Weekly observer Interview with Dr.Kiiza Besigye
It is said the elite will generally not get involved in confrontational defiance….
If they can’t get involved, that means that they are part of the problem which must be solved and by the way, the elite during the NRA war were not involved in the large measure. The people who fought were peasants.
Yet some of the fighters, like you, were elites.
Yes, but we were very few just as it is today. There are a few elites who are involved in activism today.
But with or without them, we must cause change. The elites can continue to look for greener pastures within Uganda or even abroad; when change comes, they will come but that is none of our worries.
You sound like you are disappointed with a non-cooperative section of Ugandans.
I’m disappointed but not surprised because it is the nature of our education that creates parasites rather than people who have patriotic values that offer service to others.
What do you make of the sudden death of the renegade Col Patrick Karegeya whom you worked with during the NRA war?
Karegeya went away in 1990. What has been happening in Rwanda, I’m not so much informed about, but also situations within countries are quite unique to those countries, but it is certainly sad that he died the way he died.
You got a chance to work with President Kagame and President Museveni; how do you compare the two leaders?
I have worked with Museveni as a president; I have never worked with Kagame as a president, but I know Kagame from a different perspective.
The issue I would have talked about here is that there are a lot of debates about freedom and rights in Rwanda, but one thing which is also indisputable is that the Kagame government has delivered public goods in a shorter time despite the terrible situation of genocide, but there is less corruption, there is a lot of development yet Museveni has not done much in the so many years.
Besigye is partly to blame for elites’ support of rogue regime
Kizito Michael George,
In your interview with Dr. Kizza Beigye, in the Observer of Tuesday, 07 January 2014, the retired but not tired Colonel reiterated his stance that Uganda elites are to blame for the perpetuation Museveni’s ‘rogue’ regime because they are optimistic , selfish and products of a parasitic education system . I deeply applaud Dr.Besigye’s exemplary resistance of the dictatorship in Uganda and I understand his frustrations however, I think his analysis is based on mere symptoms and not fundamental causes.
Dr. Besigye should know that serious elites will always do research about dictatorial systems in order to understand the fundamental reasons why they persist in power and will not join anybody who does not address the fundamentals . Many elites in Uganda know that Dr. Kizza Besigye has a distorted understanding of the perseverance of Uganda’s ‘rogue’ regime in power. Many are categorically aware that Museveni’s dictatorship is sustained by the US and its hegemonic neo-liberal system. Serious elites will never join a leader who has a simplistic view of the problem. It must be noted that Dr.Besigye explicitly holds the view that the dictatorship in Uganda is a domestic issue without western tentacles. Dr.Besigye should read the article of FDC die hard in the Observer of Thursday, 16 January 2014, titled, ‘’Can Uganda afford to police the region’’. In this article the adamant FDC Youth Mobilizer articulately traces the entrenchment of the Kampala ‘rogue’ regime to the US-imperial design.
Elites wonder why Dr.Besigye is virtually silent when it comes to the massive support of the ‘rogue’ regime by US and her client western nations. Elites are wondering why Besigye is silent about the dictatorship in Kagame’s Rwanda? We need to remember that in the above mentioned interview Dr.Besigye categorically shot him self in the foot by stating that ‘’there are a lot of debates about freedom and rights in Rwanda, but one thing which is also indisputable is that the Kagame government has delivered public goods in a shorter time despite the terrible situation of genocide, but there is less corruption, there is a lot of development yet Museveni has not done much in the so many years.’’ But what is the use of economic success that is not backed by human rights and good governance? Doesn’t Gadaffi’s Libya teach us a good lesson? Is Dr.Besigye insinuating that dictatorship is okay as long as there is less corruption and economic success ? Why is Besigye silent about Rwandans who have been either killed in Uganda allegedly by the Kigali regime or deported back to Rwanda by the Ugandan ‘rogue’ regime? Doesn’t this echo hypocrisy and double standards?
Elites see President Museveni as a pawn in a US neo-liberal ‘rogue’ system and know that Dr. Besigye is always running to capitals of the protectors and funders of the ‘rogue’ regime and therefore is in bed with same forces that have entrenched the dictatorship. Thus there is no guarantee that the current status quo will not continue unabated once Dr.Besigye takes over from the ‘rogue’ regime. So, elites are equally frustrated that Dr.Besigye cannot differentiate between the symptomatic ‘rogue’ regime and the fundamental ‘rogue’ regime .
Dr.Besigye should know that the elites are so frustrated that US and her client neo-liberal western promoters have created a system that nurtures and supports dictators. This system has turned professors into junk business men and elites into destitutes and beggars. In fact elites now spend most of their time trying to survive economically in an economically exploitative and oppressive system . They have almost no time to engage in critical discourses that influence and shape the national development agenda. Under the global neo-liberal capitalism(disorganized capitalism) that sustains the ‘rogue’ regime ;slavery disguises as freedom, dictatorship disguises as democracy, poison as nutrition , oppressors as liberators, terrorists as freedom fighters , might as right , propaganda as news, ignorance as enlightenment, simulation as reality, the devil as Jesus, genociders as role models, corruption as economic growth, debts accumulation as charity, human rights violations as human rights, school enrolment as education, disinformation as information, conspiracy as truth to mention but a few.
There fore it such a very frustrating eco-system of exploitation and oppression which many elites believe will break because of inner contradictions or because people come to understand it as the fundamental cause of their problems. Due to this exasperating dilemma, elites have chosen to just survive in the criminal system by working for it or in it, some have decided to enlighten people about the oppressive global system through writing while others have left it to fate. Many elites know that this system is not sustainable anyway but are not exactly sure how to break it or when it will break. Dr.Besigye has called for massive protests against the ‘rogue’ regime in Kampala similar to the ones that characterized the Arab spring. He needs to know that those protests were successful because people came to the realization that the oppressive regimes in their countries were puppets of the neo-liberal American imperial metro pole.
kizitomg@gmail.com
![]( "Frustrated: Kizza Besigye wants more elite participation in ousting President Museveni from power")
After Dr Kizza Besigye criticised the Ugandan elite for refusing to support his grass-roots campaigns to challenge President Museveni’s hold on power, many have responded in an equally strong tone, saying the former FDC president’s protest-politics is both unfashionable and unsustainable.
In support of his argument, Huntington cites the example of the French revolution as well as Argentina, Brazil, the Philippines, Taiwan, Korea, Spain, Peru, and Ecuador in the late 1970s and the 1980s, as examples of societies whose political process and democratization has been influenced by the participation of the middleclass in quest for better things.![]( "Kizza Besigye takes on police during the walk-to-work protests in 2011")
Why the elite avoid Besigye
Sunday, 11 August 2013 19:49
Frustrated: Kizza Besigye wants more elite participation in ousting President Museveni from power
The standoff raises serious concerns for those who would like to see Uganda transition from being ruled by the same group of gunmen that captured power in 1986 to truly democratic leadership.
Experts believe that such a change, as has previously happened in Ghana, cannot come easily without the involvement of the middle class, something that puts Besigye’s outburst into perspective.
In a surprise show of frustration two weeks ago, Besigye said: “The educated elite are extremely selfish. Each one is trying to look for a share of spoils...Anybody called a professor is a curse to this country. They are all hopeless and you can name them, they are all nodding their heads to what the dictator is saying. Museveni has become a tyrant because the people around are not telling him what to do.”
But various political analysts and scholars, while admitting a trait of self-preservation among the elite, have suggested the problem is largely Besigye’s. Mohammed Kulumba, a senior lecturer in Political Science at Makerere University, described Besigye’s comments and strategies as misplaced.
“The elite and middle class in general are not known for political activism. And, even when they are to participate, they don’t do it like Besigye wishes them to do it. The middle class only participates depending on who is dealing with them and based on clearly drawn strategies,” Kulumba told The Observer recently.
Giving the example of academics, Kulumba says they will not go on the streets to demonstrate. They may, however, contribute to change through making critical analyses of the actions of the regime – and, perhaps, contributing resources. And this, he argues, they have done.
He might have had in mind people like Joe Oloka Onyango and Mwambutsya Ndebesa, both Makerere dons who have often published eloquent critiques of government actions.
Opposing Museveni
Kulumba believes Besigye can find some consolation in his own history of the anti-Obote rebellion.
“He was part of the NRM and he knows very well how the middle class contributed. It was the external wing that provided the artificial blood life to those who were in the bush,” he said.
Besigye joined the opposition in 1999 after a bitter fall out with the NRM regime. He first challenged Museveni’s presidency in 2001 and lost. He has since stood two more times and lost. A recent survey carried out by this newspaper found that under President Museveni, Besigye is probably the most hunted and prosecuted opposition leader in post-independence Uganda.
The Observer reported that over the last five years, the former FDC party president has been arrested at least 28 times, charged in court at least six times, and locked up in Luzira prison once. Whereas Besigye’s political resolve is unquestionable, his political struggles have not been overwhelmingly embraced by prominent elite or the middle class, leading to his frustration.
Narrow middle
According to Dr Julius Kiiza, a political economist at Makerere, part of the problem is the fluid nature of Uganda’s class structure. For instance, doubts remain whether Uganda has a middle class in the conventional sense of the term.
“How does it survive? Can it really be termed as a middle class in the real sense? All these questions have to be answered before anyone examines its viability,” Kiiza said.
The phrase middle class which finds its expression in the works of a German philosopher, Karl Marx, has been given a modern meaning to refer to a portion of the population that includes businessmen and professionals, who have capacity to spend an extra portion of their income on anything after paying for basic needs.
American political science professor Samuel Huntington argues that in virtually every country, the most active supporters of democratisation are the middle class people.
“A rising middle class unleashes a constellation of social forces with the organisational capacity and education to press for democratic governance,” argues Huntington in his book, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century.
In support of his argument, Huntington cites the example of the French revolution as well as Argentina, Brazil, the Philippines, Taiwan, Korea, Spain, Peru, and Ecuador in the late 1970s and the 1980s, as examples of societies whose political process and democratization has been influenced by the participation of the middleclass in quest for better things.
Kizza Besigye takes on police during the walk-to-work protests in 2011
It is believed that the Arab Spring, particularly in Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria and Libya have been spearheaded by the middle class. Kiiza argues that unlike in other societies, it is unfortunate that Uganda has a narrow middle class that cannot influence Uganda’s political agenda.
“We are very few who can function independent of the political system. Majority of the perceived middleclass in Uganda survives on the political oligarchy. And, this cannot be a middle class,” he argues.
Kiiza argues that the business community is also a product of the current political regime. “Majority of the so-called rich business people became rich after 1986, which means that the regime provided their foundation. So, they cannot survive without the regime, which also explains [why] their participation in politics is to support power consolidation for the regime,” he said.
This view is echoed by Asuman Basalirwa, the President of Justice Forum (JEEMA): “Many professionals, scholars derive their livelihood by winning contracts from government. So, it has become difficult for them to ask for change as it will be self destruction.”
Indeed, one former media manager has told The Observer that he lost his job after the regime got to know that he was sympathetic to the progressive forces. “When you participate in the quest for political change there is a risk of losing your job and not everyone is brave enough to weather the challenge,” he said.
Circumstances don't warrant
Dr Golooba Mutebi, a political scientist and renowned researcher, argues that the middle class is not known for political activism. They only get involved if their survival is gravely threatened.
“There is sufficient freedom to warrant the comfort for the middleclass. The situation is not like it was during Amin’s or Obote’s time which pushed everyone to the front of seeking for change,” Golooba said.
He argues that those who favour change differ from Besigye on the means: “Some believe that there is need for change but they don’t necessarily agree that change can come through running battles. I don’t know Besigye’s ideology.”
Kulumba argues that Besigye’s strategy is not based on a reasoned plan of action.
“What is the strategy here? Have they sat down to analyse why walk to work failed before they launched another protest and others which they announce without focus?” he asked.
In defence of the protests, Basalirwa says their activities are planned. “Walk to work was based on a plan and everyone knows how the state machinery was deployed to make sure that it does not do what it was formed to do.”
Strategies
In his book, From Dictatorship to Democracy, Prof Gene Sharp, an American political scientist whose work has guided many non-violent political struggles, says that spontaneous uprisings often face serious limitations.
“Frequently, the democratic resisters have not anticipated the brutalities of the dictatorship, so that they suffered gravely and the resistance has collapsed,” he says.
Ultimately, Sharp argues that it is prudent for opposition activists to always calculate the most effective ways and times when it is ripe to bring down a dictatorship. One important point is the vision and mission of democracy activists. Sharp argues that movements that define their mission narrowly, in terms of unseating a dictator, risk failure. Seizing on this point, Kulumba argues that Besigye and group should gear their efforts towards embracing democracy and transparency in their parties.
“The political parties should work towards strengthening their structures as well as internal democracy and transparency from within, as this would help in making parties attractive. And, it is from then that they will have a critical mass,” he said.
In addition, Kiiza argues, the opposition should lobby for the state to improve services – building good roads, hospitals, schools and a good economic environment that will enable the expansion of a middleclass.
Others could argue, however, that Museveni’s government is irresponsive. And how does the opposition make an impression on an entrenched government? Besigye’s solution is street protests – which the elite have shunned, leading to frustration.When Ugandans wake Up to the reality that it is the USA that is supporting Museveni's dictatorship in order to further its imperial interests. Check this article below
![]()
President Museveni’s recent ultimatum to the rebelling SPLA soldiers was laughable but not funny.To many, it was an utterance by someone consumed by self-importance and one that never ceases to poke his nose in other people’s affairs believing that it is his God-given duty.
The author is a political activist.
0755145122
Can Uganda afford to police the region?
http://www.observer.ug/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=29663:can-uganda-afford-to-police-the-region&catid=37:guest-writers&Itemid=66
Thursday, 16 January 2014 20:48
President Museveni’s recent ultimatum to the rebelling SPLA soldiers was laughable but not funny.What, therefore, informs Museveni’s foreign policy positions?
Our engagements in foreign lands have been clothed in high-sounding motives like Pan- Africanism (SPLA), war on terror (Somalia), protecting our borders (Congo and Central African Republic), helping our ‘brothers’ to return home (Rwanda) or African solutions to African problems (Mali and Libya though in this case forces were never deployed).
A microscopic examination is, therefore, required to establish the truth behind the stated motives and resolve whether such an aggressive foreign policy is in the interest of our country and whether it should be done in our name.
Uganda has made it its business to seek to topple governments in the region or to militarily protect those in its good books.
The motive behind all this is Museveni’s personal glory as the region’s kingmaker and serving Western imperial objectives with a view of driving Western powers into a conspiracy of silence about his tyrannical record.
Thus, when the West (America) wants to kick out a ‘bad guy’, they have ready boots on the ground–UPDF. That is why he can afford to invade, topple regimes, loot and kill (DR Congo) without provoking retaliation from the international community.
When Charles Taylor did in Sierra Leone exactly what we continue to do in DR Congo, he was hounded out of office, tried and convicted by the ICC. On the other hand, our president, the ‘beacon of hope’ is always selected to lead mediation efforts even when his fingerprints are all over the crime scene or when he is clearly partisan and fuelling conflict with unhelpful ultimatums.
He does all this, not because he is the regional military giant, but because he has the strongest global power behind him. He has identified his role in the perpetuation of the global American hegemony and is more than willing to play the lackey’s part.
He sometimes pretends to be promoting African interests by using Pan-African slogans to hoodwink his peers so as to deliver them to his masters without much ado. His reward is an assurance that he will get away with his crimes as long as he plays succor to Western imperial designs. His benefactors will conveniently argue that whereas he is bad, they do not see a credible alternative to run the country.
What they actually mean is that they do not see someone willing to do their bidding as faithfully as President Museveni has done. Pursuing imperial designs or being an agent of imperialism has a cost. It breeds hostility from the dominated. There is no doubt that Ugandans are hated because of meddling in other people’s domestic affairs.
Our traders in South Sudan have been singled out for harassment and murder by our ‘pan-African’ brothers whom we supported during their war of independence. Our railway line was uprooted in Kenya because we were perceived to have meddled in their elections in 2007.
Our citizens were brutally killed in Kampala because of our involvement in Somalia and our citizens were sent packing in Tanzania because we are considered ‘the neighbour from hell’. Uganda is supposed to pay war reparations to the tune of $10 billion for the looting, killing and rape that we occasioned in Congo.
While there, we have fomented trouble and armed rebels but today we condemn a section of SPLA for trying to use ‘unconstitutional’ methods to acquire power. What a contradiction! Whereas Museveni uses foreign wars to maintain internal stability in the UPDF by having soldiers busy all the time thus entrenching himself more in power, the ordinary citizens bear the burden of his ‘community policing’ programmes.
Ugandans must, therefore, oppose these designs after all when we had the LRA, no neighbour found reason to intervene. If we treated ours as a domestic problem that did not call for external intervention, there is no reason for us to seek to regionalize other people’s problems to rationalize our intervention. It is not our duty to police the region and besides, tyranny, which is the cause of strife in this region, is very much alive here.
If we have failed to resolve it at home, how can we purport to exorcise it abroad?
We have neither the reason nor the resources to police the region. Let the Sudanese, Somalis, Congolese, etc. strive to solve their own problems as we have been struggling to solve ours without their direct military intervention. The author is a political activist.
0755145122