THE MERITS OF UNITARISM

Big words?  In my recruit training, a certain affande turned us into slaves at his quarry.  We were crushing stones for him to sell in the neighbourhood and many of us contracted - be ready for an artillery word -PNEUMONOULTRAMICROSCOPICSILICONOVOLCANOCONIOSIS, due to the silica dust in the stones we were bashing….I have since been on inhalers.  When I sound unintelligent, which is always the case as you have pointed out, it is because of limited oxygen supply to my brain..  So, bear with me. 
Back to federalism.  I talked about the demerits of federalism, you asked, no – pestered me – for the superiority of unitarism, I rejected your demand because I had not talked about the inferiority of federalism.  Now you ask for the ‘advantages’ of unitarism, once again I reject that demand because I did not talk about the ‘disadvantages’ of federalism.
 
Allow me to give you the merits of unitarism……..as I got them from S/Sgt Mwaipopo.
 
  • It is a very effective and efficient form of government.  The central government is all-powerful, and as such, it can take any step to meet the situation before it and is particularly effective in new countries that are still lacking in socio-political integration between groups and regions.  It proves very successful in dealing with the conditions of emergency. 
  • It is a flexible government..  The constitution can be amended easily by the central government according to the exigencies of the situation.  It may delegate some of its powers to local units, or take them back without any difficulty in the light of the obtaining circumstances. 
  • It brings uniformity of administration and legislation.  Since there is only one national legislature and since all powers are vested in the central government, there is uniformity in the spheres of law making and its implementation. 
  • It is less expensive as compared to a federal system because there is no duality in the field of legislation, administration and adjudication.  In other words, there is no duplication of work at the regional levels.
 
NB:  I am not talking about the merits of unitarism ‘in Uganda’.  Unitarism is a form of government.  In situations like in Uganda where there is limited government across the board, it is ludicrous to dwell on the choice between forms of government….decentralising what has never been centralised…..That is why, at times the debate here at UAH on federalism ends up sounding like shopping for a baby cot before we propose..

Composition of UPDF

This is just a small issue, but scribbled on a large tissue.
 
What one finds rather exasperating with you (in spite of all your rather un-UPC goodheartedness) are your tiring references to ‘NRA’ when you talk about the Ugandan military which, by the way, any future government, even a UPC one, will inherit.  Unless you intend to opt for the Bremmerian wisdom of disbanding the UPDF, like Paul Bremmer did in post-Saddam Iraq….the rest being as much of history as it is hysteria.
 
It is like some in the current set of Uganda’s political elite that are in charge, who continue harping on the ‘Okellos’; or worse still, if many years after its dissolution and renaming as the UNLA, one went on referring to the same UNLA as ’Kikosi Maalum’…the UPC allied component of the Anti-Amin effort.  Of course the intention would be to denigrate the UNLA by linking it to Milton Obote and the UPC.  That kind of spin would be desperately hare-brained spin.  And yes, you are a UPC spin person but get your feet to the ground brother Ochieno.
 
I would suggest that you get yourself acquainted as quickly as you can,to the reality that, the rank and file of the Ugandan military is an amalgam of at least two dozen pliticomilitary groups that have graced the country in the last three or so decades, and not those Tutsis and Rwandese as many of you here like to refer to them.  The NRA is just one out those many groups that make up the UPDF, and the original NRA soldier is now a very, very, very rare commodity.  And by the way, that is not to imply that, yeah, good riddance.  Here you are with the nuts and bolts of the Uganda military which you still call the NRA:
 
  1. National Resistance Army (NRA)
  2. Uganda National Liberation Army (UNLA)
  3. Uganda People’s Democratic Army (UPDM/A)
  4. Uganda People’s Army (UPA)
  5. Ruwenzururu Kingdom Freedom Movement
  6. Uganda Freedom Movement (UFM)
  7. Uganda Mujahdeen Movement (UMM)
  8. Ninth October Movement/Army (NOM/A)
  9. Allied Democratic Front/Force (ADF)
  10. Force Obote Back Army (FOBA),
  11. Federal Democratic Movement (Fedemo)
  12. West Nile Bank Front (WNBF) I &II
  13. Uganda National Democratic Alliance (UNDA)
  14. National Army for the Liberation of Uganda (NALU)
  15. Uganda National Rescue Front (UNRF) I &II
  16. Holy Spirit Movement/Holy Spirit Mobile Forces (HSM) I & II
  17. Citizen Army for Multiparty Politics (CAMP),
  18. Action Restore Justice (ARJ)
  19. Former Uganda National Army (FUNA),
  20. Anti-Referendum Army (ARA),
  21. Peoples’ Redemption Army (PRA)
  22. Uganda Salvation Force/Army (USF/A)
  23. Lord’s Army
  24. Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA),
 You sound a little bit clueless about the reality when you, Mr Ochieno, ad nauseum, refer to the NRA; and that causes many of us to really doubt your judgment and statesmanship if one may call it that. 
 
Your aim is to vilify those young men, many of whom have no idea about UPC, or even the NRA: many of the UPDF riflemen were born after 1986…may be 90% of the young boys in UPDF battalions.  The UPC many of them know is the group that in the 2006 elections polled 0.82% of the votes, behind a young independent man that polled 0.95%.  That is all they know!  They have no idea about your fixation with NRA.  They have never belonged to the NRA.
 
Many are from the groups I have listed for you above.  They joined the UPDF to earn a living, they work under severe hardships, when their bosses are busy stealing their pay and procuring for them substandard equipment.  Several were integrated into the UPDF from anti-NRM insurgency groupings which they were gangpressed into joining, through grissly initiations like murdering their own parents and siblings. 
 
The great majority of those boys are yearning for a change that can make their situation better than it is now.  100% of those boys who joined the UPDF through regular recruitment did not receive pay as recruits because Uganda is the only country in the world that does not pay its recruit during the first nine or more months of initial training.  This is the situation in the UPDF, and ironically, that was the situation in the UNLA…..
 
Just as an example, A Ugandan Colonel (whether Acholi, Langi or Munyankore) earns about the equivalent of $ 6,000 per year where as his British counterpart earns $150,000.  That UPDF Colonel needs to hear voices that promise to alleviate his plight, and not those like yours, that are bent on demonising him.  A future government that holds childish views about the hard-pressed UPDF soldier definitely alienates itself in advance.
 
For those of you who keep referring to the UPDF as ‘Tutsi/Rwandese’, you cannot imagine what anger you cause for young boys who are living under serious hardships.  Somehow, you end up politicising them, and poisoning them against your own interests.  Besides, an alphabetic listing of the UPDF would probably show that, about 40% of the surnames start with letter ’O', and not because they are Otafiire, Owoyesigire, Owakubariho or Owobusingye.  It is the Okellos, again!  Infact the name ‘Okello’ may be anything up to 10%.
 
You need to adopt a more mature attitude towards those boys, otherwise, you will not be ‘building for the future’.
 
Stop dancing the anti-NRA ndombolo of 1985.  Tune in to the new music brother.  Be seen to be moving on!
 
Very sincerely,
 
L/Cpl (rtd) Otto Patrick

Semei Kakungulu,Not a traitor(part 3)

If you can, please check out: RW Felkin ‘Notes on the Wanyoro Tribe’ Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh’ 19 (1891-2), 138 in C.Wilson and R. Felkin, Uganda and Egyptian Sudan (London, 1882) 209.  Felikn notes that, by the 1880s, Bunyoro had a population of 2.5 million with Buganda’s standing at 5 million.   

 When you look at the Uganda Protectorate; ‘Report on the 1911 Census of the Population of Uganda’ (Entebbe, 1912), page 15; and Uganda Protectorate, ‘General African Census 1959′ (4 vols., Entebbe, 1960), Vol II, 77, you observe that Bunyoro’s population fell from 130,992 in 1911 to 126,875 in I959. There were 270,557 Nyoro in Uganda in 1911 and I88,374 in 1959.. 

 The point here is not so much to do with those drops in the 1900s (which in themselves, are very significant, having been spawned off by the dislocation occasioned by the wars of the 1890s), but the decline from Felkin’s 2.5 million, and what the protectorate census was reporting one generation down the line…..KRS’s propensity for hyperbole and paparazzist waffling notwithstanding. 

 As a result of the war, Bunyoro suffered a major demographic crisis that it only started recovering from in the 1970’s.  Even by 1954, a certain geographer, Baker was noting how Bunyoro’s population never underwent as natural an increase as other communities in East Africa…see Uganda Journal, 18 (1954), p.102. 

 From 1910-25 the mean live birth rate for Bunyoro was 20.8 per 1,000, the lowest in Uganda; while the mean death rate was 28 per 1,000, the highest in Uganda; with 31.9 births being stillbiirths, the highest in the protectorate.  Why connect still births to the war of the 1890s?  The chaos and disruption caused by the wars sparked off a severe epidemic of yaws, syphillis and gonorrhea (just like the spread AIDS is facilitated by intractable civil conflict).  There were many reports of ‘barren women’…due to pelvic inflammatory disease (PID).

 In 1904, a certain George wilson carried out a minicensus in Bunyoro villages and found that the population of children was about 25.9%…extremely low in a preindustrial setup (Uganda’s rate now is about 60%).  While in 1921, the average figure for the protectorate was 41.5%, that of Kibiro, near Lake Mwitanzige (‘Albert’) was 23.6% only: a rather severe demographic crisis.  High infant mortality rates were partly contributed to by the destruction of Bunyoro’s pastoralist economy by the Anglo-Buganda incursion….protein malnutrition affected both mothers and children….in 1905, Dr Albert Cook notes that 90% of children in Bunyoro died during birth or in infancy, further noting that ‘Bunyoro is remarkable for its dearth of children’ (in a communication to Menog missionaries, Wellcome Library, PP/COO A255)…..etc etc etc….

 The names given to Banyoro children throughout the years embody the mood of fatalism that pervaded Bunyoro after the fall of Kabalega…..Kunihira (hope), Kyaligonza (what god will decide), Kisembo/Mugisa (mere luck or provident’s gift), Tinkamanyire (I am not sure yet..whether he will be one of the 10% survivors), Tinkasimire (can’t thank yet)…Byaruhanga, Byabakama, Byakatonda (in lost counties), Kaijamurubi/Komurubi (child of adversity), Tibulihwa (endless sorrow), Erabura (there will be no survivors) Kasigwa (father died before child’s birth), Kasangaki (will find no siblings/happiness), Kirokimu (take the day as it comes).  All those names carry the message of pervasive mortality and resignation. 

 When Miirima talks about the death of 2 million, we should be a bit inhibited in the manner with which we dismiss him.  I know Kalundi Serumaga and inhibition are like oil and water, but what do we do?

 Miirima’s problem might be that of passing a ‘process’ as an event….and that is a minor issue.

 …..And oh yes, another name: Miirima…era of darkness!…

Otto Patrick

Semei Kakungulu,Not a Traitor(part 1)

Executive summary: People who live in the failures of the past will always move backwards.

Accusing Gen. Kakungulu of murdering Ugandans is surely historically incorrect as well as it is morally so. When some one is defeated in battle, the terms of settlement are set by the victor, not by the anguished. Property, territory etc are lost. The accusation that Buganda gained under colonialism and that gen. Kakungulu was a traitor are therefore sign of intellectual dishonesty on the part of the authors, for the following few reasons:

 

1/7). Kakungulu ‘pacified’ the tribes in the East and North-East as part of his job-description. He planted trees, built roads and district centres, forced people not to move naked [the so called ba-Kedi, etc] to stop spirit worship, etc. KAKUNGULU WAS NOT THE colonial POLICY MAKER. He was not at Berlin1884.

2/7). To say he betrayed Ugandans is lack of historical ‘contexity’ (if one can use such word). It is anachronistic. FIRST OF ALL THERE WAS NO SOVREGNN STATE CALLED UGANDA. There was no such citizenship. He was not an employee of the Ugandan state. So, how can he be accused of betraying Ugandans when no Ugandan citizens existed then? Uganda has existed with citizenship only from 1962.

3/7). Even if Kakungulu were a war-lord and killed people [did he?]in the territorial space now called Uganda, he still should not be called a traitor becasue he broke no “non-aggression pact” between him and the peoples he defeated. And, even if he had dis-obeyed his bosses, another commander would have done the same job

4/7). The same goes with blaming Buganda for ‘cooperating’ with the Brits to subjugate Bunyoro: There was no ‘non-aggression treaty/cooperation/ military alliance’ between the two Kingdoms, which had been at war for 300-400 years in advance of the British. SO, HOW DOES BETRAYAL COME INHERE? 

5/7).  Speaking in terms of military strategy and diplomacy, one can say Buganda was very astitute indeed to ally with a strong force [the super-power of the day] to ‘teach’ the old enemy a lesson. Ford Mirima should instead blame the Bunyoro Kitara government of the time for failure, if not on the military front, certainly on the Diplomatic one. War is politics by other means and therefore it is a high time the Mirimas and the other apologists of failure should revisit history and apportion blame where it should be: Bunyoro’s failure in diplomacy AT THE TIME.

Speaking of betrayal how come that after King Kamurasi’s death, a very tragic succession civil war broke out, where many thousands lost their lives? Shall we therefore blame Prince Kasagama today [if not prince Kabalega in fact], for killing the Banyoro, in equal measure as the British did? Is the death of a Munyoro from a Munyoro spear ‘sweeter’ than the death of a Munyoro fighter from a Muganda warrior?

6/7) Examples: When the Germans marched on the USSR in June 1941; they shipped back everything, including people and even bridges and works of art. BUT, when you loose a war, there is what is called ‘war booty’ or war trophies. Ask the Germans: When the Soviets took Berlin in May ‘45, the carried away anything of value, including research centres and scientists [the Americans did the same in their sector]. Even territory was not spared [Germany was dismembered and parts of her restored to Poland. Part of the former centre of German imperial Glory, PRUSSIA, is now an integral part of the Russian federation called Kaliningrad]. Germany is not claiming it back in 2008!!

 

7/7). CONCLUSION: It is VERY WRONG FOR UGANDAN REVISIONISTS TO HANKER FOR THE LOSSES THEY SUFFERRED BACK IN HISTORY. It was even a mistake for the British to lay seeds for the referendum of 1964, which Obote fulfilled, in violation of the Agreement between the KY and UPC reached in advance of the Lancaster Conference, in 1961. Worse still, is the recent wave of ‘district and chiefdom creation”, in areas recognised under the Constitution of Uganda to belong to other known entities. Mirima and the other hangers-on [under the cover of the NRMO] should not exploit the ignorance of their people to hide their kingdom’s failure on the diplomatic front in the years past. This is not to say anything abut Kabalega’s ‘foolhardy’ in engaging a much superior enemy {instead of negotiating like the Ghanaian Chiefs, the Buganda Kings, etc, as a politico-military tactic, to save their kingdoms’ integrity] against whom he has no chance [he may have been a good filed-commander but he certainly was no politician. A hare cannot engage a lion without consequences]. The results were a foregone conclusion. We may praise him for bravery and darling, for sentimental and mobelisational reasons. but, at intellectual levels, the gloves have to be removed; otherwise many will continue to mislead their people, with the negative consequences for all of us.

 

Christopher Muwanga,

Semei Kakungulu, NOT a traitor(part 2)

Fellow countrymen,

 

Summing up: The problem facing Uganda today is that of REVISIONISM and the search for revenge. Mirima is among but not the only victim of this symdrome. 

I am short of ‘machine time ‘ at the cafe but I will share, all the same, a brief moment with you on the reaction of the likes of Henry Ford (???), in reality Owekitiinisa Mirima, to my post. 

First, he mistakes Baganda to have been ‘colonial agents’. Forgetting the Buganda-British relationship, at least at the beginning, was not that of “a Colony with a Coloniser” but that between two allies. There was an “allied relationship” from the 1880’s.

I will mainly dwell on clarifying truth from ‘chaff’ (sorry the word). But to summarise, there are two tendencies observed here:

  •  
    • One is the distinction between intellectual discourse and political propaganda hype and sentiment. ‘Sir Henry Ford’ mixes his love for country [Bunyoro Kitara, which he is right to love] and hate for the victors [Buganda and Britain] with intellectual facts. Intellectual discourse has no room for tribal colours and sentiments.
    • The second is the idea of basing arguments on the common saying and syndrome that every tribe has in its language: “..mother cooks best” or “..dad knows all..”. Read ahead please.

1/5. The collapse of the Berlin Wall: This wall was created by a third party [the USSR] between on German territory, dividing a SINGLE PEOPLE for geopolitical reasons , in the aftermath of WWII. Like, if a wall was built between Hoima and Masindi Districts or between Kyadondo and Kyaggwe by a third party. Neither the Bunyoro or the Buganda nations would be happy with that situation. The collapse of the Berlin Wall was a result of the decision of the Soviets (Gorbachov) to withdraw and thus re-align their politics and economy. It was not a decision of German Nation at either end of the wall. Am sure Honneker did not want it off the map. So, by Henry Ford giving this as  an example, he is deliberately misleading the debate. Is he trying to say that Bugerere is inhabited by Banyoro? Is he trying to forget that the Baluli were colonial surfs under Bunyoro and they are NOT Banyoro and were happy to come under Buganda’s protection?
The right comparison should be: After WWII, Germany lost many territories, including the “Imperial Citadel” of East Prussia. Where is that territory now? Has it been given back to Germany? [for an answer, see Kaliningrad]. Check Germany’s Eastern Border with Poland? Where is it? See the Oder river? Has Germany claimed the pre-war territory ceded to Poland? The example of Georgia is anachronistic. Russia ruled Georgia by invitation from 1781 and, going by Mirima’s theory, they should have a right to ‘claim’ Georgia lost by Yeltsin in 1991. But, if the Russians pulled out of Georgia, last summer,  it was according to their own strategic plan, not by an external directive. Remember they prepared a draft of the ‘cessation of hostilities’ and president Sakorsy appended his signature. On the idea of military trophies being from ..”the last century..”, I give the following comparison:  In the Caucasus 2008, the Russians captured American Hamvees. Where are they now? They are being displayed at the military Museum somewhere in Russia as war trophies. Are the territories of S. Ossetia and Abkhazia still under Georgia’s control? Is Kosovo still under Belgrade’s control? Don’t underrate peoples’ understanding of facts, Hon. Ford Mirima. So, Bunyoro is going to claim the ‘Abalega‘ territory from the DR Congo government , because it was under Bunyoro 130 years ago and because Kabalega was born there?
Conclusion: The German/Georgian  examples Henry quotes are irrelevant here.
2/5. Heroes and villains: May 27th was/is “heroes’ day”, at least according to the UPC. To the UPC, Lutamaguzi was a traitor against an elected Governemnt while Haji Sebirumbi was an agent of the elected government then and may be declared a hero should they come to power again [Hmmm]. January 25th is liberation day, at least according to the “Aminists”. The saying, ”..mum cooks best..” fits here very well. Sir Henry Ford thinks, Midas style/way, that “what ever Museveni touches becomes Gold”. What he [M7] says is the WHOLE TRUTH. In other words,  “..dad knows all“.  No much debate needed here because the heroes of today may not be the heroes of tomorrow. They were not heroes yesterday. Political heroes are always a political invention, to suit the powers that be, at a given time. Example: you ask the “Aba-yudaya” of Mbale whether Kakungulu is a hero or not? He is their Patriarch!
3/5. Tribes of the East: Did you know why the Bagisu loved Obote so much? Open Secret: Obote ‘gave’ Maruku County Headquarters to the Bagisu, at the expense of the ‘Bakedi’, who set up post in Tororo. the rest is History. But why this example here? – to prove that these people were fighting physically in the pre-Kakungulu era and by proxy in the post Kakungulu era. It is 2008 and people and  lives are being lost in a boundary [swamp] dispute between the Bagisu and the Bagweri on one hand and between the Banyore and Bagisu on the other. Where do you live Sir Henry, to ’seek evidence’ that Kakungulu pacified the East? How the Lango and Acholi come in, I do not know BUT, Kakungulu was mainly active up to Kaberamaido and I have not heard the Kumam complaining. I want to challenge Henry Ford instead to tell/prove to me that the Ateso have never fought the Karamajong, the Bagisu-the Ateso, the Bagweri-the Banyore, the Dhopadhola-the ‘Tororo’ Ateso, etc. Leave the sentimental and wishful world man.
4/5. Finally, on Buganda serving as ‘colonial agents’, not as Allies:  when Brittan joins the US in the war in Iraq, is that a master-colony relationship? Are the Hungarians the colonial agents of the USA because they are in Afghanistan as allies? Let Sir Henry answer that.
The point here is that Buganda was never a colony of Britain. they were allies. Buganda has been expanding that the expense of Bunyoro for 300 years in advance of the British coming here. to pretend that, when the British came in, Buganda should have reversed her strategic and historical mission of acquiring territory by diplomatic means [Kooki, Bugerere] or by war (parts to the north-west] is asking too much in retrospect. Once again, was there in place, a “non-aggression pact” ['toli ntabaala siri kutabaala"]let alone ‘omukago – friendship treaty‘] between Buganda and Bunyoro? What friendship did the Buganda betray then?
 
5/5. Conclusion: On this forum, many tell lies and get away with it. this is because of the inherent nature of the medium, thought to be secure and affordable in cost. But, on the positive side, we exchange views freely and thereby learn something. This cannot happen on the pages of the ‘New Vision’ under the amateur and political apologist Kabushenga, that Muchiga-Musisu mix of an upstart.
For example, those drunk with power now think that what they want, they must get because they are in power and have the coercive elements of governance. We have also learnt that people are ready, with the means above, to use their power to reverse 100, 2000, even 500 years of historical evolution of events, on the space now called Uganda. This is a ‘tall’ order before such people. Loosing a battle does not translate into loosing the war and justice will always prevail in the end on ONE CONDITION: LET THE TRUTH BE TOLD where it is known, otherwise state it as own opinion, not as fact.
 
Christopher Muwanga,
Nakasero,
Kampala.
18.12.2008.