Muntu exit from FDC good for all except Museveni

Dear Tingasiga;
The decision by Mugisha Muntu and a number of senior party leaders to quit the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), Uganda’s largest opposition party, has been greeted with vitriolic reaction from some members of that party.

A disinformation campaign has been re-launched to persuade the willing that Muntu, who lost his FDC presidential re-election bid last November, quit because he was unable to accept defeat. This is false.

When told that in the past Muntu had readily accepted losses of presidential and flag-bearer elections to Kizza Besigye, the disinformation campaigners switched gears to allege that Muntu quit FDC because he could not be led by a “non-westerner.” (Patrick Oboi Amuriat, the FDC president, is an Etesot from Kumi, Teso.)

But when asked why Muntu quit the NRM, which was ruled by Yoweri Museveni, a fellow Munyankore, the merchants of falsehoods spoke in tongues.

Of course, they knew that Muntu was well above such ethnic narrowmindedness, just as they knew that their allegations that Muntu was a Museveni/NRM mole was as false as claiming that there was a Mukiga man living on the Moon. I hesitate to engage in this kind of debate.

However, left unanswered, falsehoods become received wisdom. So, let me reiterate that Muntu’s continued membership in FDC was unsustainable and undesirable for both sides.

First, there was no room for Muntu’s vision and strategy for the party. In last year’s party presidential elections, Amuriat, who was very strongly supported by Besigye and Wasswa Birigwa, the party chairman, campaigned under the theme of “One Party-One Strategy.” That strategy was the pursuit of a single agenda of, mainly, street-level defiance until they installed Besigye, “the people’s president”, in State House.
Amuriat and Birigwa were very eloquent in their final campaign summation before the delegates at Namboole. They made it very clear where the party would be headed under an Amuriat presidency.

On the other hand, Muntu, campaigning under the theme of “Building FDC Together,” offered a primary strategy that would emphasise party organisation, growth and preparedness for electoral victory at all levels of government and effective governing of Uganda. Under Muntu, there would be room for street defiance campaigns by those so inclined. The delegates overwhelmingly voted for Amuriat - 641 versus 463 votes.

It was a resounding victory for the Besigye/Amuriat defiance campaign and a clear rejection of Muntu’s combined strategy. Muntu promptly and fully accepted the result without any equivocation. But it was clear there was no room for him in the party.

Second, Muntu was very explicit in addressing the chronic false allegations that he was an NRM/Museveni mole in the party. Muntu, a party founding member, who had sacrificed enormously for FDC, was plagued with what were clearly malicious allegations, merchandised by his detractors.

The falsehoods started in 2005 when Muntu indicated an interest in standing for election as president at the very founding of the party.

His subsequent efforts to wrestle the presidency or the party flag from Besigye “confirmed” the suspicion that he was up to mischief. In a culture where political parties were identified with the person of the founding leader, Muntu’s challenge was perceived as disloyalty, even treachery, in the service of “the enemy.”

We recall the passion with which Nandala Mafabi’s party presidential campaign team in 2012, led by Maj Rubaramira Ruranga, made the “NRM mole” allegations. It was remarkable, though not surprising, that the same Maj Ruranga fled into the arms of the NRM the moment Muntu was elected FDC president. Many senior party leaders remained silent in the face of this malicious onslaught against Muntu. Not that they did not know the truth. Besmirching Muntu’s good name served the interests of those whose political ambitions trumped the truth and decency.

These anti-Muntu campaigns, including the spread of falsehoods that he was a Museveni mole, were often fuelled by the State machine. One trick was to have internal security officers and other well-known NRM operatives talk in favour of Muntu to FDC delegates in their home areas. This would create the impression that Muntu was the preferred candidate of the ruling regime. Many FDC delegates fell for this.

When Muntu asked the delegates to vote him out and allow him to leave if they really believed that he was a mole, he meant what he said. That the very people who were calling Muntu a mole are now angry that he has quit the party is evidence that they knew the truth all along, namely, that Muntu was not a mole in the party. They created a toxic environment and now seem to be surprised by the consequences.

Those in the know, within the FDC, are fully aware of who is on Museveni’s payroll. I can state without hesitation that the moles have not quit the party. They have no reason to do so. It was not a joke when Muntu stated last week that Ugandans will be shocked the day the real mole(s) are revealed. The truth is that Muntu is Museveni’s political nightmare.

Muntu’s clean personal record, his environmentally-friendly persona, his popularity with the security forces and his non-confrontational style do not sit well with the President. Museveni respects Muntu, but he fears him. Museveni knows that, under the right conditions, Muntu’s attributes can do political damage to the NRM and the life presidency project.

That is why we expect Museveni and his courtiers to take a very keen interest in the new political formation that Muntu is championing. You can count on Museveni to attempt to infiltrate the organisation, with an agenda of disruption, destabilisation and destruction.

The new party’s survival will demand of all its members to be constantly alert to what happened to Uganda’s major political parties in the last 60 years. The Uganda National Congress (UNC), Democratic Party (DP), Uganda People’s Congress (UPC), National Resistance Movement (NRM) and FDC fell far short of the founders’ dreams.

They all succumbed to personality cults, petty conflicts, unchecked personal ambitions, factional scheming and malicious campaigns against challengers. Yes, UNC, DP, NRM and FDC offered varying degrees of democratic rituals, with the FDC miles ahead of the others in its attempts at democracy. However, ritual adherence to regular elections, even with free competition, does not equate to having the spirit of democracy.

My advice to those who have quit FDC is that they should exercise maximum restraint in the face of provocation by their former colleagues. They should refuse the bait and simply not engage in dogfights and mudslinging. FDC is not your enemy. No party is your enemy. Not even the NRM.

Look ahead, focus on forming a new, strong and broad national coalition. Purposefully do it right. Your overarching goal should be positive transformation of the political culture and governance of Uganda. Peacefully retiring Museveni and his party from power is only part of the agenda.

[email protected]