As the confrontation between President Yoweri Museveni and
Mengo reached a climax last Friday evening, it was the Buganda establishment
that retreated. As the Katikiro announced that Kabaka Ronald Mutebi had
cancelled his trip to Kayunga, it was clear that Museveni is the most
overestimated man in this country.
During the fight, Museveni had tactlessly given Mengo the
strategic initiative. By insisting that Mutebi will not got to Kayunga,
Museveni left Buganda’s Kabaka the initiative to decide whether to dare the
devil. If Mutebi had stuck to his guns, Museveni’s only option would have been
to arrest him. Regardless of his justification, Baganda would never have
forgiven Museveni. He had boxed himself into a corner from which retreat seemed
the only option. Why did Mengo retreat?
Possibly they realised by using intimidation, Museveni could
only score a tactical victory while Mengo would retain strategic advantage by
positioning themselves as the reasonable party. In the long term, this would
help Mengo win public support.
Museveni relies mostly on persuasion and bribery to get his
way. When these fail, he turns to intimidation and blackmail. He is a bully who
enjoys being seen as ruthless, eager to unleash violence and death to those who
dare challenge him. He has cultivated this reputation carefully, thus sending
shock and awe down the spines of potential adversaries. Yet in fact, Museveni
is a very weak president.
His army is heavily divided, his intelligence services
deeply factionalised, his party is demoralised while his cabinet is in
disarray. Lacking a unifying vision, his government has no moral purpose. To
get followers Museveni has to cough cash, thus giving corruption a free reign.
Therefore, his ability to ‘crash’ his opponents is more myth than reality.
If someone put 10,000 demonstrators on the streets of
Kampala, the army and police would disperse them; 70,000, the security services
may contain them. But if they were 200,000 and were kept on the streets for a
week, the army and police will join the demonstrators. Why? Governmental
incompetence, corruption and nepotism have led to popular discontent in the
country. The security personnel share it.
Yet, although there is widespread demand for resistance,
there is limited supply of effective organisation and leadership; we have
social dynamite but are lacking a detonator. For the police and army to break
ranks and support the democratic forces, the demonstrations have to be well
organised, well led and peaceful. This has happened in Yugoslavia, Ukraine and
the Philippines.
Yet most demonstrations have been spontaneous, a factor that
explains the degeneration into random violence and looting. In politics,
organisation is everything. Without it, you have mob action. Mobs don’t build
anything, they destroy things. They also alienate potential allies. For
example, during the riots, shops were looted and ethnic Banyankore and business
people of Asian descent attacked. Yet many of these people possibly sympathised
with the Mengo’s cause.
While the security services think the violence was organised
and coordinated, the truths is that Mengo was surprised (although some of its
leaders were also thrilled) by this spontaneous show of solidarity. Indeed,
initially Mengo did not know how to respond to the violence ‘ whether to
condemn or endorse it. Finally, they did neither.
Consequently, lumpens, petty criminals and idlers took
advantage of the organisational and leadership vacuum to loot. This way, they
played into Museveni’s hands and undermined Mengo’s cause. They scared away the
private sector and the middle class who are necessary in supporting legitimate
demands on the state ‘ thereby justifying the government’s iron fisted
reaction.
Mengo has always suffered from a parochial belief that its
demands are only for it and Museveni to decide. Yet it needs to position its
demands as part of the wider demands of all Ugandans for democracy,
accountability and better government. After decades of private negotiations, Mengo
does not seem to have realised that this is not a formula for success.
The widespread discontent against Museveni is at first sight
intriguing. He has presided over successful economic reconstruction. Ugandans
today have more cars, television and radios sets and better houses and improved
services. Yet Museveni’s delivery of public services like health and education
has been far below expectations.
Secondly, economic growth has been limited largely to
services, industry and construction. Yet these sectors employ only 20% of
Uganda’s increasingly restless young population. Agriculture on which 73% of
Ugandans depend for a livelihood has suffered negative per capita growth
averaging -2% per annum over the last ten years.
Consequently, Museveni’s electoral fortunes have been
declining in spite of his penchant for rigging. In 1996, Museveni got 4m
votes and 75.5% of the vote. In 2001, his absolute votes were 5.1m while his
percentage vote was 69%. In 2006, his absolute vote fell by one million votes
to 4m and his overall percentage to 59% with only 638,911 votes saving him from
a humiliating second round.
And this is in circumstances where Museveni’s main opponent,
Kizza Besigye, returned to the country in the last four months of the campaign,
did not have any organisation or money and was in jail or in court for two
thirds of the time. Where is Museveni going to grow new voters when the only
people joining the register are youths between 18 and 23 years ‘ the group most
disempowered and therefore angry with his leadership?
In 2006, there were 3.2m registered voters in Central
region, 65% of whom were ethnic Baganda. Museveni got 1.2m votes against
Besigye’s 740,000 ‘ beating his main rival in all sub counties in which Baganda
are a majority. If Mutebi dared to go to Kayunga and Museveni arrested him, he
would have turned away even his most ardent Baganda supporters and given
desperately needed momentum to our lackadaisical opposition.
In cancelling his visit to Kayunga, Mutebi demonstrated a
tragic lack of nerve and allowed Museveni once again to prevail over an issue
where the president had lost strategic initiative. One of the critical signs of
great leadership is the willingness to sacrifice. Mengo will not get what it
wants on a silver platter. Going to jail would have shown the sacrifice Mutebi
is willing to make for his kingdom and country.
amwenda@independent.co.ug
No comments:
Post a Comment