What can Uganda learn from world history?

Ugandans, friends and well wishers should continue to work hard, talk and write until a mutually acceptable and hopefully bloodless solution to Uganda’s spreading and deepening challenges is found. That Uganda is headed in the wrong direction is not in doubt. The Declaration signed by General Salim Salleh and posted on New Vision on March 11, 2012 is testimony to that (although it is not clear whom Salleh is representing and how seriously Ugandans should take the Declaration). The NRM government does not seem to be on the same page. NRM’s continued presentation of processes as achievements is not enough. Economic growth is necessary but is not enough to end poverty. Uganda experienced fastest economic growth in mid 1990s coinciding with the highest skewed income distribution. Diplomas that do not enable holders to find jobs are not something to be proud of. Processes must lead to outcomes that improve the general standard of living of all Ugandans. Presenting misleading information or buying support at home and abroad won’t solve the problem. Using force to crush the opposition will only widen the difference between the oppressor and oppressed classes and make matters worse. Ugandans are seeing what is happening around them and reading about what happened in the past and are drawing lessons. Although different paths were followed some of them deadly, the oppressed got liberated in the end. In some cases wise leaders or classes approached problems rationally and avoided violence. These are important lessons to draw from by Uganda leaders and the general public. The struggle for parliamentary government in England that resorted more to compromise and unity than war as a tool of solving problems with the kings has already been referred to. This article is a continuation of drawing lessons from struggles between privileged and disadvantaged members of society and how different approaches produced different results. Let us look at how different ways were adopted to address problems inspired by external lessons or failure of predecessors.

What Uganda needs to do to achieve political stability

Uganda is at a crossroads saddled with many challenges that are tearing the country apart and could lead to civil war. Those in power are blaming the opposition for causing trouble. Those in the opposition argue that government excesses are the root cause. There are two ways of sorting out the problem: fight until one group defeats the other or compromise and every Ugandan has a share in the fruits of independence. The history of England may give us a hint on the way forward.

During the middle ages, European monarchy and nobility engaged in a bitter struggle for power that resulted in absolute monarchy in France and constitutional government in England. In France the monarchy ruined the nobility through war. In England the king and the nobility agreed to share political power. They settled their disputes through compromise rather than head for total victory. King John for a time maintained his authority by using cruel methods with support of mercenaries. However, this method would not survive a serious crisis that erupted in 1214 as a result of financial crisis due to war. Because of the king’s despotism, the barons refused to help him out. In January 1215, taking advantage of his vulnerability, the barons presented the king with a series of demands for reform and end of despotism. With no support from his subjects the king signed the document in June 1215. The petition was written in Latin under the name of Magna Carta. The petition was translated into English and issued as the Great Charter. What were the landmarks in the Charter that could be emulated?

To solve a problem, you have to admit it exists

In Uganda, the problem is not government revenue. Since 1987, Uganda government has had adequate resources from various sources including donations, loans, remittances, debt relief, customs and tax revenue and sale of public enterprises. NRM government has received over $31 billion in donations alone. Uganda does not suffer a shortage of trained and experienced human power either. In fact Uganda has become an exporter of trained personnel. So what is the problem? The problem is President Museveni’s agenda contained in the 50 year Master Plan which is diametrically opposed to what we seek to do to achieve economic growth and development and improved the standard of living for all Ugandans – not to build schools, clinics and promote economic growth without equity. Museveni’s plan is to enrich and empower Bahororo people for control of Uganda in perpetuity. It is incredible but very true! This point must be repeated until it is understood very clearly by all Ugandans, friends and well wishers. Failure to understand this point will undermine all we are trying to do to make Uganda a better place for all citizens. It takes courage and risk to speak up like this but it has got to be done to save the “Pearl of Africa” from colonization – again. The two principle elements that underpin the Master Plan are the deliberate impoverishment of Ugandans by denying them quality education, employment and healthcare including nutrition and access to development resources such as land (without land, education and job you cannot consider yourself a full grown and respectable person) and credit as well as control of the instruments of repression, like the military. It is believed that impoverished, desperate and vulnerable people are easy to govern and they respect leaders without question. They have no knowledge of their rights and freedoms and cannot demand what they don’t know. That is why the middle class that has a questioning mind is declining through unemployment, retrenchment and brain drain. For easy reference, the Master Plan was posted on Ugandans at Heart Forum. Therefore it will not be summarized here. So the first step in solving Uganda’s political economy challenge is a recognition of the principle problem namely the implementation of the 50 year Master Plan led by President Museveni which has been facilitated by staff Museveni has hired and the neo-liberal model NRM adopted in 1987. Let us review the last two points.

What to do with the failed NRM government

Uganda has been described as a failed state under a military dictatorship disguised as democratic. Many of those supporting the NRM government publicly have misgivings when contacted privately. The question that has occupied center stage in discussions about the future of Uganda is what should be done to turn the country around before it is too late. Five ideas have been proposed.

First, there are those who are still committed to NRM for whatever reason and want it to stay. They are suggesting that pressure should be applied to NRM leadership to make the necessary changes and reverse the current failed trajectory. But the changes they are suggesting such as restoration of presidential term limits, ending corruption, sectarianism and mismanagement, formation of an independent electoral commission, limiting advantages of incumbency, restoration of independence of the judiciary and keeping the military out of politics will ensure defeat of NRM at the next elections. NRM is not a popular party and it is these malpractices that have kept it in power. In free and fair elections NRM cannot win. Therefore NRM is unlikely to go along with this advice. NRM has become like a very sick person that cannot work anymore and has to be retired. In other words NRM does not have the will and capacity under fundamentally changed economic circumstances – from neo-liberalism to public-private partnership – to turn the country around. If allowed to stay in power, NRM, crippled with all sorts of problems, will only make matters worse and the damage will be more costly down the road.

Uganda: Let us mean what we say about national unity

We have heard calls for national unity for a very long time. Yet national unity has not been realized. If anything national division has become the norm witness the division of Uganda from 18 districts at one time to over 100 districts today operating virtually as independent entities. One day you hear some commentators on radio or in private conversation claiming they belong to their tribe or region first and the next day they preach Uganda first.

National unity should be preached out of conviction, not out of convenience. There is enough evidence that “unity of convenience” to solve immediate problems has caused medium and long term troubles, some of them very serious. We should constantly remind ourselves of these experiences in order to do better. Elections for whatever office, assignments and promotions should be based on merit, on what individuals have accomplished and what they can offer to Uganda not on empty promises or who they are or where they come from or what faith they follow or their age or their gender.

What we have learned about Obote and Museveni leadership

It is now recognized that the quality of a leader and development perspective can make or break a nation. This matter came up in one of the discussions at the United Democratic Ugandans (UDU) conference in Boston in October 2011. Requests were made for a study of the background and leadership qualities of Obote and Museveni and draw lessons that might help in selecting future leaders.

Obote was born in Lango. Museveni’s birthplace has remained unclear, raising many questions. Obote and Museveni have a common ancestry of Nilotic and Luo-speaking people (sometimes referred to as River and Lake people) who entered what later became Uganda from Bahr -el-Ghazal in South Sudan, not from Ethiopia as originally suggested. Obote was a member of the Oyima group; Museveni is of the Batutsi/Bahororo group. Ipso facto, Obote and Museveni are distant cousins.

Museveni and Obote have played high politics in Uganda rising to the level of head of state and government and commander in-chief of Uganda’s armed forces.

What we have learned about Obote and Museveni leadership

It is now recognized that the quality of a leader and development perspective can make or break a nation. This matter came up in one of the discussions at the United Democratic Ugandans (UDU) conference in Boston in October 2011. Requests were made for a study of the background and leadership qualities of Obote and Museveni and draw lessons that might help in selecting future leaders.

Obote was born in Lango. Museveni’s birthplace has remained unclear, raising many questions. Obote and Museveni have a common ancestry of Nilotic and Luo-speaking people (sometimes referred to as River and Lake people) who entered what later became Uganda from Bahr -el-Ghazal in South Sudan, not from Ethiopia as originally suggested. Obote was a member of the Oyima group; Museveni is of the Batutsi/Bahororo group. Ipso facto, Obote and Museveni are distant cousins.

Museveni and Obote have played high politics in Uganda rising to the level of head of state and government and commander in-chief of Uganda’s armed forces.

What makes resistance succeed and lessons for Uganda

For resistance to succeed there has to be a national mission or rallying cry supported by the opposition. Here are a few examples.

1. The mission of the Cuban revolution was to free Cubans from exploitation, poverty and repression. The mission had popular support because most Cubans were exploited through poor pay and appalling living conditions including those who worked on tobacco and sugar cane farms. The mission resonated with peasants who joined the war or provided support in other ways. Many more were inspired to join the struggle after they witnessed the savage reprisal meted out by the Batista regime. Charismatic leadership and strict discipline of guerrillas were also crucial.

2. The mission of the Vietnam War guerrillas was to give land, rice and clothes to the people in South Vietnam who were very poor. The peasants rallied behind the Viet Cong guerrillas in large numbers because they supported the mission. Many more joined later because they resented forced resettlement in “strategic hamlets” which they felt denied them their liberty. Whole communities were involved in supporting the guerrillas.

What causes population to increase or decrease?

Demographers – population specialists – have concluded that the total population of the whole world will reach 7 billion on October 30, 2011 and will continue to increase thereafter.

There has been confusion about why the global population is increasing. What is causing an increase is not a rise in fertility but a fall in mortality. In other words, mortality is falling faster than fertility.

There is worry that if the global population continues to grow sooner or later the demand for goods and services will exceed their supply, causing all sorts of problems including famines and war over scarce resources. The relatively easy solution is to stop or reduce drastically population increase. This can be achieved in two ways – increase mortality and/or reduce fertility. Since it is morally wrong to recommend mortality increase, the only alternative is fertility reduction to 2.1 children per couple.

At continental, regional or national levels population increase or decrease is due to the difference between fertility and mortality (natural increase or decrease) and the difference between in-migrants and out-migrants (positive or negative migration). For example, when fertility exceeds mortality and in-migrants exceed out-migrants the population will increase. On the other hand when fertility is lower than mortality and in-migrants are fewer than out-migrants the population will decrease.

NRP won a ‘gold’ medal at UDU conference

Under the overall theme of “What is Acceptable in a Free and Democratic Society”, the first conference of United Democratic Ugandans (UDU) took place at Boston College (USA) on October 8, 2011 – on the eve of Uganda’s independence anniversary. The National Recovery Plan (NRP) was presented as an alternative to the failed policies of NRM, noting that since the official termination of the failed structural adjustment program (SAP) the government is at a loss about what to do next. The National Development Plan adopted in 2009 to replace the abandoned structural adjustment program has not taken off yet.

Without exception all commentators in formal and informal conversations praised the NRP for its high quality and relevance to Uganda’s current situation. The question was “What are the next steps”.