Part I: What is wrong with the picture here?
Okot Nyormoi
April 20, 2007
April 20, 2007
On April 12th, 2007 there was a demonstration against President Museveni’s plan to give away chunks of the revered Mabira Forest to the Sugar Corporation of Uganda Limited (SCOUL) headed by the Mehta Group. During the demonstration, an Asian man was severely beaten by the crowd and died on his way to Mulago Hospital. Meanwhile, the police was ordered not only to teargas the demonstrators, but also to use live ammunition to intimidate the demonstrators. Again on April 17th, tear gas was unleashed on opposition political leaders at a meeting to discuss the worsening situation following the arrest of many demonstrators including two members of Parliament. Furthermore, a mysterious brigade of stick wielding people have been seen beating up people on the streets of Kampala.
Ordinarily such an incident would simply be met with a yawn because:
1) In the Northern and Eastern regions nearly 2 million citizens languish in the death-trap camps euphemistically named “protected” villages in which at one point people were dying at the rate of 1,000 per week of preventable causes and yet the regime’s response was to argue about the numbers whether it was 500 instead or 1,000 without even expressing as little sympathy as shedding crocodile tears;
2) The Uganda People’s Defense Forces (UPDF) could murder in cold blood 66 unarmed kidnapped and chained children in Kitgum and celebrate it in the name of killing rebels, with the numerous so-called human rights non-governmental organizations (NGOs) uttering not a word;
3) UPDF could rape and kill young girls or mothers and children strapped on their backs while foraging for food outside the IDP’s camps without most citizens blinking an eye;
4) About a year ago, an ISO officer shot and killed 3 supporters of the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) opposition party and yet the killer is still walking the streets freely on “state duty”;
5) UPDF could kill over 60 Karamojong children in the name of “disarmament” and yet the government responded by congratulating its troops for doing a great job in disarming the Karamojong, derogatorily referred to by the establishment as “Karachuna warriors” and
6) Women and children crashing stone like prisoners right in the shadows of State House in Kampala and yet the Ministry of Tourism simply salivate at the thought of the amount of money the country can make from foreign visitors who come to gawk at the slave like labor still being practiced in the 21st century.
However, this time the reaction was so different: swift and intense. According to Nagenda, one of Ugandan’s “illustrious” journalists (New Vision, April 13) the reaction to the incidence is like variations of the story of the six blind people who were asked for an opinion of what a camel (or elephant?) looks like. Each person has a different view of what happens or what it means. Anyhow, he concluded by delivering a stinging condemnation, proclaiming how “especially nauseating it was to target totally innocent Asians”. Yet Mr. Nagenda had previously argued endlessly about whether to call the situation in Northern Uganda war, conflict or baditry, but definitely not genocide.
Not to be outdone, the NRM spokesman and attack dog, the ex-Uchumi underwear thief, Ofwono Opondo, chimed in with, “We should not target the Indians,” (The Daily Monitor, April 12). Wafula Ogutto, the spokesman for the opposition FDC, also regretted the violence. “It is unfortunate that people were killed, that somebody was killed because of his color. That is not the Uganda we want,” he said. The New Vision, the government mouthpiece, editorialized thus, “Banners saying ‘Asians should go’ or ‘For every tree cut, five Indians dead’ clearly and directly targeted people solely for belonging to a particular group – the definition of genocide” (The New Vision, April 13). The Investment State Minister Prof. Semakula Kiwanuka wasted no time in lamenting how racially motivated violence will undermine investors’ confidence in Uganda.
What is wrong with the picture here?
First of all, we are horrified that both government and even some of the opposition leaders such as Wafula Oguto are concerned more with the death of one Indian than the death of the two Ugandans when in fact we should be concerned with the tragic loss of all lives. Secondly, we are appalled that those who are crying racism are themselves reacting from a bigot’s point of view as shown by the routine lack of appropriate response to the deaths of innocent citizens which occur in the killing fields of the IDP’s camps in Northern and Eastern Uganda or in the kraals of Karamoja.
What such bigots are doing is to create a perception that the lives of Indians or foreigners (President Museveni preferred to call them his guests) are more important than the lives of citizens, some of whom he has demonized as swine, criminals, biological substances, primitive etc. If so, is it surprising then that some citizens may call for the expulsion of Asians or target Asians. In this sense, it is the NRM regime which has already targeted the Asian community as a race by inviting them to be his special guests and giving them special privileges at the expense of Africans. SCOUL’s Sharma’s arrogance was therefore not simply out of the blue. An Acholi proverb says, “Hyena eats bones because he knows that he is protected by powerful rear end muscles”.
{mospagebreak}
Third, it is also insulting to the intelligence of right thinking people that after the death of one Indian national, the government wasted no time in elevating the incident to the level of “genocide”. Yet the same NRM regime via its newspaper (The New Vision), ‘Butcher of the North’ General Tinyefunza, DP/UPC now NRM turncoat Minister Kabwegyere and others went into overdrive in denying that the government was orchestrating genocide in Acholiland. A journalist like David Mafabi made it his pet project in admonishing Olara Otunnu for moving too fast in calling the situation in Acholiland genocide. All government spokespersons do not allow the word genocide to cross their lips even when they are merely trying to deny it. It is as if using the very word alone would betray the truth about genocide they know inside. Yet here, we see that before the dust had even been washed away by the downpour which saved the day for the government, they were already charging the demonstrators with committing genocide. Wait a moment, our lords; one swallow does not make a summer.
Even the well known Political Scientist, Professor Mahood Mamdani, does not want to call the genocide in the North by its name, preferring to use the faceless word “situation”. Yet, he has made a career out of calling fascism, capitalism, dictatorship, etc by their real names. Could it be that in rejecting the use of the name genocide, he is actually trying to deny his own role in giving critical intellectual support to the NRM/A when it launched its genocide project in the early 80’s?
Fourth, the NRM regime’s response to the violence is classic George Orwellian “Animal Farm” legend. It did not only tear gas and shoot to kill the demonstrators, but it also maximally protected Asian businesses, property and persons. Homes were guarded; children were picked up from school by security forces and delivered to their homes, etc. It was unprecedented. Other than for government officers, how often have we seen private citizens being protected the way all endangered citizens should be?
In contrast, how many times has the government failed to protect the people in the IDPs camps from the moribund Lords Resistance Army (LRA) even when they knew of the rebels’ advance notice of their intention to loot or raid specific camps? Worse still, how many times has the NRA/UPDF told the people of northern Uganda to stop their own children from killing themselves when in fact it is the regime which creates situations in which former LRA rebels now in UPDF 105 Battalion would be pitted against the LRA? How many times did the NRA/UPDF turn a blind eye or flee when the LRA massacred civilians? To crown it all, how many times did UPDF soldiers rape or kill the very citizens they are supposed to protect? These are not isolated cases.
The Museveni government’s neglect and contempt for the people of Northern Uganda, and the Acholi in particular, was best summed up in a statement of Brig. Chefe Ali (RIP), former Chief of Staff and Commander of the UPDF 4th Division to the Acholi people when he said, “the Acholi shitted on themselves, who do they want to clean their ass? They must not bother other Ugandans, but they should clean it themselves!” This is classic racism and ethnic bigotry. For 21 years now, this has been the guiding philosophy behind the Museveni government’s peace and development policy in northern Uganda. In contrast, here one Indian was killed; Museveni’s sycophants are already crying genocide.
Fifth, while the pleas for protection for the people in the North and East have often, if not always, fallen on deaf ears, the government wastes no time in sending security forces to other countries such as Liberia, Burundi, Darfur and now Somalia. At the peak of the war, when Parliament passed a resolution to declare the North a disaster area, the government rejected it outright with the utmost derision. It argued that “the crisis had not yet reached a disaster level”. Yet the death rate was declared to be many times above emergency level. In contrast, when there was a small drought in Ankole, President Museveni wasted no time in declaring it a disaster area to the embarrassment of many Banyankole. He directed the Prime Minister’s Office and the Ministry of Disaster Preparedness to divert part of the relief aid to the people of the IDP camps of Northern Uganda to Ankole immediately. No wonder Mzee Byanyima, the man who raised Museveni was quoted as saying, “Mr. Museveni is a person I despise most in Uganda” (Monitor, March 30). Similarly, some journalists such as David Hoile described Museveni as dishonest and hypocritical (Media Monitors Network, August 14, 2003).
If Ugandans who were ‘enjoying’ the “peace ushered in by the NRA/M” (Obote, bandits) thought that the Museveni clan and racial bigotry was designer tailored for the people of Northern Uganda, then they were wrong as they have belatedly learnt. For them Museveni and his advisors put in place reckless toxic economic policies in place, which effectively killed off native Ugandan businesses but favored Museveni’s “guests”, the Asians, who have been surrounded with all the privileges and royalty – the untouchable ‘NRM middle class’.
Therefore, it goes without saying that it is the government of President Museveni which has created and nurtured the perception that lives, security and property of citizens are not as valuable as those of foreigners or other races. In the same breath, he has created the perception that the lives of the people in Ankole are more valuable than those in northern and eastern Uganda. In this climate of total government unresponsiveness to the concerns and needs of the citizens, it is not surprising that some people might take the law into their hands as the spokeswoman of the Democratic Party (DP) correctly explained (The Daily Monitor, April 13)
{mospagebreak}
{mospagebreak}
Will the Death of One Indian Open the Eyes of Ugandans?
Part II: The Law Must Apply to Everyone
Okot Nyormoi
April 20, 2007
In his initial response to the killing of one Indian on April 12, 2007 in Kampala following Musevenis decision to give away part of the national forest to a sugar baron, President Museveni was arrogantly defiant in proclaiming that nobody could intimidate him while he himself was in fact busy intimidating citizens with teargas and live ammunitions. In his classic go and no go style, he pretended to soften his stand by claiming that the cabinet had not yet decided on the giveaway of Mabira Forest, even though he had already written an administrative directive to the Prime Minister handing over Mabira to SCOUL almost six months before. The President dwelt at length on his petty subject of accusing the opposition of politicizing the incident and threatened action against those who “break the law”. He also found time to accuse and intimidate NGOs.
Again, here, something is wrong with the President’s warning to those who break the law. It was only a week later, while addressing the Asian community, Museveni endorsed a brigade of stick wielding vigilantes who were sent out to beat up demonstrators (Uganda: Museveni Praises Kiboko, By Emmanuel Gyezaho, Frank Nyakairu and Steven Kibuuka,, April 20). Yet such a vigilante group has no legal status and therefore has no right to beat up citizens who are exercising their rights to express themselves. For exercising their rights they are summarily tried and found guilty of disagreeing Museveni and beaten up right on the spot. The Monitor
What is also wrong is that the President himself and the SCOUL group of companies do not want to abide by the same rules. For example, as a business enterprise, the sugar estate must play by the rule of the free market. Yet, according to Mr. Kulubya, the Mehta family refused to pay a fair market price for the land he was leasing from some landlords. That is what prompted them to seek free land from the state. Besides, it is now common knowledge that the Asian community made large contributions towards Museveni’s re-elections, particularly the monster “Canja project”, for which the President is now seeking to pay them back. In so doing, they have become the financiers of a fascist dictatorship in Uganda. Similarly, it is known that the government had planned to keep the people in the North permanently in the IDPs camps so as to free their land for investors who have been accompanying him on his numerous trips to northern Uganda. Clearly, the President cannot expect citizens to abide by the rule when he himself and his cohorts do not follow the same rules. It is, therefore, not just the color of the skin that makes some people single out the Asians. It is the privileges they enjoy under the NRM regime which makes them become targets of some citizen’s anger.
Furthermore, while Ogutu is right to say that Ugandans (clergy, the legislators, students, traditional herbalists, environmentalists etc.), do not want a Uganda in which innocent people are killed simply for the color of their skin, we also want to add that they, too, do not want a Uganda in which business entrepreneurs apply double standards by using the free market law when it suits them, but demand special treatment by the state when they want to gain a competitive advantage. Most Ugandans also do not want a Uganda in which any particular group or individual is given special privileges. Otherwise, such privileged groups can also be targeted as a result of massive frustration among the natives due to their deliberate exclusion from the political and economic process in the country.
The reaction of the political parties which should effectively provide alternative leadership, to national crises leaves a lot to be desired with the exception of the Democratic Party (DP). The DP’s Spokesperson probably made the most accurate characterization of the Mabira demonstration and its aftermath. She blamed the Government for the violence. “The killings were very unfortunate and barbaric, but they were acts of frustration and the Government is to blame for this. Ugandans now know that the Government will no longer listen and they will turn to mob justice. They think that this could send a message to the Mehtas. The Government is endangering the lives of investors by giving the impression that it values them more than Ugandans,” said spokesperson Betty Nambooze.
The Mabira demonstration which started as a peaceful demonstration but later turned violent is yet another example of the people’s raising the antenna when the government does not respond to their concerns. A previous case in point was when some Acholi MP’s raised the possibility of land owners spearing investors if they were to grab their land. But they were dismissed as tribal bigots by the establishment and its hangers-on.
On the other hand, Uganda People’s Congress (UPC), wanting not to be outdone, simply accused the police for inciting the riot by blocking the demonstrators from using Kampala Road. The Assistant Secretary General, Chris Opoka was content with trivializing the matter by urging the police to go for more crowd control training.
This is a gross misunderstanding of the situation to even imply that the police used tear gas and shot at people with live ammunitions because the police force lacks skills in crown control. This is not the first time that they have used such terror tactics to violate the human rights of citizens. Opoka and the UPC should, therefore, be reminded that this was a deliberate use of force to intimidate the demonstrators, the Museveni way. The police have been well trained in the West, East and Asia. In spite of such training, they have used tear gas to break up legitimate demonstrations by Bazzukulu ba Buganda, Makerere University students and in November 2005 when three people were shot dead during a pitch battle with Colonel Besigye's supporters while he was being arrested; at the time DP supporters demonstrated to demand the release of the Kayiira assassination report. More recently, the police fired a teargas canister into a mini-bus that choked a child in the mini-bus to death (Monitor, April 7).
It is thus utterly false to imply that the use of tear gas and live ammunition to control or disperse demonstrators is due to poor police training. On the contrary, it is a well rehearsed action orchestrated by Gen. Kayihura on behalf of the President to have military officers parading in police uniforms. A soldier’s job is to protect the citizens from military attacks.
When all the above factors are put together in a single equation that analyzes the nature of President Museveni and his rule, it can be said that, while it is true that violence such as that witnessed last week will undermine investors’ confidence, it is wrong to ascribe the loss of confidence to racial violence. This is because such violence is a symptom of a condition created and nurtured by the NRM regime itself. Therefore, ‘spinning’ racism as the cause of the problem is simply to fall victim to Museveni’s diversionary tactics which will not solve the problem. Again, the ministers and many other government officials perfunctorily decried the loss of lives, particularly that of the Asian, and they moved right on to lay greater emphasis not on the protection of citizens’ lives, but on the protection of the property and lives of investors. Such statements leave citizens with the impression that value of their lives is not as much as that of the lives of foreign investors and their property.
To conclude, will this incident enable those who have ears to hear, eyes to see and brain to learn take heed of what sociologists tell us about ‘Urban Polity’. Experts on “Urban Polity” assert that repressive exploitative situations forcefully imposed on the people by the ruling elites leave frustrated and deprived people with no choice but to resort to violence and destruction of the object and symbols of the oppressor and exploiter. This time it was President Museveni’s ‘guest’ the Asians. With a rapidly growing coalition of kings, herbalists, environmentalists, bishops, political parties, students and a host of other disenfranchised people uniting, who knows who will be next? Any attempt to suppress the right of such a coalition with violence only helps to betray a growing weakness of the NRM regime. For once, people from South Central Uganda, particularly Buganda, are beginning to see that the leopard (Museveni) whom they picked up from the bush of Luwero and raised as a domestic pet because of its beautiful spotted fur, has in deed dangerous claws, which the people of Northern Uganda have been suffering from for the last 21 years.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
