Politics of intimidation and donor acquiescence won’t deliver democracy

Opposition members who lost the 1980 Uganda elections waged a guerilla war because UPC had not only intimidated voters and rigged the results but also used government resources and institutions and benefited from foreign support. Although not free and fair, the Commonwealth Observers declared the voting process and results satisfactory. UPC came to power for the second time.

In justifying what sparked the guerilla war, NRM observed that Obote and Muwanga allocated seats to their party cohorts even in areas where UPC candidates had scored less that ten percent of total votes cast. It added that besides Tanzania’s support, UPC used its control of national radio, the army, police and other state machinery to rig the election. This illegal action imposed an unpopular minority clique on the people of Uganda, leaving them no option but to take up arms in defense of people’s democratic rights.

In 1986, the rebels led by NRM came to power through the barrel of the gum with foreign fighters amounting to about 25 percent of NRM rebels and foreign backers. Because of its minority status, NRM with acquiescence of the international community delayed elections until 1996.

Contradictions in Uganda’s development policy

As we enter the second decade of the 21st century, Ugandans need to take stock of how far they have come and decide on where they want to go. Since the NRM government came to power in 1986, its development record has been characterized by three major factors – overdependence on foreign advisers, abrupt and major shift in development policy (from ten-point program to the Washington Consensus and since September 2009 to economic development planning). I have written on the first two factors and posted the articles on my blog www.kashambuzi.com. In this article we shall focus on contradictions which give the impression of failure to design policy on some issues or lack of collective responsibility.

Before NRM captured power, its cadres from different development backgrounds had debated and reached a consensus on policies contained in the ten-point program. Until July 1987 when the government launched the structural adjustment program, government representatives spoke with one voice.

Since July 1987, many government representatives have contradicted one another giving an indication of lack of harmony in policy making and collective responsibility. Let us review a few examples.

Donors are partly responsible for Uganda’s underdevelopment

Uganda’s economy since independence in 1962 has been driven by donors. Reports from the World Bank, United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and Commonwealth etc made recommendations that have driven Uganda’s economy and society. Dependence on donors for advice, funds, technical assistance and supervision has been particularly strong since the 1980s coinciding with the launch of the Washington Consensus or structural adjustment programs except for a short period between 1985 and mid-1987 when major donors withdrew support because of human rights violations, non-compliance with IMF conditionality and ideological differences. Therefore the donor community has been an integral part of Uganda’s development equation. It should therefore accept praise or constructive criticism as appropriate.

Contrary to popular belief based on GDP and per capita growth rates and macroeconomic stability, Uganda has become an underdeveloped country meaning that the standard of living of the majority of Ugandans has declined. Here are a few illustrations.