{UAH} ''The direct benefit of Ebyaffe is the Mengo establishment, not Buganda as whole'- Kasozi
|
9:38 AM |
No comments |
The cover page of political historian ABK Kasozi's book
In his latest book, The Bitter Bread of Exile, political historian ABK Kasozi, observes that the Ebyaffe (Buganda kingdom assets) which traces its background to the 1900 agreement has been the reason why Mengo does not believe in a unitary Uganda.
According to Prof Kasozi, the Mengo establishment is the major beneficiary of the 1900 Buganda Agreement.
The book, which basically discusses Kabaka Muteesa's life in exile, observes that the establishment has all along been opposed to a united Uganda because doing so would mean loss of their privileges as guaranteed by the agreement.
According to the MOU, Buganda is to get the property that was nationalised by the central government when kingdoms were abolished in 1966. This property includes administrative infrastructure of the 'defunct' Buganda kingdom.
Kasozi, in his book, says the direct benefit of Ebyaffe is the Mengo establishment, not Buganda as whole. The author says that if Mengo wants to properly get back Ebyaffe, it has to follow the right channels, which among others include, winning the control of the state.
Who are the Baganda?
Kasozi offers an insightful background of Buganda by tracing its historic background and its people as defined by the particular clans they subscribe to. The author agrees with other scholars like Prof Mahmood Mamdani that the Baganda are not an ethnic or caste group since they don't trace their ancestry background to one person.
In reference to the fact that the different social groups in modern Buganda trace different backgrounds, the author argues that apparently, this partly explains the individualism and factionalism among the Baganda people today.
Out of the 52 clans of Buganda today, only six are said to be the founder clans, 11 of them came with Kintu the first modern king who came from Mt Elgon in eastern Uganda. Meanwhile, over 30 clans are said to have been conquered from Bunyoro and Ankole as well as immigrant clans from the Lake Victoria shores.
The book notes that before the coming of colonialists, opportunities were availed to everyone regardless of their background. However, when the colonialist came, there was change in leadership mobility as Mengo took charge of the social hierarchy.
Kasozi argues that, although with the creation of Uganda, an alternative political space was opened for everyone, Baganda inclusive; the Baganda rebels who could disregard the view of Mengo did it at their own peril.
Taking note of Mengo's political behaviour, the author argues that discrimination of politicians who don't toe Mengo's line in the national politics, is a mistake which has partly been responsible for the political divisions in Buganda. No wonder, political historians, particularly Prof Mahmood Mamdani, have argued that Buganda is a majority with a minority mindset.
"This is true. We are divided because of failure by the Mengo people to weather criticism. And, indeed the critical Baganda have been rendered useless yet they would have been part of the political struggle to emancipate our people," Kasozi told The Observer in regard to Mamdani's observation.
The author attacks the monarchy by pointing out that since its takeover of Buganda's leadership, it has failed to recognise and address the changing political forces taking place within Buganda and the larger state of Uganda as well as caring for the interest of the Baganda peasants.
The book, published by Progressive Publishing House and yet to be launched, has been described by Prof Joe Oloka-Onyango as fascinating and raising the debate of Ebyaffe in a more academic style. "I have read this book and it raises some serious issues that have to be appreciated by everyone in the country," he told The Observer.
A Summary of The Bitter Bread of Exile: The financial problems of Sir Edward Muteesa II, 1966-1969
This book is not only about Sir Edward Muteesa II, the first President of Uganda, 1963 -1963 and Kabaka of Buganda, 1939-1966, it is also about the story of the Uganda state from 1900 to 1971. After going through this book, you will understand why Uganda is what it is today.
The book covers only the last three years of Sir Edward Muteesa's life with specific emphasis on his suffering and the lessons to be learned from his experience. It is not intended to be a full biography of the Kabaka/President. Using original sources that have not been tapped before, the author weaves a number of themes into the sad personal story of Uganda's first president in his last exile, 1966-1969.
The book is divided into six sections, each with a specific theme connected to a well argued theoretical framework. The first section, chapters 1-5, highlights the social and political causes of Sir Edward Muteesa's exile. The author argues that the failure of the state to integrate into a viable political community explains the tears Ugandans have shed since independence.
Sir Edward Muteesa's exile and suffering is viewed in this historical context. The second and third sections, chapters 6-12, not only describe Sir Edward Muteesa's suffering in exile in the UK, but also bring to light an aspect of British imperial history that is rarely described in historical narratives of Africa. This is the export of the British social hierarchy into the colonies.
In 1966, Sir Edward Muteesa II was guaranteed entrance into the U.K and financially supported by his friends YV0P were, mainly, titled members of the British upper class into whose ranks he was recruited by his education, socialization and collaboration in governing the Uganda colonial state.
For the British lords and sirs who managed the empire, class trumped race in their dealings with African or Asian collaborators. A substantial number of his friends from this class-Lord Allan Lennox-Boyd, Edward Heath, Lord Montague, Reginald Maudling, Lord Carrington, Sir Hugh Frazer, Lord Nugent, Sir Nigel Fisher, Sir Dingle Foot, and others-showed to Sir Edward Muteesa a degree of friendship and loyalty that was amazing.
These elites considered him as one of their number and supported him against the official position of the Labour Government under Harold Wilson. Supported by his titled friends, Sir Edward Muteesa tried unsuccessfully to obtain financial support from the British Labour Government.
Section IV, chapters 13-16, focuses on the tortures of exile, recounting specific moments when the pains of being away from home were really bitter. Born as a king, and later nominated as president of a gradually failing state, Sir Edward Muteesa II found himself living like a pauper. But unlike Shakespeare's King Richard II, Sir Edward Muteesa II remained calm and strong and only had a few moments of breakdown when he visited a hospital.
Section V, chapters 17-23, focuses on the death of Sir Edward Muteesa II and the politics around the disposal of his body. The author raises a number of unanswered questions regarding the cause of the Kabaka's death and, in an appendix, produces a copy of the original postmortem report of the dead king from the London Hospital Medical College.
In these chapters, the weaknesses of post-independence African political regimes are shown. Uganda's leaders at the time showed amazing parochialism, pettiness and fear of presumed enemies. Fearing the political shadow of Sir Edward Muteesa II, the UPC Government desired to influence the way he would be buried.
Intensive diplomatic efforts were undertaken to have Sir Edward buried in Uganda as a "common man". But the Kabaka's family decided to have him temporarily buried in England. After failing to have the body returned, the UPC Government tried to influence the way Muteesa was buried in the UK.
Through rigorous diplomatic efforts, the Government protested against the representation of the Queen at the funeral and against giving Muteesa II what it perceived to be a "full military funeral" by a British regiment.
The last section VI, chapter 24, is a postscript that asks the fundamental question of which direction should Buganda-and Uganda-take in order to build a viable and harmonious integrated political community in what we all call the pearl of Africa. For the Baganda, the author recommends full integration and participation in the state and the redesigning of the Buganda monarchy to fit in with, and match, the changing African political landscape.
On the issue of extreme loyalty to small states within states in competition to large ones in many African countries, the author believes that the bad governance of central authorities contributes to sub-nationalism.
For him, good governance enhances the process of state integration and unity. For the Uganda state, he recommends the building of viable social institutions that are not transitory like human beings but are able to endure the test of time.
Such institutions, he argues, should guarantee changes of leaders without the use of violence. Once these institutions are in place, he concludes, future leaders of Uganda are unlikely to eat the bitter bread of exile.skakaire@observer.ug
--
H.OGWAPITI
-----------------------------------------------------
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
---Theodore Roosevelt
UAH forum is devoted to matters of interest to Ugandans and Africans in general. Individuals are responsible for whatever they post on this forum.To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ugandans-at-heart+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com or Abbey Semuwemba at: abbeysemuwemba@gmail.com.
0 comments:
Post a Comment