NRM: experience is a function of listening, adjusting and practicing

When NRM came to power in 1986, it formed a national unity cabinet with seasoned ministers including the prime minister, ministers of finance and planning and economic development and internal and foreign affairs. It also retained some experienced permanent secretaries. It launched a popular, well-formulated and balanced ten point program. The statements by the president were relevant, giving the impression that he knew what the challenges were and how to address them. Many Ugandans were impressed and supported the program. As expected, the first year was difficult as the government tried to cope with the economic and political crisis.

In 1987, the government abruptly abandoned the ten point program and embraced the extreme version (shock therapy) of stabilization and structural adjustment program (SAP), the very program it vehemently opposed during Obote II regime in 1981-85. The minister of finance and governor of the central bank were replaced as well as senior officials. The minister of finance who was an economist was replaced by a medical doctor in charge of a complex SAP program, implying that loyalty triumphed over competence. The ministries of finance and planning were merged into one ministry and staff in planning replaced that in finance in the new combined ministry of finance, planning and economic development. This was a major change.

NRM is definitely headed in the wrong direction

Medical doctors always tell us that when a disease is identified very early, there are good chances the patient will be successfully treated. Why can’t this method be applied in politics so that a government loses support by all stakeholders and is removed from power before too much damage is done? In politics there is a tendency to wait until too much suffering has occurred even when there is clear evidence the government is headed in the wrong direction and won’t change course.

NRM under the leadership of President Museveni came to power in 1986 in part because a large section of Ugandans strategically placed didn’t like UPC under Obote after the 1980 elections. Second some western governments suspected Obote still harbored socialist elements and his return to power was unwelcome. Third, UPC government fell out with the IMF and World Bank on macro-economic and human rights concerns.

Museveni came in as one of the new breed of African (military) leaders determined to transform Uganda’s economics, politics and governance. He was opposed to African dictators who stayed in power too long, governed unjustly without free and fair elections and term limits, violated human rights and fundamental freedoms and abused their offices through corruption, sectarianism, cronyism and mismanagement of public funds.

What the next Uganda leader must have and pledge to do

It is no longer a debatable issue even among once staunch supporters of NRM government at home and abroad. Uganda has become a divided, corrupt, sectarian and retrogressive state. It has remained absolutely poor, hungry, thirsty, sick, illiterate and degrading very fast environmentally and diplomatically.

Uganda image in the Great Lakes region, in Africa and in the rest of the world has been dramatically tarnished. Museveni is no longer regarded as the dean of the new breed of African leaders, peace maker, star performer and blue eyed boy of the west but as a dictator who has presided over a failed state now characterized by resurgence with vengeance of diseases that had disappeared including scabies and jiggers which are undeniably external manifestations of absolute poverty, notwithstanding economic growth, export diversification, privatization of public enterprises, downsizing public service and controlling inflation.

That Uganda is in trouble came out clearly during the Jubilee message on October 9, 2012 when the president could not record in any meaningful way what NRM has done to raise the overall standard of living in view of the fact that it has been in power for more than half of Uganda’s fifty years of independence.

Is there anything in Uganda that NRM has done right?

With a professional eye, it is difficult to see what NRM government has done right. However, it is very easy to see what it has done wrong. The costs have by far exceeded the benefits, raising serious questions about how long Ugandans should sustain NRM in power. So far, surrogates for the government have failed to convince the public. That they have failed comes through when asked to provide success stories. They don’t even know how to successfully attack their opponents, ending up embarrassing themselves when asked to substantiate their allegations. Let us illustrate what has gone wrong.

Low inflation alone won’t develop Uganda’s economy

In 1987, NRM government launched a stabilization and structural adjustment program (SAP). The first three years under the stabilization component were devoted largely to cleaning up the house through reducing inflation from triple to single digits, achieving a realistic exchange rate and balanced budget and promoting exports. This was a period of belt-tightening which reduced budget allocations to social sectors of health and education as well as agriculture. After these goals had been reached within a short period, the government was expected to relax belt-tightening and begin the process of development and economic transformation and distribution of growth benefits including increased government revenue to increase funding for social sectors and agriculture. Inflation control as well as monetary and fiscal policies would be relaxed as well. But they have remained a priority area since then, limiting economic growth and job creation prospects.

In the budget speech on June 14, 2012 the minister of finance stated that “Tackling inflation remains government’s overriding macroeconomic objective in order to protect macroeconomic stability”. Therefore a tight monetary and fiscal policy will remain in place as well. This policy poses problems for economic growth and job creation. In the financial year 2011/12 characterized by tight fiscal and monetary policy, economic growth of 3.2 percent was the lowest since NRM came to power and for the first time less that the population growth of 3.5 percent. Although inflation was reduced significantly, economic growth slowed tremendously and poverty rose to the tune of 81 percent.

Sleepy and quarrelsome NRM can’t lead and develop Uganda

It is now crystal clear that Uganda has leaders suffering from a sleeping ailment. As if that was not debilitating enough, they have begun to quarrel among themselves. When the president addressed parliament last year on State of the Nation, his senior cabinet staff fell into deep sleep – people can doze off once in a while and that is excusable but when you sleep so deeply and repeatedly that is a different matter. One would have thought that the sleeping habit was due to age but young ones slept as well on both occasions. Therefore age has nothing to do with it. Last year’s sleeping incident was not taken seriously. We thought there must have been some specific and temporary reason why so many cabinet ministers could sleep so much. On June 7, 2012 it happened again this time with more ministers – again young and old – in deeper sleep than last year. Leaders who can sleep this deeply and for so long in the presence of their president, how much do they sleep when they are alone in their offices? A non-Ugandan friend of mine who had seen pictures of last year called me after he saw those of this year. He wanted to know whether Ugandans were suffering from a sleeping disease and, if so, what steps were being taken to cure it because no country can develop with that kind of leadership. I had no answer for him.

Differences between NRM and UDU development priorities

There are sharp differences between NRM and UDU development priorities.

1. For NRM urban and export-oriented economic growth and earning hard currency come first. This is a top-down approach where the people come last through a trickledown mechanism which sadly has not worked since it was introduced in 1987. Furthermore, NRM policy has focused on services in urban areas especially Kampala and its vicinity generating 70 percent of Gross National Income (GNI) with a population of less than 2 million out of 34 million Ugandans. NRM policy is designed to service external markets with food and raw materials first. For UDU Ugandans come first. The majority of Ugandans (over 85 percent) who are poor and unemployed live in rural areas. UDU will therefore formulate a bottom-up and pro-poor economic growth program based on agriculture and rural development (agro-processing, infrastructure such as roads – focusing on constructing permanent bridges with central government support – and affordable energy) thereby serving the people first and directly. In contrast to NRM food production will meet the needs of Uganda first and surplus will be exported to neighboring countries and beyond. With planned increased productivity, Uganda will have enough food for domestic consumption and increase exports. Under NRM policy food exports have undermined supplies for domestic consumption especially of proteins which are exported in beans and fish. Eating non-nutritious foodstuffs such as cassava and maize has resulted in neurological disabilities and insanity, undermining human capital formation.

NRM is in disarray and won’t recover

The Roman Empire was severely weakened by luxuries, corruption and strife. The empire would have collapsed even without barbarian invasions. The invasions merely speeded up what was inevitable. NRM is in the same situation. It has been weakened by too much luxury, too much corruption and the emerging internal strife. If you want to understand the level of luxury, you keep your eyes wide open during the end of year season festivities – from Christmas Day to the New Year – in the countryside. I say countryside because that is where the differences between the rich and the poor are very striking. The NRM big shots and their families are driven in four wheel vehicles. They organize parties the moment they arrive in the villages. They organize extraordinary wedding parties, christening parties, thanksgiving parties; parties for relatives; parties for supporters, parties, parties, parties to show how rich they are until they return to Kampala. And on Christmas Day they come to church dressed expensively and immaculately from the head of the family down to the youngest member. And while these festivities and displays are going on the poor, in second hand clothes and without shoes gather around and watch in disbelief, their hands covering their mouths. And they begin to wonder how these people most of whom lived in poverty like them a few years ago managed to amass so much wealth.

NRM can easily be unseated on four conditions

The popularity of NRM among Ugandans at home and abroad including many in NRM itself has sunk to the lowest level. The uncaring attitude of NRM to the suffering of Ugandans particularly women and children especially during the current economic hard times so soon after NRM was re-elected for another five-year term has driven the point home that Museveni – who is the de facto government of Uganda – does not care about Ugandans. He only uses them in pursuit of his imperial ambitions including changing the demographic composition of Uganda by increasing immigrants, ultimately turning indigenous population into a minority in their own country.

Let us not start war against NRM government

We know that when a government fails to take responsibility for the welfare of the people, it should be removed from power. In the last 26 years NRM government has failed to deliver basic services. Ugandans have tried to remove it from power through the ballot box without success. And it is not likely to happen in the foreseeable future without term limits and an independent electoral commission. Logically, some Ugandans are reasoning that since the ballot box has failed, we must resort to war. But some Ugandans have said no. This does not mean that those who do not want war are cowards. It means that they are pragmatic. Starting a war against a recognized government regardless of how it came into power will be condemned by the international community and come to the government’s rescue. In fact, NRM would welcome such attack to give it a golden opportunity to arrest real and imagined enemies of the state in the name of national security against terrorists and put them away for good. It would also help NRM divert development resources to war efforts and impoverish Ugandans further without being blamed. So Ugandans eager to fight need to understand fully the environment at home and abroad in which they are operating before definitive actions are taken.