Ugandans-At-Heart

Dear “Sir” Henry Ford and others.

Summary: “Revanchism” and “Revisionism” -the desire for revenge and for the re-writing of history is a double edged sword. You may use it for a moment but it may cause you losses in the end.? How? Why? One now talks of a “master Plan”, etc. Does “Sir” Ford want a Kingdom where the Banyoro are a minority again?

It is a disease that occupies short-sighted minds, that plan looking at short-term scenarios and act without strategic calculations. Two examples will suffice before more details are furnished.

1/6. After the defeat of Germany in WW-I, many in Germany felt bad, despite the fact that their leaders at the time has started WW-I. One hot-head, a street artist called Adolfo Hitler used extremist language and support from conservatives to try to re-draw the borders of Germany as affirmed by the treaty of Versailles [Take note "Sir" Ford].

Well, he eventually became elected Chancellor of Germany in 1933 BUT remember, by May 9th, 1945, after WW-II, Germany was even smaller than it had been when he came to power. The rest is history. Even a re-united Germany [1989] is far smaller than the ‘post-WW-I’ one.

If revisionism were right or logical, Russia would demand for Alaska, France for Louisiana, Italy for Egypt or even for India and all the territories in-between [Roman Empire], etc, etc.

Mother of all questions; therefore, how far back in history or when does demand for the  ‘restitution’ and restoration of ‘lost territories ‘ begin and end? Shall all humanity now claim the so called “Garden of Aden” -because that is where we ‘all’ came from, mbu [one hears]? Stop being misled and excited by the heat of the moment please. Do not behave as though the ‘project’ called Uganda has ceased to exist.  Buganda is not a sovereign State. Neither is Bunyoro. How can then, one start claiming territory from the other? You are be shaming the State and GoU. Am surprised you are not yet charged with ‘treason’, for advocating ‘un-constitutional measures’ to solve sentimental problems.

2/6. Revisionism is illogical, especially when you mix mythology, wishes etc with fact. You say that even the people in the ‘3 -original counties’ of Buganda “would be speaking Luo…”. Since when, “Sir” Ford, did inhabitants speak the language of the visitors? The Banyoro Kings are of Luo origin, so we are told. Why then is Runyoro spoken in Bunyoro-Kitara, today, not Luo? It is like saying that there were no people in Buganda in advance of the Biito dynasties? I still have to learn that version of history which says “creation /existence started with the centralized states in the interlocutrice area”. Welcome to the World man. 

3/6. I have no words for the statements put out by one “Patric Von Otto” who seems to have qualified more in spewing vulgarities than ideas. One point though: by talking of a non-aggression pact between entities or peoples, I did not necessarily mean written ones. There is what we call “omukkago” stamped by “blood brother-hood” or consented intermarriage. There was such an arrangement between the principalities of Busoga and Buganda Kingdom. Kooki is another example. The Banyala of Bugerere changed/sought allegiance with Buganda, for protection at their own request for fear of Bunyoro, far in advance of the British arrival. They even produced one of the most famous Katikiro’s at Mengo, in recent times. Hold a referendum there today and see. So, the “tolintabaala-siri kutabaala’ is a non-aggression pact, written or not. Why should Bunyoro want to re-assert her authority on non-Banyoro peoples that were happy to survive its yoke earlier on. Are Banyala, Banyoro? Are Baluli, Banyoro? Are people of Bulemezi, Banyoro? Or you want the place empty when you re-gain it? The Nyamwezi Empire gave Buganda trade missions/expeditions rights of ‘safe –passage’ to and from the coast, while trading in cloth, guns, merchandise, Ivory, etc. Why was this possible? Why was Buganda not fighting the Nyamwezi to the south-west? Because there was a ‘non-agression pact’ arrangement, which was missing in the Buganda-Bunyoro relationship.

4/6. To come to our days: the British have no written constitution, neither had/has Buganda. It does not mean they do not have laws.

Please “Von” Otto, I know what I was talking about. If the Banyoro had “omukkago” with Buganda, they would have faced the Arabs and the British together.  But come this situation when Buganda had relations with England and not with Bunyoro and you expect them to betray this relationship because of a local rival they have been at war with for 300 years, because of geography and colour? One: Buganda is a dependable alley [Ask UPC: Buganda gave them power].Buganda is neither racist nor short sighted, please [see the nationalities represented in the Great Lukiiko, even former porters and herdsmen are represented!!]. But Buganda is Principled. There was no need to jeopardize a well-nurtured relationship with a World power that had the ability to provide education ,etc with a fair-weather neigbour, for sentimental reasons of race, proximity, etc, even when the neigbour has not requested for help. You cannot always guess the needs of people for them.

5/6. Why is all this coming up at this time? It is, among other reasons, the misplaced envy and nostalgia that are at work [giving rise to the ‘gandophobia’ syndrome].

 When a child from a needy family grows up and becomes able, it may want to revenge on a neigbour, “why did you have better toys than I did when we were young?” –mainly because the former needy child has a stick and may be campaigned by a ‘bully’, while the former well-off one has his (stick) unready and may be is seemingly un-campaigned. The real truth is that, the insolence of the former needy child, now envious of the peer would still have no chance in an ‘equal contest’ (without a biased third party that is).

 Wait till the Bachope and Alur start demanding for their own Cultural heads and districts apart from Masindi. Even the Buliisa people [e.g. the long suffering Bagungu, the original inhabitants of the Albertine shores, long subjugated by Bunyoro], may demand an ‘equitable share’ of the oil resources, to remain in the local communities.

The advise remains: Let Buganda and Bunyoro join to demand their say in a United Uganda, for the benefits of their people and Ugandans at large.

6/6. Concluding: So, “Sir” Henry Ford, seek not revenge. Revisionisim is a double –edged sword that can even harm the user. Do not mix the extent of the former Bunyoro Kitara Kingdom with “Bunyoro-ness”. This is one of the reasons ancient Bunyoro Kitara  broke up into pieces, in the first place!! Tooro did not secede on the intervention of Buganda. Karagwe in Tanzania was not lost due to Buganda, neither did Ankole, let alone Bunyala or even Bulemezi you wrongly talk of. If push and further you go back to that situation, Banyoro will become a minority in the Kingdom again and, what went around will still come around. Better keep what you have now and enjoy what the Central GoU and the locals will give to you, from the oil revenues. Better fight for more. Check the Oil Agreements first.

As for “Von” Otto, I am not ready to stoop to his level of vulgarities contained in his post on subject. Germany started WW-I and lost. Still it started WW-II and lost further. There is no benefit in revisionism especially that grounded on ‘illogic’ and blind revenge. Full stop.

Happy New year to the Compatriots.

Christopher Muwanga,

Nakasero,

Kampala.

29.12.2008