{UAH} US IMPERIALISM AND UGANDA-BWESIGYE BWA MWESIGIRE

US IMPERIALISM AND UGANDA

4DEC 2018

---

ADD A COMMENT

BY BWESIGYE BWA MWESIGIRE

Today marks the 28th day since Dr. Stella Nyanzi was arrested yet again by the Museveni regime, and detained for what the prosecution calls "cyber harassment and offensive communication." Nyanzi, a researcher and activist, is known for using Facebook to critique Museveni's government using a particular language and choice of words that so-called "polite company" frowns upon. She is on trial for likening Museveni to a pair of buttocks in 2017, and now to that case, has been added another, stemming from a poem she posted on what has been designated as Museveni's birthday. She has not applied for bail yet, reportedly arguing that she wants Museveni himself to come and take the witness stand in court and explain how her words offend him.

Stella Nyanzi is not a leader of a guerilla movement. She is not a trade union leader. She is not an opposition Member of Parliament sitting to the left of the speaker neither does she belong to a Left-wing political party. She is an educated woman with access to Facebook, which she has used effectively to mobilize dissent against Museveni's 32 year-old regime. In this talk tonight, I describe Nyanzi's critique and organizing against Museveni as belonging to the Ugandan Left, and I tie it into Bobi Wine's People Power movement, Kizza Besigye's People's Government, which I connect to Kabaka Mwanga, Queen Muhumuza and Omukama Kabalega's wars against British imperialism.

How should we understand Ugandan Left Organizing?

The most dominant idea of Leftist resistance has been the Marxist-Leninist revolutionary party, and of course it's Maoist extension, that brings in the people's guerilla war. As we know here, ideas of anarchist left organizing, social democratic and democratic socialist political parties remain alive today. When I mention the Left, the Western Left, the Eurocentric Left, I mostly mean the various positions listed above, mainly anarchism, and social democracy but also to some extent the Leninist vanguard party and democratic socialism.

In this talk, I am interested mostly in Lenin, for his theorization of imperialism as a stage of capitalism, but also for his opposition to war. The Left therefore here means an anti-imperialism, anti-capitalism, anti-war position. So, the internationalist Left here would mean the global movements against imperialist capitalist militarism. This also goes for what my description of the Ugandan Left means. The movements in Uganda that are fighting against capitalism, imperialism, and militarism for me, belong to the Left. I am splitting hairs not so much in search of ideological purity, but to have a form of clarity about what I mean and because of the particular history of Uganda, and Museveni's rule over the last 32 years. Let me elaborate.

Uganda was created by British colonialists at the end of the nineteenth century and the start of the twentieth century after they conquered the kingdom states of Buganda, Nkore, Toro, Bunyoro and other non-kingdom state formations and turned them into one territory they called the Protectorate of Uganda. This colonial state was resisted from the start by the people whose own political formations were overthrown and their sovereignty breached. The independence movements once the colonial state had consolidated its power, took various forms. The most historicised are those of the workers, peasants and traders who fought for the right to trade, colonially denied to Africans, tried to reverse the colonial takeover of land from peasants to a small landed gentry, and agitated for the right to participate in their own governance. These were all Left positions. The Ugandan Left, therefore brings together anti-imperialist, anti-war, and anti-capitalist positions which date back to Kabaka Mwanga's, Omukama Kabalega's, Queen Muhumuza's and other anti-imperialist struggles of the late 1800s and early 1900s.

In 1962, the colonial state was handed over to indigenous Ugandans, although the country's economy, and social-cultural life remained tied to imperialism. British companies dominated the economy, and English remained the official language of the country. Except a national flag, new national anthem, a coat of arms, a Ugandan-manned state infrastructure, and other superficial elements, for all intents and purposes imperialism continued. As Kwame Nkrumah put it, neocolonialism indeed is a stage of imperialism. Whether it was Milton Obote, or Idi Amin, the two prominent presidents of the country in its immediate post-independence era, their exercise of political power was heavily limited by the British imperial hold on the country. They obviously, for their political survival, at least in rhetorical terms claimed to be anti-imperialist, but they knew who held power, they knew that they were not the ruling class in the neocolony. Indeed the British, working with Israel and the US overthrew Obote and installed Idi Amin. The ruling class in the neocolony, as in the colony is the bourgeoisie of the imperialist country. The political leadership is a mere managerial class working on behalf of imperialism.

Enter the Neoliberal stage of Imperialism

As Lester Spence tells us, the roots of the neoliberal stage of imperialism date back to Nixon's time in the US presidency. Neoliberalism as defined by Spence is the application of business principles to every aspect of life. Running the state as if it were a business, turning the role of the state to the promotion of private business. Of course we know from centuries of Left scholarship that the nation-state's primary role is the safeguarding of the interests of the bourgeoisie. As Lenin taught us, imperialism is a stage of capitalism, Nkrumah added that neo-colonialism is another stage of imperialism, and in the same line, neoliberalism is the contemporary stage of the same imperialism. Neoliberalism has used Structural Adjustment Policies (SAPs) to realign nation-states in the "third-world" to continue serving the global bourgeoisie. As the events in Berlin and Moscow in the late 1980s and early 1990s revealed, the United States has become a single leader of global Capitalism, and therefore the super-imperialist nation-state of the neoliberal era. It is no accident that the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, the twin financial monitors for neoliberal imperialism are headquartered in the United States.

To return to Uganda, Yoweri Museveni was one of the radical students at the University of Dar es Salaam in the late 1960s, and was a keen supporter of national liberation movements of the era. He is indeed well acquainted with Marxist-Leninist-Maoism. As Dani Nabudere has written, Museveni never overcame militarism, despite his Leftist formation. The part of Maoism that centers on the people, escaped him. Maoism to him was only a matter of military strategy. His Maoism did not extend to the organization of society. It was just a matter of winning a war, getting civilians to support his war and path to power, as opposed to a people-based struggle. In the 1970s, Museveni engaged in military activities against Idi Amin's dictatorship, and between 1981 and 1986, he waged a guerilla war and captured power. That was the end of his Maoism.

Even during the war, Museveni and his rebels were in touch with imperialist capitalism. Some of their funders were Western-based multinational companies. But there was still a problem with his reputation as a Marxist. He therefore went to work to rebrand himself, and shed off any ties to Marxism, Socialism, and Communism. Before long, he had won the trust of the United States. His government adopted almost every single policy that the IMF and WB recommended. Neoliberalism became the mode of business. Museveni became a free market evangelist himself. Uganda shed off public parastatals at give-away prices, told the people that it wasn't the government's job to provide social services, and praised itself as having successfully turned around the country's economy, code for ensuring that whatever little control of the economy that was left in people's hands was handed over to neoliberal imperialism. Nothing had changed in terms of who calls the shots in the country. The bourgeoisie in the United States mainly calls the shots in Uganda. As long as Museveni satisfies whatever imperialist neoliberal capitalism asks of him, he can rule as long and in whatever way he wishes.

Over the 32 years Museveni has ruled Uganda, he has permanently been on the side of the Americans. From Reagan, through Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Obama, and to Trump, Museveni has prided himself on what he calls a "partnership" with the Americans. This "partnership" has been at the core, of a military nature, meaning that Uganda's wars in the entire Great Lakes region have had American backing. Uganda is a military capitalist state. Of course, as we know, to capitalists, war is business by other means. However, Ugandans have not sat down to watch this exploitation of their country and their oppression. They have actively opposed Museveni and his imperialist backers from the first day he took power. Museveni has used his friendships with the United States to thwart all the opposition he has met from Ugandans. The struggle in Uganda is therefore not just a struggle for democracy and for Museveni to leave power, but also the struggle for self-determination, the struggle for Ugandans to determine their own destiny, to win back what they lost when Britain colonised them, and when Museveni literally sold the economy to multinational capital, and the United States Military Industrial Complex.

The War on Terror Worsens Things

Perhaps the most dramatic of the contradictions between the people of Uganda and United States imperialism came in 2001. Believing that perhaps the United States meant its rhetoric around democracy, free and fair elections, human and civil rights, Museveni's challenger in the 2001 election, himself a former rebel in Museveni's personal army, Col. Kizza Besigye escaped from house arrest and headed to the United States to canvass support for his pro-democracy movement. Besigye's political platform was then reformist than revolutionary. In fact, his slogan was Reform Now. The political group that emerged out of that was Reform Agenda. Eventually, when they formed a political party, the Forum for Democratic Change, it in documents states that its ideology is center-right, supporting a free-market economy, with the provision of public services as a safety net.

The War on Terror however blinded the United States in its choice of partners and with a willing, able and dependable militarist in Museveni, who immediately pledged support to Bush II's wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, no ideological promises from Besigye could get the bourgeoisie in America to see his points about democracy and peace in Uganda. Under Museveni, Uganda has become America's biggest agent not only in the Great Lakes region but all over the world. Museveni plays the role of America's mercenary. A Bloomberg report even noted that Uganda's biggest export is mercenaries. You can guess the biggest client. This extent of militarization has not escaped Museveni's free market economics. It is based on neoliberalism. Private security companies are big business for the Museveni family. Who cares about democracy? Besigye was denied asylum in the United States, in the United Kingdom, and spent five years of his exile in South Africa as Museveni fought America's wars in return to keeping him in power.

Kizza Besigye and the political party whose flag he carries in sham presidential elections have not given up. They know that Museveni's elections are a farce, but they use them to further show how much of a farce they are. They use electoral periods as an opportunity to share their message of political change. In 2011, they organized a peaceful protest campaign dubbed Walk to Work, inspired by the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, and unfortunately Libya. Obviously Museveni used his military might to repress the protests. But something else happened. Ambassadors of several Western countries in Uganda called Besigye and gave him a tongue-lashing because of Walk to Work. If he had doubts as to who directly benefits and sustains Museveni's dictatorship, he got it in that meeting. After yet another sham election in 2016, Besigye was sworn in as President of the People's Government and has an elaborate structure with People's assemblies and a full cabinet of ministers. Despite the official ideological leaning of FDC to center-right politics, Besigye's People's Government is a front for a struggle against US imperialism in as far as it targets Museveni, US' core ally and agent.

Museveni's anti-Western rhetoric  is not anti-imperialism

Over time, for an agent of United States neoliberal imperialism, it has become necessary to find smokescreens so as to claim nominal legitimacy among the people, who are suffering due to their status as the exploited and oppressed. Museveni has jumped onto what he calls the "social imperialism" of Western countries, to stage a clash between himself and the United States among others and tell Ugandans he actually stands for their interests. Of course no one believes this, I doubt even his most trusted propagandists do. He uses already widespread homophobia for example, say the introduction of an Anti-Homosexuality Bill in 2009, hoping to appeal to conservative Christian and Muslim sentiments among the people, and stage a war of words with activists elsewhere mostly in Western countries, including with Western governments and portray himself as a defender of Ugandan values and morals. When Obama called this law odious, it was a peak for the imperialist diversionary tactics as Museveni and his propagandists claimed to carry the flag of Africa's independence from America's promotion of homosexuality. No one is fooled by this game that he plays with his imperialist backers to hoodwink Ugandans. America still funded Museveni's military at the time, American businesses still exploited Ugandans, despite the media war over gay rights.

Most recently, this trick was pulled out of the bag when Bobi Wine (aka Robert Kyagulanyi), a musician-parliamentarian opposed to Museveni's life presidency was arrested, allegedly subjected to cruel, inhuman, humiliating and degrading treatment while in detention, sparking global outrage. Museveni's propagandists pulled homophobia out of their bag of tricks. They claimed that Bobi Wine, who has personally been hoodwinked by this same tactic in the past, was funded by gay rights groups from America to recruit Ugandan children into homosexuality. They thought as usual, that the people would now start talking about cultural values and "social imperialism" and forget about Bobi Wine's call for People Power. The tactic spectacularly failed. Demonstrations were held in many places in the country, in other cities on the African continent, and even in the United States protesting Museveni's life rule, but really United States imperialism.

While traditionally, left movements are associated with trade union activism, democratic socialist political parties, guerilla movements, and anarchist formations among others, I argue that in the Ugandan context, we should understand Stella Nyanzi's peaceful Facebook-based activism, Bobi Wine's People Power movement, and Kizza Besigye's People's Government as Left Movements. In a textbook sense at least from the perspective of the Western Left, elements of what Stella Nyanzi, Bobi Wine, and Kizza Besigye say for example in policy discussions fall on the liberal bourgeois capitalist side of things. Our analysis must however "stretch Marx" as Frantz Fanon once put it. We can't limit ourselves to conceptualizations that have developed in a particular context. The left and right spectrum as we know, has its roots in the post French revolution period. After the overthrow of the king, whoever sat to the left of the speaker versus those who sat to the right became left and right wings. It would appear oxymoronic therefore to label any monarch as Leftist. But how do you categorise Kabaka Mwanga, Omukama Kabalega and Queen Muhumuza's anti-imperialist politics? Do you say they are not leftist because they were monarchist, and discredit their anti-imperialism?

Following Cedric Robinson's theorization of the Black Radical Tradition, and Carole Boyce Davies' formulation of Claudia Jones' politics as located to the left of Karl Marx, I argue that the international Left, that Left movements based in Western countries must be ready to stretch their ideological frames, when dealing with situations outside the West. In the Ugandan context, this will see us supporting movements that on paper may seem advocating for reactionary policy positions. In any case, as Besigye found out, fighting Museveni, is indeed fighting US imperialism and therefore a Left position. The center-right politics will remain on paper.

Thank you very much.

This speech was delivered at the Party for Socialism and Liberation – PSL(Geneva branch)'s Peace Talk on Friday November 30, 2018.

Bwesigye Bwa Mwesigire is a Ugandan activist and writer. He is currently a PhD student in English at Cornell University. 

--
Disclaimer:Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ugandans-at-heart+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com