When people are oppressed and depressed as Ugandans are there is a natural tendency to want to use any means including force to end their suffering and punish those (real or imaginary) that caused them pain. In moments like this they forget to gauge the strength of opponents or determine where they are weakest. They act on the spur of the moment, in a hurry or in anger and forget to organize and strategize properly under able leadership or even to estimate total costs on their side. Sometimes they misread what is happening around them as German peasants did during Martin Luther agitation against the church, hoping he would support their cause. They were wrong and paid a heavy price.
When World War I began, some participants like Russia joined in without adequate preparation in part to solve domestic problems and hoping that it would end quickly. It lasted from 1914 to 1918 and 20 million people are believed to have lost their lives from various causes. The immediate post war condition in Europe was a sorry one. To colossal human and physical loss was added the ravages of a flu epidemic in the winter of 1918-19 that killed tens of thousands of people already weakened by shortages, hardship and disruptions of European economy and society (J. W. Hall 2002). A large generation of young men was decimated. France lost 20 percent between the ages of 20 and 44. Germany lost 15 percent. The end of war was accompanied by bitterness and pessimism. The young people became disheartened and disillusioned and were dubbed the “Lost Generation” in the 1920s and ‘30s. Churchill observed that although the war had ended it was foolish to speak of winners. Victory had been ‘bought so dear as to be indistinguishable from defeat”, he lamented (D. C. Heath 1992).
The unsatisfactory end of war terms of settlement sparked the beginning of a more devastating World War II from 1939 to 1945. Thus, WWII has been described as a continuation of World War I. “As in the First, more civilians died than soldiers – some 50 million of the former to 15 million of the latter” (Lorraine Glennon 2000). Property loss was also colossal – homes, churches, schools, factories and infrastructure were gone. Millions were displaced and reduced to begging while many starved to death. In some countries the living envied the dead (D. C. Heath 1992).
The point being made here is that war is not a simple matter. It is destructive and often continues after the first phase is over. World War I led to World War II and into the Cold War. Similarly the five year guerrilla war in Uganda led to the Northern and Eastern war with devastating effects. Therefore those remaining few Ugandans still promoting war in the first instance as a means to tackle NRM government should recast their stand.
There is another reason why Uganda opposition should not engage in war unless in self-defense for which training and readiness should be undertaken. Uganda is being led by hard core military people who are bent on crushing the rest and hopefully stay in power indefinitely. Uganda soldiers have had good training with foreign support in money and advisers. They have also had combat experience and are ready for any confrontation with the opposition. Because of deliberate unemployment, malnutrition, impoverishment and poor health, Ugandans have been weakened and cannot physically and psychologically sustain prolonged warfare against a formidable army and sophisticated intelligence network. Second, the external environment is not in favor of waging war against a government legitimate or not. Mali is a case in point. The 1981-85 guerrilla war was conducted under totally different circumstances at home (including an area to operate from) and abroad from the current ones. This is an important distinction that must be kept in mind. Pushing people into war in the absence of these prerequisites is suicidal.
But there is a piece of good news only if the opposition musters how to use it. NRM is politically divided, quarrelsome and weak. Corruption, sectarianism, cronyism and mismanagement and succession conflicts have pushed the party against the wall. The hard core members want to maintain the status quo and turn Uganda into a dynasty. That group would welcome an attack by the opposition for two main reasons. First, it would help to mobilize and consolidate the party against a common enemy which is the opposition. At the same time, it would weed out undesirable members of NRM and simplify the succession race. Second, it would dub opposition attackers terrorists and seek international support to drain the swamp and deny “mosquitoes” breeding ground. Villages providing support to so-called terrorists would be razed to the ground. Any suspect, real or imaginary, would be put behind bars or worse. The remaining civilians would be put into camps and their land dished out to developers. The war would be prolonged as much as possible to mobilize resources for the war effort and keep the generals happy. With opposition discredited as terrorists and in disarray, NRM would push harder for political federation. Development would be sidelined under the pretext of devoting resources to chasing away terrorists from Uganda soil. The elections in 2016 would be won by NRM easily and a one party-state established with a president for life.
To prevent this from happening, the opposition should drop the idea of using military force except in self defense. It should focus on non-violent resistance which is legitimate and is already working and dividing the police force and worrying NRM leaders. The international community is watching for violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms by NRM and will act quickly against such actions. The security forces as individuals and/or as a group are nervous. The ball is in the opposition court. If we do not use it wisely we can’t blame anyone else. Therefore students, youth, women, religious leaders, civil servants, workers, NRM progressives and rank and file in security forces come out and reclaim your liberty, justice and dignity that NRM has taken away from you. Nobody is going to do it for you.
Religious leaders need to learn and adapt as appropriate the late Pope John Paul messages. In his sermons the Pope criticized government actions and policies. He preached freedom, peace, justice and openness. He placed human rights above everything else. He spoke clearly about human life and the importance of human rights. Our religious leaders have a duty to go beyond condemnation of the wrongs in the country but to join their flock in demanding real change in the lives of Ugandans. Churches in Africa and other parts of the world have played important and even leading roles in the liberation struggle. Archbishop Desmond Tutu won a Nobel Prize for Peace for his stand against apartheid in South Africa. Conditions in Uganda in terms of poverty and inequality are not different from what Tutu preached against.
Ugandans need a dedicated, patriotic and caring government that puts the people of Uganda first; helps them find jobs; reduces taxes in hard times; provides lunch to school children; helps students that do well but cannot advance for lack of tuition; lowers food and fuel prices etc. Governments in developed and developing countries do these things. Why can’t Uganda government do the same instead of leaving the market forces with their known imperfections in charge of Uganda’s economy and society? NRM is not caring in large part because we have not pushed hard enough. It bribes voters and we give them the vote. Regarding opposition, it needs to be better organized and lead under one umbrella organization. A combined ZANU and ZAPU under Patriotic Front mastered enough critical mass to push Ian Smith to the constitutional negotiating table in London. KANU and UNIP in Kenya and Zambia respectively would probably still be in power if opposition parties had not worked together under one leader. It is in the interest of NRM if the opposition groups remains divided or are led by unpopular people.
Finally, the proposed negotiations under the Inter-Party Organization for Democracy (IPOD) should be encouraged, but must be inclusive and integrate Ugandans in the diaspora that are active in Uganda’s political process. The terms of reference must be comprehensive with clear objectives, processes and outcomes and cleared by all stakeholders and made available to the public. Leaders must be patriotic, dedicated and with impeccable record and must be experienced negotiators ready to engage in a give-and-take discourse.