Prime
Museveni’s empty promises on democracy
Moses Khisa
What you need to know:
- From 2001 and on, State organised violence and blatant repression against opposition parties and politicians became the mainstay of Uganda’s electoral landscape.
Since he captured power as leader of the second successful post-colonial African guerrilla rebel group, after Hissen Habre in Chad, President Museveni repeatedly claimed he fought the 1981 to 1986 war to restore democratic governance and respect for human rights.
In the initial years of his rule, he superintended modestly progressive reforms that gave voice to the citizenry through local level political participation and public accountability. While for long spells armed insurgency in the north was a huge human rights disaster, the rest of Uganda returned to a sound, stable and secure state.
Until the late 1990s, Museveni’s democratic credentials appeared credible and compelling precisely because he had not been tested yet. Western political and diplomatic actors saw him as representing the ‘new breed of African leadership.’ All seemed rosy and reassuring until Museveni faced a real test of his democratic credentials.
It was during the 2001 elections, and subsequent electoral cycles that Dr Kizza Besigye fully exposed Museveni’s pretensions and hollow promises of a reformer and progressive incumbent who had heretofore earned plaudits.
From 2001 and on, State organised violence and blatant repression against opposition parties and politicians became the mainstay of Uganda’s electoral landscape.
Throughout the 2000s and 2010s, Western media and at least sections of the academia, perhaps in sync with diplomatic and security assessments of their respective governments, either painted a positive image or at worst maintained a largely lukewarm interest in the deepening tenor of Museveni’s authoritarian rule.
The West’s half-hearted and often approving stance towards Museveni’s rule derived from his favourable standing at the Pentagon as an invaluable ally in the war on terror, especially countering perceived Islamist threats under the tutelage of Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir, and of course the situation in Somalia. He also was seen as an outstanding student of neoliberalism and the Washington consensus, who undertook thoroughgoing reforms making Uganda’s economy arguably the most liberalised and privatised in Africa.
Against the background of the West’s lukewarm and sometimes approving attitude, come 2021elections and a dramatic turn.
In an instant, Bobi Wine became a fetish, valorised and sensationalised in ways that betray an historical understanding of Uganda’s political landscape. Quite remarkably, a flurry of Western advocates and promoters of democracy have been hard at work on the streets of Twitter and Facebook, urging their respective home governments in Europe and North America to call out Museveni’s excesses, to issue tough statements.
In a particularly instructive ‘show of solidarity,’ they demanded that their embassies in Kampala, literally, order Museveni to lift the military/police siege on Bobi Wine’s house, effectively under house arrest since the night of the polls. This proposed nostrum, of their governments issuing tough orders to Mr Museveni to ‘behave,’ apparently is justified because Museveni is a net beneficiary of Western foreign aid who should be reined in by his benefactors. But resisting and defeating an entrenched authoritarian ruler is no walk in the forest, not reducible to the fiat of pressure from Western powers. The forces and fuel that can bring about change in a manner that advances the cause of genuine democracy and freedom, must necessarily evolve and emerge from Uganda and among Ugandans.
After 35 years in power, Museveni has taken Uganda down a dangerous path. His rule has become more repressive, characterised by mounting brutality against political opponents and a rusted response to biting socioeconomic difficulties. Bringing about meaningful change is not as simple as chasing out an autocrat and installing a new messianic figure with a populist appeal.
It may well be an easier job to overthrow Museveni in a popular process. The tougher job is forging a new Uganda of peace and prosperity. The issue is not merely one of ‘removing a dictator,’ it is also about understanding how a post-Museveni Uganda can be viably pursued and prudently implemented. For foreign actors genuinely fired up for freedom and liberation of suffering Ugandans, I propose more humility and less hubris. Uganda is at grave political crossroads. The possibility of social disintegration is real. The country’s social fabric is fragile. The youth bulge presents a daunting task. Land conflicts portend the most important source of social disharmony and violence.
The country’s democratic experiment requires a total rethink. Tackling these endemic problems requires a candid and concerted national conversation to turn the corner.
The country wants to free itself from Museveni’s mess, but Museveni too needs to be liberated from his own trap of power. It is a delicate and difficult negotiation to be navigated. It needs thoughtfulness and perceptiveness.
