Museveni planning to use Baganda to install his son as next president- Dr.Kashambuzi


JAJAI have written this article in good faith and it should be read and understood that way. Baganda have been complaining that they did not understand Museveni when they worked with him to overthrow Obote and Okello regimes.

One of the reasons that I began writing and broadcasting on Tutsi in general and Museveni in particular was to make East Africans in general and Baganda in particular to understand how Tutsi treat other ethnic groups. They use other people to get to power and then destroy them to stay in power. That is what Museveni did and continues to do with Baganda in Uganda and that is what Kagame did and continues to do with Hutu in Rwanda. That is the bitter truth whether we like it or not.

Museveni makes promises that he does not keep and implement.

1. He made promises with then Prince Ronald Mutebi in London that he has not implemented.

2. He made an agreement with Okello in Nairobi that he did not fulfill.

3. He made agreement with Ugandans to implement the ten-point program which he abandoned before implementation began.

4. He promised Habyarimana that he would never support Tutsi rebels against his government in Rwanda but supported RPF that overthrew the government.

5. He promised to end the suffering of Ugandans and return their properties which he has not done after 28 years in power.

What makes Baganda think that this time Museveni will behave differently?

Museveni became president by default instead of a Muganda as was understood and implied when Lule became chairman of NRM. Museveni knew Baganda would not be happy. To buy time, he gave them juicy ministries while he consolidated his position and then used them to gain support for the 1995 constitution which he directed and got elected since 1996. He accepted the return of limited Kabakaship when he realized that Baganda would not vote for him but declined to honor other promises as agreed federo. The Kabaka’s rights and freedoms have since been severely restricted including free travel in his kingdom.

During the 1981-86 war Museveni guerrillas are alleged to have killed Baganda indiscriminately to discredit Obote and pushed Baganda into the forest apparently for protection while the principal goal is alleged to have been to clear the area of Baganda and occupy it with Tutsi. Most of the money that was donated to rehabilitate the returning Baganda never got there. It is reported to have disappeared in Kampala.

Now that Baganda have begun to understand Museveni and his Tutsi-dominated government and he is losing support among Baganda as 2016 elections approach and campaign for his son to succeed him as the next president heats up, he began to realize he could lose: hence his abrupt agreement to sign the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which he had rejected.

Baganda especially those who have begun celebrating must understand that an MOU does not constitute an agreement that all that Buganda has been demanding will be returned. The MOU simply means that Museveni has agreed to enter into negotiations with Mengo on how to return Buganda properties and federo. It does not mean the negotiations will automatically succeed. After he gets re-elected or his son succeeds him, Museveni will forget about the MOU. The language used so far shows how Baganda are likely to get nothing. Museveni is reported to have said “what used” to belong to Baganda, not what “belonged” to Baganda. He has also said that Baganda have to provide “proof of ownership”. These words point to a rough road ahead as negotiations begin, if they begin at all.

To get what he wants from Baganda without giving them much or anything he has directly and/or indirectly selected Baganda to help him get what he wants.

1. The vice president, a Muganda, must be working hard to get Mengo accept Museveni re-election or install his son as the next president;

2. Museveni must have influenced Mengo to elect a young man Mayiga as Katikkiro to represent the young Baganda generation to support Muhoozi for president. Muhoozi is presented as leader of the young generation in Uganda;

3. Katumba Wamala, a Muganda, was made chief of defense forces (army commander) without power simply to please Baganda in return for supporting Museveni re-election or install Muhoozi as the next president;

4. Moses Kigogo is the deputy chairman of NRM who will ensure Baganda MP s and Baganda voters support the MOU when it is presented to parliament, if it gets there in the first place, for debate and support Museveni re-election or installation of Muhoozi as next president;

5. Kabaka’s brother who is now actively involved in the MOU is reported to be married to a Tutsi woman whose influence will tilt toward supporting Museveni and his son.

Museveni will not let land and properties return to Buganda because those already occupying them are the ones keeping him in power including generals. Return of properties to Buganda will be done by another government led by a bold and dedicated leader and not necessarily a Muganda that has nothing to do with NRM and distribution of Buganda properties to current occupiers. Ultimately the decision to return Buganda properties and restore federo is political, not a legal issue.

That there was a three hour private meeting between Museveni (none from the government accompanied Museveni) and three Baganda representatives (Mayiga a youth representative likely to support Muhoozi, Kabaka’s brother Wasajja married to a Tutsi wife and Ndiwalana Kabaka’s loyalist unlikely to disagree with Mayiga and Wasajja) clearly points to what is in store for Uganda using Baganda again.

Baganda should draw lessons from the past and act differently this time.

1. Baganda supported the ascendancy of Obote before independence and regretted later.

2. Baganda supported Amin when he overthrew Obote government and regretted later.

3. Baganda supported Museveni and regretted later.

4. Baganda are again about to repeat the same mistake of supporting the ascendancy of Muhoozi which they will definitely regret later.

I am not mentioning these things to devalue Baganda but to alert them to what awaits them as well as Uganda. Many Ugandans know and agree with what I am saying but for various reasons are unable to say so.

It has been reported that Museveni signed the MOU at this particular time for “political convenience”. Among other things:

1. Museveni wants to stop Baganda from discussing “Buganda Occupation” at the forthcoming Ttabamiruka conference in New Jersey, USA at the end of this month.

2. Museveni wants to stop Radio Munansi and other media from calling for rejection of Museveni and/or his son and NRM government.

3. Museveni wants to show the world which is turning against him and his regime and is beginning to talk about the possibility of a transitional government in Uganda that he has begun to accommodate the wishes of the people and he should regain access to foreign aid and technical assistance and be allowed to stay in power beyond 2015 or have his son installed as the next president.

Once he gets what he wants, Museveni will conveniently forget that the MOU existed.

Buganda and the rest of Uganda if you go along with Museveni again it will be your fault because unlike in the past you now know who Museveni is and how Tutsi operate. Tutsi use people to get power and then destroy them to stay in power. This has been their signature characteristic since they interacted with Hutu and Bairu over many centuries. Hutu and Bairu have been used as individuals and then marginalized. Baganda who are beginning to know Tutsi should listen to those who have dealt with them for a long time. Tutsi use all sorts of methods including marrying Tutsi women to non-Tutsi men and then generally Tutsi women have children with Tutsi men in order to replace non-Tutsi families with Tutsi ones for generations to come.

Baganda sympathizers including me have advised you. Consider what we have said and decide and you alone will be accountable for the decision you take and the outcomes thereof.

Yesterday (August, 4, 2013) on Radio Munansi English program, I analyzed the shortcomings of the MOU. Baganda are advised to think again about the meaning of this MOU or you will be disappointed again. Good luck.

DR. ERIC KASHAMBUZI
UAH MEMBER IN NEWYORK

Advertisements

Comments

3 Comments so far. Leave a comment below.
  1. Indeed that is what he’s tying to do!

  2. Reblogged this on patrickyeyune's Blog and commented:
    thats quite true

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: