[UAH] Uganda: Let us move on

There are Ugandans especially those living in comfort or protecting their interests that don't want to be bothered by lessons of history or many questions asked.  There are also those who don't want controversial issues debated at all or if they do, to do so privately. People insisting on putting all the issues on the table for public debate, believe in transparency and accountability of present and potential leaders are increasingly under attack by those few who have something to hide from the public and are becoming vocal and using language to discourage further discourse. You can't be a public figure and demand to be left alone to enjoy your private life undisturbed.

There are also Ugandans that have been hurt so much either individually, as a family or a nation that they would rather not be reminded of what happened and who caused it.  

By contrast, there are those Ugandans especially the youth who want the story to be told in its full but unbiased historical perspective.  Those who forget the lessons of history are bound to repeat mistakes. Additionally history has no distinct boundaries: it is seamless. In short the past influences the present much as the present impacts the future. The pre-colonial history of Rwanda is impacting the Great Lakes region today. Therefore we need to know the pre-colonial history of Rwanda to avoid a repeat of what happened then.

Similarly, there is a lot to learn from Uganda's history especially since independence. We rushed in a competitive political race to get to the finishing line first and made blunders that should not be repeated. Marriages of convenience don't last long.  We have seen that including in the French, Mexican, Russian and Ethiopian revolutions where groups that came together for the sole purpose of removing a common obstacle turned against one another leading to costly civil wars.  

In Uganda we rushed to get rid of Obote and failed to find out where Amin was spending the money that disappeared from the defense budget. We ended up with Sudanese and Congolese mercenaries that contributed to the loss of up to 500,000 Uganda lives.

We rushed again to get rid of Obote II regime and failed to find out who some members of Museveni guerrillas were that spoke a language(s) uncommon in Uganda.  We ended up with Tutsi mercenaries and we have seen what has happened.

Now we are once again in a hurry to get rid of Museveni – after realizing since 2011 that elections won't do it – that we seem ready to embrace anybody to lead without questions asked. That some Ugandans have already embraced General David Sejjusa (Tinyefuza) as the next president of Uganda is baffling to say the least. Is this greed to get to the finishing line first? Some are already claiming credit they haven't worked for or downplaying the contribution of others because they want to be seen as the champion of what is happening. Let us not forget the rush that occurred in which coalitions were formed overnight to defeat DP shortly before Uganda's independence in 1962.

That some potential leaders have refused to talk to the people they want to lead as often as they are asked to or to disclose who they are leaves a lot to be desired.  Many Uganda leaders have a disturbing habit of hiding behind ignorance to absolve themselves from mistakes, arguing that if they had known what they now know they would have acted differently by commission or omission.

Uganda's challenges and prospects won't be understood without locating the country within the Great Lakes region and understanding the historical relationship between Kagame and Museveni that probably goes back to the former Mpororo kingdom that disintegrated from internal feud by mid-18^th century and without drawing lessons about Hutu/Bairu antagonistic relations with Tutsi since the 15^th century. These relations have been resurrected and are being extended silently to other parts including in the rest of Uganda.

Why do you think Mbabazi wants to give peasant land to large scale farmers or Museveni is proposing to turn peasants into workers: to dispossess Ugandans of their land as Hutu were dispossessed of their land in Rwanda and became serfs on what was previously their land.  Strategically, Museveni can't use the word serf in the 21^st century – a medieval word – hence workers sounds better but the two mean more or less the same.

Also why has Museveni refused to conduct a population census: because it will reveal that indigenous Ugandans are in danger of losing their numerical superiority if that hasn't already happened? Why has Uganda chosen to train doctors, nurses and midwives to administer long-acting birth control intrauterine devices and implants instead of giving girls lunch to keep them at school longer and thereby avoid teenage pregnancy?  Why has Museveni chosen the military to issue identity cards? Or why are institutions decaying or destroyed like burning schools, eliminating cooperatives and weakening extension services contributing to Uganda becoming a failed state: because they had benefited indigenous Ugandans.

Under Museveni Uganda has developed apartheid- like policies particularly in education, healthcare and now increasing land redistribution that have benefited Tutsi and Tutsified Ugandans and disadvantaged indigenous ones. This development is indisputable. Many of us in the struggle want a level playing field for all. And what's wrong with that?

Denying that Tutsi Empire project is being pursued vigorously by political means (East African political federation) and military means (removing Bantu-dominated regimes in Burundi in 1993, Rwanda in 1994 and DRC in 1997 and now the M23 has established alternative or parallel government) is like burying the head in the sand.

Why do you think Kagame and Museveni are working around the clock to eliminate national boundaries? To create East African economic community and political federation you don't need to eliminate national borders. NAFTA hasn't eliminated borders between Mexico, USA and Canada and has no intention of doing so. Similarly, EU has no plans of eliminating national borders!

Museveni is eager to become the first president or emperor of the East African political federation after he has installed his son as president of Uganda. This is no longer a secret unless we Ugandans, (our friends and well wishers) don't want to be bothered: we simply want to live our lives – miserable or otherwise.

The purpose of research and publication is to present facts for debate and taking informed decisions. A lot has been written already albeit more needs to be done to help Ugandans to decide what they want. We have witnessed and experienced governments by military leaders. Do we want to have another one after Museveni has exited?

After taking power Amin stated clearly that his would be a temporary administration and he would gladly return to the barracks after an elected government had been installed which he would serve professionally. We know what happened: there were no elections. Museveni vowed to topple Obote II government and hand power to DP that to him won the 1980 elections. We know what happened: DP is still waiting.

Now we hear that after another military takeover, civilians will be invited to form a government, implying that military regimes are unpopular in Uganda.

What must be understood is that Museveni's guerrilla war took place in a totally different environment from what we have today. To pretend the same conditions exist today is extremely naïve. The human cost must also be factored in any military strategy and the people of Uganda must support it especially those in Luwero because wherever a military struggle starts it will end up in the Triangle simply because you can't get to Kampala without going through that area and the closer you are to Kampala the more intense the fighting becomes with many more human casualties.

Clearly there is still a lot to be done making it difficult to simply say "we want to move on" without questions asked or history revisited. We simply can't let sleeping dogs lie.

Eric