Putting Pressure on Museveni
I have commented before on the worrying situation in Uganda. President Mueveni has changed the constitution and is now running for a third term in office. He has imprisoned his greatest rival Kizza Besigye and take ever increasing liberties in his pursuit of power.The donor countires of the west have finally found his behaviour unacceptable and at least the UK, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden have frozen its developpment aid to the country. This is obviously a huge blow to a government which funds half of its budget with aid. What will the effects of these actions be?
Best case, but highly unlikely, scenario is that the actions wakes Museveni out of his dreams of eternal power, that he steps down from the presidency after his two terms and that the multipartyism and democracy in Uganda continues to develop. Most African governments today thrive upon a populistic anti Western and especially anti American consents. Whatever the problem the West can always be blamed. As Mugabe stood up against his "neo colonial oppressors" he gained enormous respect in Africa and he is looked up to by large parts of the continent. Cutting aid to Uganda will therefore morelikely push Museveni another step in the direction of his colleague in Zimbabwe.
We are therefore likely to see Museveni use the cutting of aid to his advantage. He will speak of his own strength in the face of western imperialism, and he will further stress the need for his strong leadership. To the Monitor in Uganda he has already stated: "When you listen to outsiders, you make mistakes." "Yielding to pressure from outsiders has been our big mistake in some cases. We will never do it again." Museveni further argued that he would be able to demonstrate how Africa can develop without donor aid, "especially if that aid is arrogantly mixed up with an effort to interfere in our sovereignty". Most likely the rhetoric will work and he will be re-elected stronger than ever.
If cutting of aid is not going to work than what will? Not much to be honest. With the institutionalisation of development aid, the Ugandan government has already lost the all important feature of accountability to its people. Managerial problems can always be blamed on the donors and after 19 years in power, Museveni sees himself as a semi-good without whom his country cannot survive.
I see no light at the end of the tunnel.
(c) Robert Egnell
posted by Robert Egnell at 7:17 AM
4 Comments:
I'm an uninformed hillbilly living in the Appalachian hills of the U.S.A. So I look forward to this blog for some learnin.
What troubles me is that the best case scenario for Uganda seems unlikely to me for reasons that have to do with your post on democracy as well.
Here in America we are told that we must abandon our system of government to secure our safety. So while with one hand my government withholds money to combat "corruption" in Uganda and with the other hand doles out money to Museveni's secret policing and militarism.
Museveni understands the imperialism and militarism of the USA very well. Better than we here in America understand them.
It seems the danger in your perscription of pragmatism is that it turns a blind eye to the fundamental changes in the mechanisms of U.S. democracy. Changes that dictators like Museveni are quick to exploit.
Public criticism of the American regime may do some good.
Kaunda,
your modesty is something I could really learn from, but after reading your blog it really seems out of place. You are a fantastic writer and I thoroughly enjoy your posts! In your comment you bring up some extremely important questions that I have not really thought enough about.
First, the war on terrorism and how it is connected to development aid. A really tricky subject.
Second, American self-perception. I agree with you that many foreign leaders, as well as the "enemies" of the USA in the war on terror, understands the US governmental mindset better than the the US government and its people understands it.
The self-perception of the US as a force for good and as a source of good values and culture is really its greatest weakness as it means that the US will never understand international criticism.
The "truth" of things is obviously somewhere in between but understanding one's image in international politics is extremely important, and the self-image is currently simply too far from the US image abroad.
Anyway, leaders of the third world not only understand and exploit American imperialism well, they also understand development aid politics a bit too well. Even though Museveni is currently losing a large portion of next years budget he knows that most of it will benefit the country anyway in NGO funded projects instead of budget support.
Giving and taking away development aid is really a poor attempt to play the God of social development. The results of giving and removing aid really always seem to be the opposite of the intended. Giving aid does not lead to development and removing it certainly will not lead to improved democracy and respect for human right.
Finally let me admit that this is written after a Christmas lunch with one or two too many Swedish schnaps.
Best,
Robert
Robert,
You write brilliantly even after Christmas lunch with one too many Swedish schnaps! I wish you a wonderful Christmas time.
Thank you so much for your blog. It's great to have informed voices available and that you are teaching in Africa too. I can't quite get across to my friends here is how many African young people are eager to engage with the people all over and that such engagement is good for us all.
Your point: “understanding one's image in international politics is extremely important” is very astute; even with the caveat of your observation: “The self-perception of the US as a force for good and as a source for good values and culture is really its greatest weakness as it means that the US will never understand international criticism.”
Fergal Keane's pessimism for Africa is not something to cheer, but I think he's right that a dose of humility might well help us to see more clearly. Your recent posts on NGO advertising billboards brought a reluctant smile to my face because you're looking with clear eyes at daunting problems. Keane's view: “The West is being defeated by the politics of wishful thinking in Africa” plays out somewhat differently in Europe as in the US. I'm afraid you're right that we in the US will never understand international criticism. I do hope that won't discourage such criticism. There is a salient difference between “wishful” and “principled” thinking. My concern is that the US is veering away from foundational principles not only in Africa but around the world.
Towards the end of WWII many ameliorated their loss with a sense of optimism for the future. In the US FDR's “Four Freedoms” and then after the war the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights were expressions of the foundations of that optimism; a sense for what it meant to defeat Fascism.
In the spring of 2005 many countries were pressuring Museveni not to run again. I was disheartened to read about that time in the Ugandan press that Oklahoma senator James Inhofe met with Museveni in northern Uganda to deliver money to Uganda's intelligence services. Inhofe remarked during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing concerning the prisoner abuse scandal: “I'm outraged by the outrage.” Inhofe and Museveni are connected through rightist Christian movements; a confluence of Fascist commitment.
In today's Chicago Tribune Steve Chapman writes regarding the US executive branch: “What we have now is not a robust executive but a reckless one. At times like this, it's apparent that Cheney and Bush want more power not because they need it to protect the nation, but because they want more power. Another paradox: In their conduct of the war on terror, they expect our trust, but they can't be bothered to earn it.”
In WWII it was important to mobilize for human rights and ideas of individual freedom, political democracy, the rule of law, and cultural freedom. In Bush's war on terror the means justify the ends with wan allusions to western values donning Christian clothes.
The Brazilian musician Caetano Veloso writing about “The Clash of Civilizations” wrote: “It is indeed obvious that liberalism will be the next domino to fall, if the self-proclaimed lovers of such western achievements—the conservatives of rich Western countries—fatally devalue this foundation as they celebrate the bankruptcy of socialism, beckoning submission with an explicit return to “faith'--and an implicit return to racist values—none of which liberal thinking would tolerate.
Around a traditional bon fire I light with my friends on the Winter Solstice we talked about how complacent we'd been politically to allow the current political regime power. Such talk was, of course, met with laughter and the recognition we're just the little people. Many of my friends are religious, but we all share a commitment to a secular and civil form of government.
You're an expert about Samuel Huntington. I'm terribly ignorant about both Huntington and all thing military. So I come to your “Civil-Military in Peace Operations” without a hook to hang my hat. My babbling—seems like ranting—stems from my belief that many in power here in the US have explicitly abandoned the Liberal tradition upon which western values are built. I well understand my perspective may well be “wacky” and conspiratorial. Nevertheless, the enthusiasm about “the war on terror” viewed from a perspective of Christendom versus Islam by American political and military leadership sets my hair alight.
It's a bit of self-deprecating humor to say I'm a hillbilly, but I also meant to draw your attention to a difference between the political milieu here in the US and other rich countries. I am not hostile to religion, but it's very important to count American religiosity when trying to understand us and our military enterprise. Lieutenant General William Boykin is not an anomaly, nor the Christian-fundamentalist bigotry of the US Air Force Academy. The radical religious right hold the reins of power here and will not relinquish them willingly.
With all my wishful thinking, I wish that your pessimism about Museveni and perhaps governments across Africa weren't warranted. Alas, you see things clearly. Cast your clear eyes on American government too. We're in a maze clouded by wishful thinking and risk loosing our core of mutually shared values. I don't wish that sensible people around the world will oppose the US, rather that they will oppose our drift away from humane values and totalism.
I grew up in Zimbabwe, in the capital Harare. I saw how amazing it was in the 80´s and how shamelessly Mugabe destroyed the country in the 90´s. It is such a shame, but its the trend of leaders in Africa. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Robert Mugabe went from savior to dictator and election rigger. He is running this year again... the saddest thing is once he is gone, who will take power? Which is better: the devil you know or the devil you dont? I live outside africa now, and miss it terribly. It saddens me that my birthplace is no more the welcoming bread basket it once was.
Post a Comment
<< Home