National stability has trampled individual freedom in Uganda

Museveni became president in 1986 with a message of democracy, free and fair elections, freedom and prosperity for all contained in the ten-point program which he dropped in 1987 in favor of structural adjustment program (SAP) with stiff conditions. The unpopularity of SAP which was being experimented in Uganda after some countries like Ghana and Chile had found it costly and adjusted it, and the threat of terrorism in the East Africa region created a pretext for Museveni to introduce measures that have trampled individual freedom. In 2002, an anti-terrorist law came into force with a broad definition of terrorism as the “use of violence or threat of violence with intent to promote or achieve political, religious, economic and cultural or social ends in an unlawful manner”.

Painful structural adjustment at home and Uganda’s intervention in countries of the greater lakes region including alleged genocide of Hutu in DRC and plunder of Congo’s resources made Museveni unpopular, causing him to become authoritarian in order to cling to power because in a free and fair election he would lose.

Museveni has no legitimacy to govern in Uganda

Museveni has repeatedly stated that the people of Uganda are sovereign. Ipso facto, Museveni cannot govern without their consent. There has to be a contract between him and the citizens of Uganda. Without this contract, Museveni has no legitimacy. Without legitimacy at home, Museveni and his government cannot be recognized abroad and welcome into the community of nations. Thus, without legitimacy, Museveni cannot represent the people of Uganda abroad or enter into agreement (contract) on their behalf. Museveni may have power through the barrel of the gun, but that does not confer legitimacy. Using power without legitimacy is tyranny.

The people of Uganda have withheld consent because the 2011 elections from the highest to the lowest level lacked a level playing field. They were organized by a discredited electoral commission, some five million Uganda voters were disenfranchised, an equal number of foreigners voted for NRM, there was massive intimidation by security forces, and NRM used public resources to fund its campaigns. The international observer teams have concluded that the elections were not free and fair.

Museveni has not felt the wind of change

On February 3, 1960 former Britain’s Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan addressed both houses of parliament in South Africa. He warned the Nationalist Government of South Africa of ‘the wind of change’ blowing through the continent. He served notice that Britain could no longer support the policy of apartheid. He stressed that Britain rejected the idea of any inherent superiority of one race over another. He added that ‘individual merit alone is the criterion of man’s advancement, political or economic” (Fifty Correspondents of Reuters, Putman 1967).

Museveni came to power in 1986, at a time of economic and political crisis. The leaders of Africa had been discredited for economic mismanagement and one party political system. There was a search for political and economic stability. The new breed of African leaders shot to the scene through the barrel of the gun including Museveni.

Economic reforms through structural adjustment necessitated curbing freedom to make sure opposition groups did not emerge. In order to implement the austerity program of structural adjustment in Uganda Museveni with tacit support of proponents of structural adjustment allowed abuse of human rights. His abusive actions were conveniently described as boldness. Museveni unlike other leaders was given room to postpone multiparty politics, enabling him to crush DP and UPC.

Museveni’s time is running out

The people of Uganda want their country, dignity and liberty back. Ipso facto, they want Museveni out no matter what others may say.

First, the good news is that Ugandans have finally realized who Museveni is and why he has divided Ugandans up and trampled on their civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights with impunity. Museveni fought a guerrilla war on Buganda territory with foreign and mercenary backing. Some 25 percent of guerrilla fighters were Tutsi mostly from Rwanda – Museveni’s cousins. Museveni tortured a Muhima man who wanted to know the guerrillas in their midst that spoke a strange language. Museveni tortured this man to put an end to that kind of questioning.

Lest we forget here are a few names of Tutsi who commanded the guerrilla war and served in Uganda’s army. Fred Rwigyema, major-general of NRA and its deputy commander – Museveni being the commander, Paul Kagame a major in NRA and head of intelligence and counter-intelligence, Dr. Peter Baingana a major and head of the NRA medical services, Chris Bunyenyezi a major and commanding officer of NRA’s 306 brigade and major Sam Kaka commanding officer of the NRA’s military police. Some returned to Rwanda in 1994 after the fall of Habyarimana regime. Some have returned to govern Uganda with Museveni.

Uganda voters should not sell their birthright for a kilo of salt

This 2011 election will save or destroy Uganda. Re-electing Museveni will change Uganda as we have known it – make no mistake about it. The trajectory is very clear. Museveni is already negotiating with foreigners to sell Uganda’s land – the deal with Egypt is in final stages of finalization.

When Roman food crop producing peasants were forced to sell their land to large scale farmers, the latter switched from food crops for peasant consumption to grazing cattle and sheep or growing grapes and olives for rich families. Rome’s population declined in part from high mortality rate of impoverished, hungry and sick peasants. The weakened Rome was invaded and conquered by barbarians.

Similarly, through the sale of Uganda’s land to foreigners who will then grow foodstuffs to feed their own people, Uganda peasants will dwindle and be replaced by ‘invaders’ through East African economic integration and political federation. This is not a joke. The brilliant, dynamic and jovial children that Uganda has known will be gone as education standards decline and child malnutrition and associated diseases take its toll.

No leader can build a strong nation by neglecting food, education and health

There is no country in the world that has progressed without paying sufficient attention to food and nutrition security, healthcare and education. The vital role of nutrition, healthcare including safe drinking water, adequate sanitation and general hygiene has been stressed in mortality decline. General education has also been recognized as a pillar in nation building.

Mothers Union in Uganda provided women with general education in home economics: adequate and balanced diet, drinking boiled water and avoiding eating raw food, washing hands with soap or ash after using a toilet and before touching food, draining stagnant water to eliminate breeding space for mosquitoes, washing clothes, bathing regularly and keeping the house and its surroundings tidy etc.

At school teachers made sure that pupils were clean: bathed, brushed their teeth, had no lice and wore clean uniforms. Pupils were required to bring lunches and by sharing different foodstuffs they ate balanced meals. Parents therefore made sure that there was enough food at the household level. Consequently, they tended two fields: one specifically for foodstuffs for domestic consumption and the other for cash crops such as coffee, cotton or tobacco. Food for domestic consumption was never sold. Parents would be alerted when their child showed signs of sickness and would be taken to a dispensary for check up. Schools were inspected regularly to make sure standards of teaching, quality of lunches and the general health of pupils were maintained.

Why ethnic tensions are intensifying in southwest Uganda

My career has enabled me to interact with many people from and outside Uganda and to hear many stories (many of them distorted) about who is who and who is doing well and not so well economically in Uganda. There is a general feeling that all south westerners are doing well at the expense of other Ugandans since Museveni came to power in 1986. In other words they think that all south westerners are Bahororo, Bahima, Batutsi and Banyamulenge (all represented in Uganda). This is the group of Nilotic Bantu speakers led by Museveni that has made tremendous progress in wealth accumulation. The other group of Bantu speakers known by the epithet of Bairu (slaves) or commoners in south west Uganda is extremely poor because of historical exploitation by the Nilotic Bantu speaking group since the two groups interacted about four hundred years ago.

I know some readers are not comfortable about this Bahororo and Bairu diatribe. I do not like it either. Actually it was dying out until Museveni came to power and re-established hostilities by suppressing Bairu through the implementation of structural adjustment that has pushed many back into poverty. Museveni is a divisive leader that seems to enjoy the suffering of others. This may explain why he has refused to support school lunches for kids from poor families but he has money for funerals – how else can you understand it.

The Application of western concept of stability in Uganda needs recasting

The people of Uganda have really suffered all sorts of injustices – economic, social and environmental – in large part because of western advice to Uganda governments on how to establish and maintain economic and political stability. Britain’s rejection of Obote’s “Move to the Left” and nationalization of industries resulted in his overthrow in 1971 and the installation of Amin. The suffering of the people of Uganda during this period is too well known to be repeated here. But this was considered a period of stability and Amin continued to enjoy support from some western countries until he was overthrown in 1979 apparently with British involvement (New African June 2007).

Since 1981 (except a three year period from 1984 to 1986) Uganda has implemented structural adjustment policies which call for macroeconomic stability. Although macroeconomic stability means many things including balanced budgets, in Uganda it has come to mean controlling inflation to 5 percent per annum. To maintain this economic stability, money supply in Uganda’s economy has been controlled including through raising interest rates. High and variable interest rates of up to 30 percent have discouraged borrowing by small and medium enterprises and investing in labor-intensive enterprises. Many entrepreneurs who ventured and borrowed were not able to repay. They either defaulted or sold their assets including land and/or livestock or married off their daughters at very tender ages to repay the loans that left them worse off.

Museveni has violent and feudal characteristics

The people of Uganda are resenting Museveni because of his increasing use of violence which he studied in Tanzania and has been encouraged to apply at home by some donors to maintain ‘stability’; his implementation of the philosophy of metamorphosis designed to transform beyond recognition Uganda’s ecological and demographic landscape (having more cattle than crops and more foreigners than indigenous people and another Ivory Coast in Uganda); and his consolidation of feudalism of lords (Bahororo) and serfs (the rest of Uganda) and Tutsi empire disguised as East African political federation with western encouragement.

Through the application of harsh anti-sectarian and anti-terrorism Acts and with tacit donor support, Museveni has violently silenced dissent apparently in the name of political and economic stability. Meanwhile suppressed dissent built into frustration and anger and then into enlightenment and dialectics. Ugandans thus no longer regard Museveni as a leader with divine right whose word is taken at face value. Instead, Ugandans are asking questions and demanding satisfactory answers (enlightenment) and are spending more time in archives and libraries and on the internet unearthing what was hidden (dialectics). Supporters of Museveni at home and abroad should not be surprised at what has hit them.

Museveni’s use of force has become counterproductive

There is consensus that Museveni is a leader guided by a unique philosophy based on the use of force and fear, dependence on foreigners and regional focus that has made his presidency counter-productive, calling for his defeat in 2011 elections. Museveni’s defeat is very important for Uganda, neighboring countries and development partners in order to avoid heavier losses in the future. Thick clouds are gathering on the political horizon and if they are not dissipated quickly they could unleash a very destructive storm. If preventive steps had been taken Ethiopia and Zaire could have avoided the adverse impact of 1974 and 1996/7 events respectively. To prevent the possibility of such events occurring in Uganda, we need to adopt a preventive strategy because it is always cheaper than cure. We should at all times avoid emotions about what Museveni has done for or against us. We should be guided only by considerations of dignity, liberty/freedom and equality of all Ugandans. We should seek and tell the truth because a diversion will be catastrophic. For easy reference let us review the rationale behind Museveni’s philosophy.