Kutesa: I don’t want to be president

Kampala

In an interview with Managing Editor DANIEL K. KALINAKI and Senior Reporter TABU BUTAGIRA, Foreign Affairs Minister Sam Kutesa ruled himself out of the race to succeed President Museveni, spoke about Somalia and relations with the United States. Excerpts:

We went into Somalia under the AU mandate and other countries were supposed to contribute troops and other resources, which they haven’t. Are you comfortable with this and is this an open-ended assignment?
A: No. We went to Somalia on behalf of the African Union and other countries; Nigeria, Ghana, Malawi, had pledged to bring in troops in as well. To-date, it is only Burundi that joined us.
Our purpose in Somalia is twofold; protect the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) institutions and train Somalis so that they have capacity to run their own affairs and secure their country. So we are doing a good job at both so far. Do we feel let down other countries didn’t come up? Yes. It cannot be an open-ended assignment and that is why we are helping train Somalis to take over their own security. It is not our intention to stay in Somalia (indefinitely).

Do we have a tentative deadline by which we need to be out of Somalia?
We believe that training a force of 20,000 Somalis is sufficient to protect Somalia and to protect their own government. And the training is going on and I think it is not too far from the date when we shall secure that number.

The TFG does not appear to be making inroads politically or gaining acceptance among Somalis. Are we not propping up a government that is unsustainable?
There is a problem of territory and how to access others in the country. Amisom (the African Union Peacekeeping Mission to Somalia) are still limited around Mogadishu. We have encouraged (President Sheik Shariff) to have an inclusive government so that there is a sense of involvement. Not all (fighting) groupings are al Qaeda or al Shabaab supporters.

At the end of August, the transitional period comes to an end. So we are now involved in discussion with them, the international community, the AU to see how and through what method this is extended. You have TFG in Mogadishu, other governments in Puntland and Somaliland. We are trying to see how these can work together.

Some people have drawn parallels between our involvement in Somalia and the way we manage our relationship with the US. After the July 2010 bombings in Kampala, the tone and message from the Americans changed – became more supportive and understanding. Are we in Somalia to appease the US?
What a price to pay! We are in Somalia because of our Pan-African policy; we believe that it is not right for Africans to sit and watch as an African state becomes a failed state. We draw from our own history. We were becoming a failed state under [late President] Idi Amin Dada and Tanzania volunteered to remove that problem and then build our capacity to run own affairs. Our approach has nothing to do with our relationship with the United States. We think African states have to play the role to bring stability to the continent.

Has it helped the US to be more understanding?
The US Congress ordered Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to report quarterly to Congress on (Uganda’s preparation for the February 18 elections). The tone of the report became more positive not as result of our involvement in Somalia; it is as a result of the improvements that were being made in the electoral process such as new voter registrations and the on-line technology for reporting results. The positivity of their reports is a reflection of the improvements in our electoral systems. In any case when they demanded for these reports, we were actually already in Somalia. (UPDF entered Mogadishu in March 2007 – Editor). So, it is clear that our involvement in Somalia has no relationship with their view of our electoral process.

What would you say was the biggest achievement Uganda had from having a temporary seat on the UN Security Council?
We had a seat on a table where world peace and stability are discussed. And it enabled us to bring forward African issues which many times.

Secondly, majority of the Security Council resolutions in the last five or so years have been on Africa and we had the opportunity now to bring the African perspective and to show where problems are and influence decisions. I commend Ambassador Dr Ruhakana Rugunda for doing a stellar job at the Security Council.

You have done fairly well getting these kinds of big ticket assignments like procuring the Security Council seat and the (Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting) Chogm which ended up under your supervision and was very controversial. Apart from just having a week of international guests, what did we achieve from hosting this summit?
I think that as a member of the Commonwealth, it was an honour and privilege to host it partly because we believe in shared values of the Commonwealth; democracy rule of law, observation of human rights. And it is not normal that the Commonwealth Summit would go to a country where there is doubt about the policies of that country in regard to these shared values. Imperfect as it maybe, we have embarked on a democratic process, observance of human rights and the guaranteeing of human rights and the rule of law. So hosting Chogm was a stamp of approval of our policies. The other aspect is the infrastructure – the tourism and hotel capacity – that was put in place in preparation for Chogm had then a lot of economic benefits and residual continuous benefits. We have since then hosted summits of the African Union, Organisation of Islamic Countries and the International Criminal Court. Uganda has since become a preferred conference destination; the number of tourists has jumped up by 200,000 a year since Chogm.

The Auditor General in his report on Chogm, and in findings variously upheld by the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament, found widespread cases of either incompetence or actual theft of public funds by officials. Is this a personal indictment of your leadership?
I played a leading role along with the President and many other people in Chogm here. But when Chogm came, we set up a Cabinet committee chaired by the Vice President and sometimes by the President himself and decisions were made collectively. We had a Secretariat chaired by the deputy Head of Public Service and including Permanent Secretaries.If there were any mistakes that could have been committed, it cannot be a personal indictment.

There is not a time when I ever made a decision without my colleagues being part of it. Now was Chogm a success? Yes, it was. Could there have been mistakes? Probably because some of them could have been through procurement because time limits were putting pressure on the carrying out of these decisions. What I know is no minister handled the monies.

How do you respond to people who say that ministers, yourself included, conveniently hide behind the cloak of collective responsibility to dodge personal liability?
I totally disagree. I don’t think anyone should hide behind the cloak of collective responsibility. If you read the AG’s report and the PAC report you see a world of difference. The AG, for example in my own case, nowhere says that I had conflict of interest but PAC, because of political interests – and I have reasonable suspicion who was involved in those politics – came out with a totally different conclusion.

You have a long record of public service and legal practice. There have, however, been persistent allegations levelled against you about your handling of public finances, resulting in your censure (from Parliament in 1998). What is it about you that draws this suspicion?
As I said earlier, censures and most of the accusations are political. People who take a swipe are political and want to run down your record. And some of them have used my relationship with the First Family which, if they want to attack, I become the punching bag. So they hit at me. But I have been related to the First Family long before; my late wife was cousin to the First Lady way back from 1974. So really I can’t change my family relationships. Otherwise, I have a very clean and successful record politically.

Why would they target you specifically when there are other people related or associated with the First Family in public service?
I don’t know how many times Gen. Salim Saleh (President Museveni’s brother) has been attacked or called a profiteer; even my son-in-law (First Son, Lt. Col. Muhoozi Kainerugaba); a young man who is just professional and does nothing wrong has been attacked. So we all get attacked, it is not specific. If you are the one in Parliament, they can use that route to target you. But I think my record speaks for itself.

How much are you worth, if I may ask?
I am worth about $3 to $4m (about Shs8b).

Do you feel the government can do anything about corruption?
I think corruption is an evil in society because it totally undermines whatever services you want to deliver to the population. It is not the way the government runs; that it has decided that corruption is one of its policies. On the contrary, government has put measures to fight corruption. I think it is to do with the freedom of your own media that corruption is talked about more openly now than ever before. I believe that what the government is doing or ought to do is to strengthen and finance the investigative and prosecution departments so that whoever is alleged to have committed crime is fully investigated and prosecuted. But the will to fight corruption is there.

How do you respond to the statement made by the outgoing Head of the Anti-Corruption Court, Justice John Bosco Katutsi, that there is a deliberate effort to prosecute small fish while the bigger political players, whom he describes as crocodiles, are let off scot-free?
Justice Katutsi was slightly ahead of me in Law school and I know him to be a good person but also extremely poetic; that’s why his judgments are memorable. You remember there was an investigation about corruption in the army.
The President at that time sacked his army Chief of Staff, his chief of intelligence Brig. Henry Tumukunde and even the army commander (late Maj. Gen. James) Kazini. I don’t know anybody in Africa who could have demonstrated such strong will by tackling corruption by sacking such people.

Some people will argue that he sacked those but he forgave his brother, Gen. Saleh.
His brother was not involved.

But he had been involved in the junk choppers case where he confessed to taking an $800,000 bribe.
I think the matter was referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions and it was the DPP to look at the evidence. I don’t think that simply because Salim Saleh is the brother of the President, he is not entitled to due process of the law.

In the same way some people will argue that the other people who were sacked deserved a fair hearing.
They were heard. And some of them have been acquitted. But the point I am making is that nowhere in Africa has any government taken such a bold decision against corruption. So when people are not prosecuted, it maybe because the investigations department is underfunded and they have not completed their investigations or there is no credible evidence.

There are reports that you are lobbying to head the proposed new Oil ministry (Mr Kutesa laughs heartily). Having done very well in Foreign Affairs, wouldn’t this be the next good ministry for you to give your talents to?
That’s laughable. I have no expertise at all in oil matters and I would be like a square peg in a round hole if made a minister for oil. I can learn but that is not really the area of my best competence.

In terms of the political power play, one of the things that Wikileaks revealed is this jostling over succession in which you were put in a certain camp with Ms Amelia Kyambadde, the former PPS to the President, trying to fight the Amama Mbabazi camp. What is your role in this matter?
First of all I think the succession story has been extremely diversionary. Everytime we finish an election, the next five years people are engaged in succession battles. I think people should concentrate on doing well what they are doing now. If you are a Minister of Security and party Secretary-General, run the party properly; do your security work properly. If you are a Foreign Minister, do your best to do your work as Foreign Minister. Then let the President do his work properly.

From 2001 I have heard this debate and I have asked people: Who says the post is vacant for you to talk about succession?

But as a politician obviously your ambition is to seek that higher office.
I can tell you that in terms of high office in government, I have reached the highest one I want myself.

Would you consider a run for President?
No I wouldn’t.

Why not?
I think I have served enough and I can best serve the country at this level.

So are you looking to step down?
Eventually I will retire. I am not going to die in these offices. I want to go and do a few things of my own when I still have some energy in me.

What do you want to do outside government?
I want to find time to probably do some writing about my own experiences whatever they are on. Whatever advice is worth, I pass on to the younger generations.

Would having term limits be a good thing for the country?
I don’t think so and I did support the lifting of term limits. I don’t think that it is a tenet of democracy that you must have term limits. What you must have are free and fair elections regularly. I don’t know why now everybody thinks as a pillar of democracy, term limits is a must. It’s unique to the United States and now imposed on Africa.

The way we have engaged with China appears different from the way countries like Kenya have. They have put stadiums for us and this office block for the President whereas in Kenya, they are helping them to put up super highways that are then going to be productive tools. Do you feel that we know what we want in our partnership with the Chinese and that we are actually working actively to achieve that?
Well, I don’t know where China has not built a stadium in Africa. They have always done even before this economic boom. But now they are an economic powerhouse and what we are engaged in with them now and the loans that are negotiated with the Chinese have to do with infrastructure.

We have seen problems with Chinese-funded projects such as the National Data Backbone and the Southern Bypass, which is set to be one of the most expensive roads in the world. Is the Chinese model, of see-no evil, hear-no-evil good for us?
I have heard that complaint mostly from our Western friends. It is true that China will not ask about democracy and the rule of law and that the Western countries do so. Now is it good or is it bad? I have no idea. But me I think that shouldn’t be democratising because the West asks us questions or wants us to. I think it is important for Africa to democratise because it is good for us. But if we do it to please someone else, we do it half-heartedly.

We have seen a warming of relations between Uganda and Rwanda but we still have hiccups including allegations that we were involved, supported or looked the other way when some high-profile Rwandan officials left the country. How much of a strain has that put on our relations and do we have the necessary institutional relationships to override any disagreements between individuals?
I think what we have done is to get on with the business of running our countries.Rwanda now has joined the East African Community so institutionally there are places where we meet and smoothen out issues. Our bilateral relations have also improved tremendously and we do have consultations.
I think the best mechanism to use in any country – and Rwanda is part of that – is when there is a problem, talk about it. That’s the only way you resolve it.
For example when you talk about high profile people going through here, it is true that some of them went through here but we were not aware that they were running away at that time. And it is not that we are encouraging rebellion against Rwanda. What I can assure you is in this region we cannot let Uganda to be used to destabilise our neighbours. That’s our foreign policy.