Weekly observer
Interview with Dr.Kiiza Besigye
It
is said the elite will generally not get involved in confrontational defiance….
If they can’t get involved, that means that they
are part of the problem which must be solved and by the way, the elite during
the NRA war were not involved in the large measure. The people who fought were
peasants.
Yet some of the fighters, like you, were elites.
Yes, but we were very few just as it is today.
There are a few elites who are involved in activism today.
But with or without them, we must cause change.
The elites can continue to look for greener pastures within Uganda or even abroad; when change
comes, they will come but that is none of our worries.
You sound like you are disappointed with a non-cooperative section of Ugandans.
I’m disappointed but not surprised because it is
the nature of our education that creates parasites
rather than people who have patriotic values that offer service to
others.
What do you make of the sudden death of
the renegade Col
Patrick Karegeya whom you worked with during the NRA war?
Karegeya went away in 1990. What has been
happening in Rwanda,
I’m not so much informed about, but also situations
within countries are quite unique to those countries, but it is
certainly sad that he died the way he died.
You got a chance to work with President Kagame and President Museveni; how do you compare the two leaders?
I have worked with Museveni as a president; I have never worked with Kagame as a president, but I
know Kagame from a different perspective.
The issue I would have talked about here is that there are a lot of debates about freedom and rights in
Rwanda, but one thing which is also indisputable is that the Kagame
government has delivered public goods in a shorter time despite the terrible
situation of genocide, but there is less corruption,
there is a lot of development yet Museveni has not done much in the so many
years.
Besigye is partly to blame for elites’ support of rogue regime
Kizito Michael George,
In your interview with Dr. Kizza Beigye, in the
Observer of Tuesday, 07 January 2014,
the retired but not tired Colonel reiterated his stance that Uganda elites are to blame for the
perpetuation Museveni’s ‘rogue’ regime because they are optimistic ,
selfish and products of a parasitic education system . I deeply applaud Dr.Besigye’s exemplary
resistance of the dictatorship in Uganda and I understand his
frustrations however, I think his analysis is based on mere symptoms and not fundamental causes.
Dr. Besigye
should know that serious elites will always do research about dictatorial
systems in order to understand the
fundamental reasons why they persist in power and will not join anybody who
does not address the fundamentals . Many elites in Uganda
know that Dr. Kizza Besigye has a distorted understanding of the perseverance
of Uganda’s ‘rogue’ regime in power. Many are
categorically aware that Museveni’s dictatorship is sustained by the US and
its hegemonic neo-liberal system. Serious elites will never join a leader who
has a simplistic view of the problem. It must be noted that Dr.Besigye
explicitly holds the view that the dictatorship in Uganda is a domestic issue without western tentacles. Dr.Besigye should read the article of FDC die hard in the Observer of Thursday,
16 January 2014, titled, ‘’Can Uganda
afford to police the region’’. In this article the adamant FDC Youth
Mobilizer articulately traces the entrenchment of the Kampala ‘rogue’ regime to the
US-imperial design.
Elites wonder
why Dr.Besigye is virtually silent when
it comes to the massive support of the ‘rogue’ regime by US and her
client western nations. Elites are wondering why Besigye is silent about the
dictatorship in Kagame’s Rwanda?
We need to remember that in the above mentioned interview Dr.Besigye
categorically shot him self in the foot
by stating that ‘’there
are a lot of debates about freedom and rights in Rwanda, but one thing which is
also indisputable is that the Kagame government has delivered public goods in a
shorter time despite the terrible situation of genocide, but there is less
corruption, there is a lot of development yet Museveni has not done much in the
so many years.’’ But what is the use of economic success that is not
backed by human rights and good
governance? Doesn’t Gadaffi’s Libya
teach us a good lesson? Is Dr.Besigye insinuating that dictatorship is okay as long as there is
less corruption and economic success ? Why is Besigye silent about Rwandans who
have been either killed in Uganda
allegedly by the Kigali regime or deported back
to Rwanda
by the Ugandan ‘rogue’ regime? Doesn’t
this echo hypocrisy and double standards?
Elites see President Museveni as
a pawn in a US
neo-liberal ‘rogue’ system and know that
Dr. Besigye is always running to capitals of the protectors and funders
of the ‘rogue’ regime and therefore is in bed with same forces that have entrenched the dictatorship. Thus
there is no guarantee that the current
status quo will not continue unabated once Dr.Besigye takes over from the ‘rogue’
regime. So, elites are equally frustrated that Dr.Besigye cannot differentiate
between the symptomatic ‘rogue’ regime
and the fundamental ‘rogue’ regime .
There fore it is such a very
frustrating eco-system of exploitation and oppression which many elites believe
will break because of inner contradictions or because people come to understand
it as the fundamental cause of their problems. Due to this exasperating dilemma,
elites have chosen to just survive in the criminal system by working for it or
in it, some have decided to enlighten
people about the oppressive global system through writing while others have
left it to fate. Many elites know that this system is not sustainable anyway
but are not exactly sure how to break it or when it will break. Dr.Besigye has called for massive protests
against the ‘rogue’ regime in Kampala
similar to the ones that characterized the Arab spring. He needs to know that those protests were successful because
people came to the realization that the oppressive regimes in their countries
were puppets of the neo-liberal American imperial metro pole.
kizitomg@gmail.com
After
Dr Kizza Besigye criticised the Ugandan elite for refusing to support
his grass-roots campaigns to challenge President Museveni’s hold on
power, many have responded in an equally strong tone, saying the former
FDC president’s protest-politics is both unfashionable and
unsustainable.
In support of his argument, Huntington cites the example of the French revolution as well as Argentina, Brazil, the Philippines, Taiwan, Korea, Spain, Peru, and Ecuador in the late 1970s and the 1980s, as examples of societies whose political process and democratization has been influenced by the participation of the middleclass in quest for better things.
When American dictatorial client regimes give no damn about the poor: Striving tooth and nail to please his master –Babylon USA: President Museveni uses Money of Poor Ugandans to finance UPDF soldiers’ fighting in Sudan
Can Uganda afford to police the region?
http://www.observer.ug/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=29663:can-uganda-afford-to-police-the-region&catid=37:guest-writers&Itemid=66
How American Neo-liberal elites sophisticatedly use their intellectual antics to legitimize USA client state dictatorships : American neo-liberal elite Andrew Mwenda stealthily blames Museveni’s dictatorship on the opposition .
Is President Museveni a patriotic Ugandan or a pleaser of his master and Protector –Babylon USA?? Museveni blocks Anti-Homosexuality Bill
If you look a little bit more carefully you can see the American New world order system and her client/slave states: US experts to assist police in recruitment: Ugandan soldiers complete US-led special operations training course: Uganda on course to become a total dictatorship, Prof.OLoka Onyango
Why the elite avoid Besigye
Sunday, 11 August 2013 19:49
Frustrated: Kizza Besigye wants more elite participation in ousting President Museveni from power
The standoff raises serious concerns for
those who would like to see Uganda transition from being ruled by the
same group of gunmen that captured power in 1986 to truly democratic
leadership.
Experts believe that such a change, as
has previously happened in Ghana, cannot come easily without the
involvement of the middle class, something that puts Besigye’s outburst
into perspective.
In a surprise show of frustration two
weeks ago, Besigye said: “The educated elite are extremely selfish. Each
one is trying to look for a share of spoils...Anybody called a
professor is a curse to this country. They are all hopeless and you can
name them, they are all nodding their heads to what the dictator is
saying. Museveni has become a tyrant because the people around are not
telling him what to do.”
But various political analysts and
scholars, while admitting a trait of self-preservation among the elite,
have suggested the problem is largely Besigye’s. Mohammed Kulumba, a
senior lecturer in Political Science at Makerere University, described
Besigye’s comments and strategies as misplaced.
“The elite and middle class in general
are not known for political activism. And, even when they are to
participate, they don’t do it like Besigye wishes them to do it. The
middle class only participates depending on who is dealing with them and
based on clearly drawn strategies,” Kulumba told The Observer recently.
Giving the example of academics, Kulumba
says they will not go on the streets to demonstrate. They may, however,
contribute to change through making critical analyses of the actions of
the regime – and, perhaps, contributing resources. And this, he argues,
they have done.
He might have had in mind people like
Joe Oloka Onyango and Mwambutsya Ndebesa, both Makerere dons who have
often published eloquent critiques of government actions.
Opposing Museveni
Kulumba believes Besigye can find some consolation in his own history of the anti-Obote rebellion.
“He was part of the NRM and he knows
very well how the middle class contributed. It was the external wing
that provided the artificial blood life to those who were in the bush,”
he said.
Besigye joined the opposition in 1999
after a bitter fall out with the NRM regime. He first challenged
Museveni’s presidency in 2001 and lost. He has since stood two more
times and lost. A recent survey carried out by this newspaper found that
under President Museveni, Besigye is probably the most hunted and
prosecuted opposition leader in post-independence Uganda.
The Observer reported that over the last
five years, the former FDC party president has been arrested at least
28 times, charged in court at least six times, and locked up in Luzira
prison once. Whereas Besigye’s political resolve is unquestionable, his
political struggles have not been overwhelmingly embraced by prominent
elite or the middle class, leading to his frustration.
Narrow middle
According to Dr Julius Kiiza, a
political economist at Makerere, part of the problem is the fluid nature
of Uganda’s class structure. For instance, doubts remain whether Uganda
has a middle class in the conventional sense of the term.
“How does it survive? Can it really be
termed as a middle class in the real sense? All these questions have to
be answered before anyone examines its viability,” Kiiza said.
The phrase middle class which finds its
expression in the works of a German philosopher, Karl Marx, has been
given a modern meaning to refer to a portion of the population that
includes businessmen and professionals, who have capacity to spend an
extra portion of their income on anything after paying for basic needs.
American political science professor
Samuel Huntington argues that in virtually every country, the most
active supporters of democratisation are the middle class people.
“A rising middle class unleashes a
constellation of social forces with the organisational capacity and
education to press for democratic governance,” argues Huntington in his
book, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century.
In support of his argument, Huntington cites the example of the French revolution as well as Argentina, Brazil, the Philippines, Taiwan, Korea, Spain, Peru, and Ecuador in the late 1970s and the 1980s, as examples of societies whose political process and democratization has been influenced by the participation of the middleclass in quest for better things.
Kizza Besigye takes on police during the walk-to-work protests in 2011
It is believed that the Arab Spring,
particularly in Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria and Libya have been spearheaded
by the middle class. Kiiza argues that unlike in other societies, it is
unfortunate that Uganda has a narrow middle class that cannot influence
Uganda’s political agenda.
“We are very few who can function
independent of the political system. Majority of the perceived
middleclass in Uganda survives on the political oligarchy. And, this
cannot be a middle class,” he argues.
Kiiza argues that the business community
is also a product of the current political regime. “Majority of the
so-called rich business people became rich after 1986, which means that
the regime provided their foundation. So, they cannot survive without
the regime, which also explains [why] their participation in politics is
to support power consolidation for the regime,” he said.
This view is echoed by Asuman Basalirwa,
the President of Justice Forum (JEEMA): “Many professionals, scholars
derive their livelihood by winning contracts from government. So, it has
become difficult for them to ask for change as it will be self
destruction.”
Indeed, one former media manager has
told The Observer that he lost his job after the regime got to know that
he was sympathetic to the progressive forces. “When you participate in
the quest for political change there is a risk of losing your job and
not everyone is brave enough to weather the challenge,” he said.
Circumstances don't warrant
Dr Golooba Mutebi, a political scientist
and renowned researcher, argues that the middle class is not known for
political activism. They only get involved if their survival is gravely
threatened.
“There is sufficient freedom to warrant
the comfort for the middleclass. The situation is not like it was during
Amin’s or Obote’s time which pushed everyone to the front of seeking
for change,” Golooba said.
He argues that those who favour change
differ from Besigye on the means: “Some believe that there is need for
change but they don’t necessarily agree that change can come through
running battles. I don’t know Besigye’s ideology.”
Kulumba argues that Besigye’s strategy is not based on a reasoned plan of action.
“What is the strategy here? Have they
sat down to analyse why walk to work failed before they launched another
protest and others which they announce without focus?” he asked.
In defence of the protests, Basalirwa
says their activities are planned. “Walk to work was based on a plan and
everyone knows how the state machinery was deployed to make sure that
it does not do what it was formed to do.”
Strategies
In his book, From Dictatorship to
Democracy, Prof Gene Sharp, an American political scientist whose work
has guided many non-violent political struggles, says that spontaneous
uprisings often face serious limitations.
“Frequently, the democratic resisters
have not anticipated the brutalities of the dictatorship, so that they
suffered gravely and the resistance has collapsed,” he says.
Ultimately, Sharp argues that it is
prudent for opposition activists to always calculate the most effective
ways and times when it is ripe to bring down a dictatorship. One
important point is the vision and mission of democracy activists. Sharp
argues that movements that define their mission narrowly, in terms of
unseating a dictator, risk failure. Seizing on this point, Kulumba
argues that Besigye and group should gear their efforts towards
embracing democracy and transparency in their parties.
“The political parties should work
towards strengthening their structures as well as internal democracy and
transparency from within, as this would help in making parties
attractive. And, it is from then that they will have a critical mass,”
he said.
In addition, Kiiza argues, the
opposition should lobby for the state to improve services – building
good roads, hospitals, schools and a good economic environment that will
enable the expansion of a middleclass.
Others could argue, however, that
Museveni’s government is irresponsive. And how does the opposition make
an impression on an entrenched government? Besigye’s solution is street
protests – which the elite have shunned, leading to frustration.
When
Ugandans wake Up to the reality that it is the USA that is supporting
Museveni's dictatorship in order to further its imperial interests.
Check this article below
President Museveni’s recent ultimatum to the rebelling SPLA soldiers was laughable but not funny.
To many, it was an utterance by someone consumed by self-importance
and one that never ceases to poke his nose in other people’s affairs
believing that it is his God-given duty.
We have neither the reason nor the
resources to police the region. Let the Sudanese, Somalis, Congolese,
etc. strive to solve their own problems as we have been struggling to
solve ours without their direct military intervention.
The author is a political activist.
0755145122
Can Uganda afford to police the region?
http://www.observer.ug/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=29663:can-uganda-afford-to-police-the-region&catid=37:guest-writers&Itemid=66
Thursday, 16 January 2014 20:48
President Museveni’s recent ultimatum to the rebelling SPLA soldiers was laughable but not funny.
What, therefore, informs Museveni’s foreign policy positions?
Our engagements in foreign lands have
been clothed in high-sounding motives like Pan- Africanism (SPLA), war
on terror (Somalia), protecting our borders (Congo and Central African
Republic), helping our ‘brothers’ to return home (Rwanda) or African
solutions to African problems (Mali and Libya though in this case forces
were never deployed).
A microscopic examination is, therefore,
required to establish the truth behind the stated motives and resolve
whether such an aggressive foreign policy is in the interest of our
country and whether it should be done in our name.
Uganda has made it its business to seek to topple governments in the region or to militarily protect those in its good books.
The motive behind all this is Museveni’s
personal glory as the region’s kingmaker and serving Western imperial
objectives with a view of driving Western powers into a conspiracy of
silence about his tyrannical record.
Thus, when the West (America) wants to
kick out a ‘bad guy’, they have ready boots on the ground–UPDF. That is
why he can afford to invade, topple regimes, loot and kill (DR Congo)
without provoking retaliation from the international community.
When Charles Taylor did in Sierra Leone
exactly what we continue to do in DR Congo, he was hounded out of
office, tried and convicted by the ICC. On the other hand, our
president, the ‘beacon of hope’ is always selected to lead mediation
efforts even when his fingerprints are all over the crime scene or when
he is clearly partisan and fuelling conflict with unhelpful ultimatums.
He does all this, not because he is the
regional military giant, but because he has the strongest global power
behind him. He has identified his role in the perpetuation of the global
American hegemony and is more than willing to play the lackey’s part.
He sometimes pretends to be promoting
African interests by using Pan-African slogans to hoodwink his peers so
as to deliver them to his masters without much ado. His reward is an
assurance that he will get away with his crimes as long as he plays
succor to Western imperial designs. His benefactors will conveniently
argue that whereas he is bad, they do not see a credible alternative to
run the country.
What they actually mean is that they do
not see someone willing to do their bidding as faithfully as President
Museveni has done. Pursuing imperial designs or being an agent of
imperialism has a cost. It breeds hostility from the dominated. There is
no doubt that Ugandans are hated because of meddling in other people’s
domestic affairs.
Our traders in South Sudan have been
singled out for harassment and murder by our ‘pan-African’ brothers whom
we supported during their war of independence. Our railway line was
uprooted in Kenya because we were perceived to have meddled in their
elections in 2007.
Our citizens were brutally killed in
Kampala because of our involvement in Somalia and our citizens were sent
packing in Tanzania because we are considered ‘the neighbour from
hell’. Uganda is supposed to pay war reparations to the tune of $10
billion for the looting, killing and rape that we occasioned in Congo.
While there, we have fomented trouble
and armed rebels but today we condemn a section of SPLA for trying to
use ‘unconstitutional’ methods to acquire power. What a contradiction!
Whereas Museveni uses foreign wars to maintain internal stability in the
UPDF by having soldiers busy all the time thus entrenching himself more
in power, the ordinary citizens bear the burden of his ‘community
policing’ programmes.
Ugandans must, therefore, oppose these
designs after all when we had the LRA, no neighbour found reason to
intervene. If we treated ours as a domestic problem that did not call
for external intervention, there is no reason for us to seek to
regionalize other people’s problems to rationalize our intervention. It
is not our duty to police the region and besides, tyranny, which is the
cause of strife in this region, is very much alive here.
If we have failed to resolve it at home, how can we purport to exorcise it abroad?
The author is a political activist.
0755145122
