The Juba Peace Talks
The Juba peace talks have been interrupted because the LRA felt that there were grounds to be considered in order to make it a fair exercise. Their contentions were that:
1. Uganda army was attempting to surround LRA in the two designated assembly points,
2. The mediator, Dr. Riek Machar was not neutral.
As a result, they demanded that the mediator be changed and a new venue outside Sudan be found. These followed clearly documented evidences of Uganda government troops being closer to the assembly point than was comfortable(intent to capture LRA and end peace talks) and Dr. Riek Machar making demands that were tantamount to supporting the position of Uganda government.
The aim of negotiation is to find ‘middle ground.’ Dr. Riek Machar has been calling for the top leaders of LRA to attend the peace talks because the next stage required the signing of documents. Yet, at the same time, contentious issues raised by the LRA delegations are brushed aside. So, what documents were Kony and Otti necessary to sign? It is true that the presence of Kony in Juba would indicate how close peace was to northern Uganda. But there is also a chance that the situation could degenerate into far worse scenarios than is currently obtaining.
Given Museveni’s propensities for violating peace treaties and the constant shuttling of GOSS Vice President and mediator between Juba and Kampala, would this not give anyone ground for rejecting Machar as mediator?
Acholi delegation to Juba attempting to rejuvenate the peace talks recommends that Juba be the venue. Sudanese governors meeting recommends that LRA be forcibly evicted from Southern Sudan and that the peace talks are carried out elsewhere keeping GOSS as mediator. Both these groups are not really part of the peace talks but they directly benefit greatly from the cessation of war in their areas.
No other party, so far, has even acknowledged the position taken by the LRA as genuine and deserving of immediate attention. At the same time they demand that Kony himself come to Juba to sign some important document that are coming up shortly!! The mediator has threatened the LRA to do what he wants, like Kony coming to Juba to sign documents and that failure on the part of Kony is indicative of his lack of interest in peace in northern Uganda. On the other hand, refusing to accommodate the demands put forth by the LRA on the grounds that ‘it is frivilous’ is really delaying the conclusion of the talks.
There are sentimental reasons for Acholi groups insisting that Juba continue to be the venue of the peace talks and that Dr. Riek Machar continue being the moderator. Museveni, however, has purged himself of all such feelings and therefore ready to subjugate our Acholi people.
Briefly, I find that the LRA delegation is genuine in their demand for change of venue and mediator. It is up to us to clearly state our demands and indicate how far we can go without seeing concrete results before purging our people of those same sentiments that is making us subservient to Museveni who cares nothing about us.
Monday, March 05, 2007
Sunday, November 12, 2006
ICC Is 'Monkey Wrench' In Juba Peace Talks
I cannot believe that the most educated and ‘forward’ people cannot understand what the LRA is saying about not assembling at the two locations.
1. The LRA chief said he couldn’t go to Juba as long as the ICC warrant is in effect.
2. Museveni says he cannot ask the ICC to withdraw the warrants unless the LRA sign the peace deal.
3. ICC says it cannot withdraw the warrants unless Museveni requests it.
All these issues simply stifle the peace negotiation. So is the peace talks being relegated to secondary status?
The negotiation in Juba is not proceeding in good tone otherwise there would be enough trust to defray these three points. We would like to see a comprehensive agreement that is acceptable and enforceable/sustainable before we can comment on the three issues.
LRA chiefs are within their rights to refuse to attend Juba talks unless their fear can be allayed. Uganda government, on the other hand cannot demand a signing of a peace agreement first then granting the LRA protection or requesting the withdrawal of the warrants because it does not affect the contents of the peace talks. If anything, the LRA have the right to fear that the government is bent on trapping them instead of delivering peace to northern region.
Kony's presence cannot boost the peace talk at this time at all because even the LRA have unilaterally adopted a cease-fire that has been kept by them in spite of incitement by government forces. A big delagation from Acholi has visited the general at his hide-out and that should have been all the boost we needed. Right now, there is no agreement to sign to bring Gen. Kony to Juba especially with the ICC warrant in place. If the peace talk is also the venue where ICC arrest will be effected, then there is no need to waste our time negotiating an unsustainable agreement.
Conclusion:
Absence of warrants will allow LRA to have more trust and make negotiation more likely to succeed. However, this will rob Museveni of a method of taunting and attempting to frustrate the LRA to abandon the peace talk.
The third point of ICC withdrawing the warrant is also less important if the government and LRA engage in sincere talks aimed at restoring peace and dignity to all. Only after the talks have been concluded to the satisfaction of all stakeholders should the ICC issues be tackled if they are still relevant then. At that time it will be easy to point out where or how the ICC warrant obstructs the return of peace.
So, there you have it. The bringing of ICC issue at the peace talk serves no other purpose at this time except to scuttle the meeting. That is what it is. No argument can alter that fact!
There are absolutely no scenarios in which the ICC warrant can concurrently exist with the ongoing peace talks in Juba to a peaceful conclusion.
1. The LRA chief said he couldn’t go to Juba as long as the ICC warrant is in effect.
2. Museveni says he cannot ask the ICC to withdraw the warrants unless the LRA sign the peace deal.
3. ICC says it cannot withdraw the warrants unless Museveni requests it.
All these issues simply stifle the peace negotiation. So is the peace talks being relegated to secondary status?
The negotiation in Juba is not proceeding in good tone otherwise there would be enough trust to defray these three points. We would like to see a comprehensive agreement that is acceptable and enforceable/sustainable before we can comment on the three issues.
LRA chiefs are within their rights to refuse to attend Juba talks unless their fear can be allayed. Uganda government, on the other hand cannot demand a signing of a peace agreement first then granting the LRA protection or requesting the withdrawal of the warrants because it does not affect the contents of the peace talks. If anything, the LRA have the right to fear that the government is bent on trapping them instead of delivering peace to northern region.
Kony's presence cannot boost the peace talk at this time at all because even the LRA have unilaterally adopted a cease-fire that has been kept by them in spite of incitement by government forces. A big delagation from Acholi has visited the general at his hide-out and that should have been all the boost we needed. Right now, there is no agreement to sign to bring Gen. Kony to Juba especially with the ICC warrant in place. If the peace talk is also the venue where ICC arrest will be effected, then there is no need to waste our time negotiating an unsustainable agreement.
Conclusion:
Absence of warrants will allow LRA to have more trust and make negotiation more likely to succeed. However, this will rob Museveni of a method of taunting and attempting to frustrate the LRA to abandon the peace talk.
The third point of ICC withdrawing the warrant is also less important if the government and LRA engage in sincere talks aimed at restoring peace and dignity to all. Only after the talks have been concluded to the satisfaction of all stakeholders should the ICC issues be tackled if they are still relevant then. At that time it will be easy to point out where or how the ICC warrant obstructs the return of peace.
So, there you have it. The bringing of ICC issue at the peace talk serves no other purpose at this time except to scuttle the meeting. That is what it is. No argument can alter that fact!
There are absolutely no scenarios in which the ICC warrant can concurrently exist with the ongoing peace talks in Juba to a peaceful conclusion.
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
The Juba Peace Talks is About Peace in Uganda
Many people have varying views about the Juba peace talks. Some think it is about 'soft landing' by the LRA top commanders. This is rather simplistic if one considers how the whole country has been thrown into turmoil and bloodshed by many ambitious groups. The greatest division among the people has been ushered in by the NRM regime which has killed and maimed with impunity. So well-carried out are their plans that an ordinary person would not be able to tell the crime NRM is committing. One favorite method is to cordon off an area and fake an attack in which the NRA is always victorious and only allow its version of news to be published afterwards.
Now, the Monitor newspaper has published an article written by Angelo Izama which is one of the best example of how NRM manipulates events and information. It is one of the greatest fabrications in the history of Uganda NRM regime. Izama either only reads what he wants to read or is compelled to ignore other obvious sources of contradiction to his story.On October 24, 2006 it was reported in a Nairobi newspaper that 15 soldiers from the federal government were arrested for killing 5 people south of Juba. This killing was reported by Uganda authorities to be the work of LRA. In spite of the fact that the government of Southern Sudan has said the killings was the work of suspects from the federal government; Angelo Izama (NRM propaganda) would have none of that. So they came up with a name for these groups as “New LRA”. Why does it have to be ” New LRA?”The only plausible reason is that the government of Uganda has made a mistake to accept the peace negotiation in Juba Sudan where they cannot control the pace of things and are trying to find a way to scuttle the peace talks because LRA has now become a more formidable force than hitherto believed. It has now even metamorphosed into 'New LRA.' The situation in southern Sudan is very complex in terms of the number of forces involved in the areas.
The arrival of ‘New LRA’ is, definitely, not the reason to scuttle the peace talks. The way Izama put it, Khartoum did not need a pseudonym to carry out its mandate. It is really in poor taste to imply that the Khartoum government can only operate incognito in southern Sudan or that they need to be the ‘formidable LRA’ in order to be heard or accomplish their goals. What Izama is doing here is telling his readers that there are no wrong-doers other than LRA. This is wrong and does not promote understanding among different groups with opposing ideas. The insistence that all wrong-doings be pinned on LRA is sinister warning from Uganda government that they will respect no peace accord signed by the LRA or any groups for that matter.
And, totally missing the point, the Uganda government is not able to see that the peace talk is about peace to the people of northern region, eastern region and all areas of Uganda. Given all the negative propaganda against the LRA, it should have become clear that the reason people all over the world are not convinced about the Uganda government propaganda is that evil and repression is certainly being perpetrated by the government. The LRA is merely doing its best to resist a sophisticated genocidal plan of the government.
Right now as I speak, if the Museveni government were to remove the NRA soldiers from all detaches, reverse its policy towards the people in eastern and northern Uganda, promote a committee for reconciliation, obtain and disburse fund for rehabilitation of the northern and eastern regions, revert maintaining of law and order to the police, embark on a program to empower the people in all communities, the Juba peace talk would become redundant. These few points would result in a speedy return to normalcy in Uganda. Museveni has had a long and prosperous rule, which he can now exit with the Juba Peace talks. At this time the will to forgive and not look back is at its highest among the tired people of Uganda because the so-called peace in the rest of Uganda is really a result of the pervasive spy network instituted by Museveni in terms of NRA cadres and LC system. So, Museveni can either take it or let the opportunity slip by again. The people have a long memory.
Now, the Monitor newspaper has published an article written by Angelo Izama which is one of the best example of how NRM manipulates events and information. It is one of the greatest fabrications in the history of Uganda NRM regime. Izama either only reads what he wants to read or is compelled to ignore other obvious sources of contradiction to his story.On October 24, 2006 it was reported in a Nairobi newspaper that 15 soldiers from the federal government were arrested for killing 5 people south of Juba. This killing was reported by Uganda authorities to be the work of LRA. In spite of the fact that the government of Southern Sudan has said the killings was the work of suspects from the federal government; Angelo Izama (NRM propaganda) would have none of that. So they came up with a name for these groups as “New LRA”. Why does it have to be ” New LRA?”The only plausible reason is that the government of Uganda has made a mistake to accept the peace negotiation in Juba Sudan where they cannot control the pace of things and are trying to find a way to scuttle the peace talks because LRA has now become a more formidable force than hitherto believed. It has now even metamorphosed into 'New LRA.' The situation in southern Sudan is very complex in terms of the number of forces involved in the areas.
The arrival of ‘New LRA’ is, definitely, not the reason to scuttle the peace talks. The way Izama put it, Khartoum did not need a pseudonym to carry out its mandate. It is really in poor taste to imply that the Khartoum government can only operate incognito in southern Sudan or that they need to be the ‘formidable LRA’ in order to be heard or accomplish their goals. What Izama is doing here is telling his readers that there are no wrong-doers other than LRA. This is wrong and does not promote understanding among different groups with opposing ideas. The insistence that all wrong-doings be pinned on LRA is sinister warning from Uganda government that they will respect no peace accord signed by the LRA or any groups for that matter.
And, totally missing the point, the Uganda government is not able to see that the peace talk is about peace to the people of northern region, eastern region and all areas of Uganda. Given all the negative propaganda against the LRA, it should have become clear that the reason people all over the world are not convinced about the Uganda government propaganda is that evil and repression is certainly being perpetrated by the government. The LRA is merely doing its best to resist a sophisticated genocidal plan of the government.
Right now as I speak, if the Museveni government were to remove the NRA soldiers from all detaches, reverse its policy towards the people in eastern and northern Uganda, promote a committee for reconciliation, obtain and disburse fund for rehabilitation of the northern and eastern regions, revert maintaining of law and order to the police, embark on a program to empower the people in all communities, the Juba peace talk would become redundant. These few points would result in a speedy return to normalcy in Uganda. Museveni has had a long and prosperous rule, which he can now exit with the Juba Peace talks. At this time the will to forgive and not look back is at its highest among the tired people of Uganda because the so-called peace in the rest of Uganda is really a result of the pervasive spy network instituted by Museveni in terms of NRA cadres and LC system. So, Museveni can either take it or let the opportunity slip by again. The people have a long memory.
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
What Will Museveni Next Do in Sudan?
In September 2005 this blog reported:
According to report in the Nation, "A source said Khartoum is particularly concerned that President Museveni entered Sudanese territory without informing the central authority. According to military sources, the president entered Yei under heavy military escort including battlewagons and heavy artillery."
This occurred when Museveni traveled to attend the funeral of Dr. John Garang in Southern Sudan city of Yei. Almost a year later, Museveni has tried yet another trick to reduce the GOSS to a surrogate administration in which he can come as and when he likes without any protocol. This is really a very dangerous precedent. Museveni has a large deployment of soldiers allegedly for the purpose of an operation that was named "Iron Fist", an attempt to 'finish off' the last of the LRA. This year, even when Museveni has agreed to have a peace negotiation to solve the problem that has bedeviled northern Uganda for close to twenty years, the Uganda forces are still deployed in southern Sudan without restriction when a peace talk is going on in Juba.
This time Museveni traveled to Juba with five different aircraft: the presidential jet and four other helicopters. Is this the "Invasion of Sudan" that Museveni has been planning for a long time? According to protocol, Museveni should have gone to Khartoum first before proceeding to Juba. So, what is really going on here?
Considering the international interest in Sudan as a whole, Museveni is on a mission that has nothing to do with peace talks going on in Juba. The fact that he has been reported to have met the LRA delegation and berated and merely abused them is indicative that his main aim is not peace negotiations. Museveni is searching for some "buttons" to push in order to torpedo the talks and achieve his aims in southern Sudan.
There is a Lwo saying that says: "Lewic weko icamo awola" which means that you see a man poisoning food and offering it to you but you are too shy to refuse and end up dead. The security of Southern Sudan is also the security of northern Uganda and consequently, the security of the rest of Uganda and the great lakes regions of Africa. Can we count on Salva Kir to rise up to the challenge?
According to report in the Nation, "A source said Khartoum is particularly concerned that President Museveni entered Sudanese territory without informing the central authority. According to military sources, the president entered Yei under heavy military escort including battlewagons and heavy artillery."
This occurred when Museveni traveled to attend the funeral of Dr. John Garang in Southern Sudan city of Yei. Almost a year later, Museveni has tried yet another trick to reduce the GOSS to a surrogate administration in which he can come as and when he likes without any protocol. This is really a very dangerous precedent. Museveni has a large deployment of soldiers allegedly for the purpose of an operation that was named "Iron Fist", an attempt to 'finish off' the last of the LRA. This year, even when Museveni has agreed to have a peace negotiation to solve the problem that has bedeviled northern Uganda for close to twenty years, the Uganda forces are still deployed in southern Sudan without restriction when a peace talk is going on in Juba.
This time Museveni traveled to Juba with five different aircraft: the presidential jet and four other helicopters. Is this the "Invasion of Sudan" that Museveni has been planning for a long time? According to protocol, Museveni should have gone to Khartoum first before proceeding to Juba. So, what is really going on here?
Considering the international interest in Sudan as a whole, Museveni is on a mission that has nothing to do with peace talks going on in Juba. The fact that he has been reported to have met the LRA delegation and berated and merely abused them is indicative that his main aim is not peace negotiations. Museveni is searching for some "buttons" to push in order to torpedo the talks and achieve his aims in southern Sudan.
There is a Lwo saying that says: "Lewic weko icamo awola" which means that you see a man poisoning food and offering it to you but you are too shy to refuse and end up dead. The security of Southern Sudan is also the security of northern Uganda and consequently, the security of the rest of Uganda and the great lakes regions of Africa. Can we count on Salva Kir to rise up to the challenge?
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Sudan Must Decide to Move Ugandan Troops to the Border
History
When Uganda government fell out with Congo, they sent their army into Congo to follow the rebels of the ADF there. What followed the arrival and stay of Uganda forces in Congo is a long list of mayhem and looting of Congo mineral wealth under various companies overseen by the Uganda army. Different militias were armed to exact killings against the other tribes in the region. The arms used were supplied by the Uganda army. The only people who operated in these areas were Uganda, Rwanda and Congolese nationals. Nothing has been heard about the ADF in spite of that being the reason Uganda went into Congo in the first place.
Now, using a similar strategies, Uganda has turned its attention to Sudan. The presence of Uganda troops in Sudan should have been very much modified such that they should have been staying close to the border. But for some reasons or others, Uganda troops are roaming free in southern Sudan as if it was its own territory. Does the question of sovereignty matter anymore?
A truce has been signed between Uganda and LRA witnessed by the government of Southern Sudan. Our able reporters of the Daily Monitor in Southern Sudan and Uganda have reported that the truce has been broken or violated by both the LRA and Uganda government. These reporters are aware that the LRA was to report to two locations: Owiny Kibul and Rii Kwangba. Although these reporters were not part of the negotiation, couldn't they see that this was tantamount to suicide by the LRA? But they did not even as much as point that out; let alone taking the high ground of criticizing it for ‘impossibility of performance.’ So, the UPDF comes very close to Owiny Kibul where LRA are converging. The LRA sees danger and vacates the location. Monitor reporters wrote that LRA and government troops have violated the spirit of the agreement. This glaring conspiracy will do nothing but erode any vestige of confidence in the intention of Uganda government troops. In truth, it was the approaching encirclement by UPDF that caused the LRA to leave the assembly point.
The reporters also stated “Eyewitnesses claim the rebel Lord’s Resistance Army carried out the massacres.” Who are the eyewitnesses and who interviewed them? Without this information, the newspaper would be better off not publishing such a questionable story and sending it around the world. When several attempts to negotiate peace were made within Uganda, it never lasted as long as it has lasted in Juba today. The UPDF would find ways to try and ambush the rebels and as soon as the LRA gets winds of UPDF plans, they would disperse for their safety. That would be the end of peace talks.
Now with the involvement of the government of southern Sudan, the UPDF are finding it very difficult to torpedo the peace talks. However, they are not leaving any ‘stones unturned’ before continuing with the peace talks. Already they have participated in killing 41 people most of whom were civilian with the hope that they can embroil southern Sudan in the mess and eventually scuttle the peace talks. Sudan has acknowledged the four attacks by ‘different armed ambushes by a group we have not yet ascertained’ but Uganda has already put the blame, unequivocally, on the LRA. How can this be? And as would be intended by Uganda, Machar responded with great emotion as reported in the Monitor newspaper from Uganda; “Shocked and incensed by the violent scene, Machar drove back to Juba and summoned the LRA delegation for a meeting on Tuesday night. The LRA negotiators, who had stayed at the Juba Bridge Hotel in protest over Sunday's incursions, however, declined to respond to Machar’s calls.” Under this scenario, Uganda hopes to impel Sudan to make rash decisions and perhaps even attack the LRA thereby scuttling the peace talks completely.
Conclusion:
Uganda government especially the military wing composed of the original NRA, do not wish to relinquish power and the privileges they have become so used to in the past eighteen years or so. Furthermore, the piecemeal operations towards the LRA provide ample excuses and tangible proofs to attract more funds from donors than a successful return of peace to the region. Also, the economic damage in the north is a big boon for diverted funds to the south where the bigwigs of NRA come from. This will stop as soon as there is peaceful resolution and ensuing reconstruction of the north. And most ominous of all is the combined size and quality of economic recovery of northern and eastern regions of Uganda plus all the peripheral regions including southern Sudan. These regions that have been suffering under Museveni dictatorial regime will become an unassailable force against Yoweri’s army of oppressors. Sudan can demand that Uganda soldiers be located on Uganda side of the border for as long as the peace talks last so that it will have fewer forces to deal with on its side of the border. It is its sovereign's right to demand so! This is the most relevant decision it can make immediately. Otherwise Museveni is going to cause mayhem in southern Sudan.
When Uganda government fell out with Congo, they sent their army into Congo to follow the rebels of the ADF there. What followed the arrival and stay of Uganda forces in Congo is a long list of mayhem and looting of Congo mineral wealth under various companies overseen by the Uganda army. Different militias were armed to exact killings against the other tribes in the region. The arms used were supplied by the Uganda army. The only people who operated in these areas were Uganda, Rwanda and Congolese nationals. Nothing has been heard about the ADF in spite of that being the reason Uganda went into Congo in the first place.
Now, using a similar strategies, Uganda has turned its attention to Sudan. The presence of Uganda troops in Sudan should have been very much modified such that they should have been staying close to the border. But for some reasons or others, Uganda troops are roaming free in southern Sudan as if it was its own territory. Does the question of sovereignty matter anymore?
A truce has been signed between Uganda and LRA witnessed by the government of Southern Sudan. Our able reporters of the Daily Monitor in Southern Sudan and Uganda have reported that the truce has been broken or violated by both the LRA and Uganda government. These reporters are aware that the LRA was to report to two locations: Owiny Kibul and Rii Kwangba. Although these reporters were not part of the negotiation, couldn't they see that this was tantamount to suicide by the LRA? But they did not even as much as point that out; let alone taking the high ground of criticizing it for ‘impossibility of performance.’ So, the UPDF comes very close to Owiny Kibul where LRA are converging. The LRA sees danger and vacates the location. Monitor reporters wrote that LRA and government troops have violated the spirit of the agreement. This glaring conspiracy will do nothing but erode any vestige of confidence in the intention of Uganda government troops. In truth, it was the approaching encirclement by UPDF that caused the LRA to leave the assembly point.
The reporters also stated “Eyewitnesses claim the rebel Lord’s Resistance Army carried out the massacres.” Who are the eyewitnesses and who interviewed them? Without this information, the newspaper would be better off not publishing such a questionable story and sending it around the world. When several attempts to negotiate peace were made within Uganda, it never lasted as long as it has lasted in Juba today. The UPDF would find ways to try and ambush the rebels and as soon as the LRA gets winds of UPDF plans, they would disperse for their safety. That would be the end of peace talks.
Now with the involvement of the government of southern Sudan, the UPDF are finding it very difficult to torpedo the peace talks. However, they are not leaving any ‘stones unturned’ before continuing with the peace talks. Already they have participated in killing 41 people most of whom were civilian with the hope that they can embroil southern Sudan in the mess and eventually scuttle the peace talks. Sudan has acknowledged the four attacks by ‘different armed ambushes by a group we have not yet ascertained’ but Uganda has already put the blame, unequivocally, on the LRA. How can this be? And as would be intended by Uganda, Machar responded with great emotion as reported in the Monitor newspaper from Uganda; “Shocked and incensed by the violent scene, Machar drove back to Juba and summoned the LRA delegation for a meeting on Tuesday night. The LRA negotiators, who had stayed at the Juba Bridge Hotel in protest over Sunday's incursions, however, declined to respond to Machar’s calls.” Under this scenario, Uganda hopes to impel Sudan to make rash decisions and perhaps even attack the LRA thereby scuttling the peace talks completely.
Conclusion:
Uganda government especially the military wing composed of the original NRA, do not wish to relinquish power and the privileges they have become so used to in the past eighteen years or so. Furthermore, the piecemeal operations towards the LRA provide ample excuses and tangible proofs to attract more funds from donors than a successful return of peace to the region. Also, the economic damage in the north is a big boon for diverted funds to the south where the bigwigs of NRA come from. This will stop as soon as there is peaceful resolution and ensuing reconstruction of the north. And most ominous of all is the combined size and quality of economic recovery of northern and eastern regions of Uganda plus all the peripheral regions including southern Sudan. These regions that have been suffering under Museveni dictatorial regime will become an unassailable force against Yoweri’s army of oppressors. Sudan can demand that Uganda soldiers be located on Uganda side of the border for as long as the peace talks last so that it will have fewer forces to deal with on its side of the border. It is its sovereign's right to demand so! This is the most relevant decision it can make immediately. Otherwise Museveni is going to cause mayhem in southern Sudan.
Saturday, October 07, 2006
Do Not Torpedo the Peace Talks in Juba
Something tells me this Juba Peace talks is about something else other than peace. Why are the Uganda and Southern Sudan government intent on LRA assembling in two locations and signing of the documents in a great hurry?
Why would anybody even consider that the peace talks proceed with ICC threat unresolved? Museveni, has to provide conditions to keep the ICC away from Kony and his commanders, otherwise there will be no peace involving those five men. These two issues are mutually exclusive. Without these men, there must be modified peace talks, becasue the people of Uganda in the affected areas still need peace from the government of Museveni.
Twenty years of oppression and mistrust cannot be wiped out by mere signing of documents in Juba.
There are specific conditions that are indicative of hidden traps and tricks. Would Garang have agreed to assemble the SPLA in a location that can easily be ambushed by Sudan government? If not, why would they include this condition for the LRA without safeguard?
If Riek Machar is impartial, why is he treating the LRA as if they have no rights and obligations?
If Museveni really wants peace, why is he constantly threatening the LRA with force if they did not assemble at the two locations, or sign peace by some given dates?
What does the army commander General Aronda mean when he says that it is “free for all”?
Failure of a comprehensive peace agreement should be put on the government of Uganda and Sudan for maintaining a stance that creates fear and distrust to the LRA.
Museveni has in the past lured rebels out of the bush with false promises of peace only to turn around and liquidate them one by one.
If these people are really in a hurry for peace to return to the country, then they should remove threats and relocate UPDF south of Karuma. The LRA then can be in charge of peace development and security in the north. That should be coupled with messages that promote trust and confidence in both sides. Right now, what is happening is that some UPDF commanders begin to talk provocatively the moment there are positive moves towards peaceful resolution. This is because they will lose some of the benefits from operations against the rebels.
So, the best thing that the government of Southern Sudan can do is have patience and facilitate peace talk to all available extent. Assembling in specific locations seems to be the least to worry about if the two sides are ready for peace. So far the LRA have indicated maturity and seriousness by controlling its fighters, while losing some to Uganda government forces, although they are not confined in any specific locations. After exhaustive searches for solutions, the proponents may then say, " We have done our best."
Why would anybody even consider that the peace talks proceed with ICC threat unresolved? Museveni, has to provide conditions to keep the ICC away from Kony and his commanders, otherwise there will be no peace involving those five men. These two issues are mutually exclusive. Without these men, there must be modified peace talks, becasue the people of Uganda in the affected areas still need peace from the government of Museveni.
Twenty years of oppression and mistrust cannot be wiped out by mere signing of documents in Juba.
There are specific conditions that are indicative of hidden traps and tricks. Would Garang have agreed to assemble the SPLA in a location that can easily be ambushed by Sudan government? If not, why would they include this condition for the LRA without safeguard?
If Riek Machar is impartial, why is he treating the LRA as if they have no rights and obligations?
If Museveni really wants peace, why is he constantly threatening the LRA with force if they did not assemble at the two locations, or sign peace by some given dates?
What does the army commander General Aronda mean when he says that it is “free for all”?
Failure of a comprehensive peace agreement should be put on the government of Uganda and Sudan for maintaining a stance that creates fear and distrust to the LRA.
Museveni has in the past lured rebels out of the bush with false promises of peace only to turn around and liquidate them one by one.
If these people are really in a hurry for peace to return to the country, then they should remove threats and relocate UPDF south of Karuma. The LRA then can be in charge of peace development and security in the north. That should be coupled with messages that promote trust and confidence in both sides. Right now, what is happening is that some UPDF commanders begin to talk provocatively the moment there are positive moves towards peaceful resolution. This is because they will lose some of the benefits from operations against the rebels.
So, the best thing that the government of Southern Sudan can do is have patience and facilitate peace talk to all available extent. Assembling in specific locations seems to be the least to worry about if the two sides are ready for peace. So far the LRA have indicated maturity and seriousness by controlling its fighters, while losing some to Uganda government forces, although they are not confined in any specific locations. After exhaustive searches for solutions, the proponents may then say, " We have done our best."
Monday, July 10, 2006
Who Is Afraid of Peace?
All Ugandans should take this opportunity to unite and institute a better sytem to govern the country.
There is a Peace Talk taking place in Juba, Sudan. The aim is to bring peace to Uganda in general and northern Uganda, particularly in Acholi, Lango and Teso districts. The three proponents are: Museveni and his lieutenants and Kony and his lieutenants and the people.
Literally, Museveni has perfected a system of staying in power while Kony has perfected a system of staying in the bush. The people however are divided and are at a loss.
How have the participants fared in this war?
Museveni:
Museveni has used the war effectively to stay in power for now close to 20 years. He has mastered the art of decoy presentation, false promising and heartless killings. He has never retracted any of the statements he made that amount to discrimination among tribes. For example: “ We massacred those chaps badly…” or “surrender by July 31…”
Many other statements after this surrender ultimatum convey a different image. The government side even has gone as far as swearing that ICC will not get Kony from their hand. This is an about turn for the government and one, which reinforces the desire for peace and brotherly coexistence. I, in my own heart, salute the speaker for making such a strong and unambiguous statement, not because it defies the ICC, but that it recognizes where our salvation as Ugandans lie. If it is too good to be true, then maybe it is because the war has dragged on for far too long to be true also. However the measure of the agreement or talk is not in the agreement signed but the sincerity, commitment and determination to see peace return to Uganda, or in other words, the implementation of the resolutions.
Kony
Very little is known about this man. Even the bit that is written is extremely unrepresentative of this fighter. It is a popular sentence in the Uganda newspapers and wildly copied abroad that Kony or LRA want to rule Uganda according to the 10 Commandments. A fairer presentation should have included Kony’s genesis and the extrapolation would have indicated a wish to replace Museveni’s NRA policies with the 10 Commandments. The wild allegations about Kony and LRA are purely extrapolation of diseased minds considering northerners as biological substances. I am an Acholi and I believe I know the critical reasons for Kony’s being in the bush. In the early days of NRA when they asked people to bring the guns back, many people complied and as soon as they were disarmed, soldier of NRA attacked them at night saying they were coming to retrieve their utensils that were taken from Luwero. People were killed women were raped and men sodomized in broad daylight. This continued until people like Kony found there was no better way to protect oneself than by arming and defending their groups. As soon as they did this, the government became even more furious and literally began a campaign to obliterate Acholi from the land. So, how would any journalist write that Kony want to rule Uganda according to the 10 Commandments? It is pure self-defense.
The People
If you are in the southern part of Uganda, you hear about LRA attacks and it sounds to your ears unbelievable and you take no actions because it seems so far away. In the north you know you are in a hopeless situation because you do not know whether you will survive the day. You fear daylight and darkness equally: during the day because they can see you, at night because you can’t see them. Some people will make a fortune out of the misery of the northerners while others will lose a fortune for the same reason.
If the peace talk succeeds (brings positive changes in the country) both Museveni and Kony will be respected by the people of Uganda. The next agenda is to retire the two from public life. At this time Uganda can truly talk about amending the constitution to remove those articles that are contrary to the wishes of the people. The government should be dissolved and a general election called. This would be the best time to install true democracy in Uganda government system and dissolve the UPDF and recruit a new Uganda army.
There is a Peace Talk taking place in Juba, Sudan. The aim is to bring peace to Uganda in general and northern Uganda, particularly in Acholi, Lango and Teso districts. The three proponents are: Museveni and his lieutenants and Kony and his lieutenants and the people.
Literally, Museveni has perfected a system of staying in power while Kony has perfected a system of staying in the bush. The people however are divided and are at a loss.
How have the participants fared in this war?
Museveni:
Museveni has used the war effectively to stay in power for now close to 20 years. He has mastered the art of decoy presentation, false promising and heartless killings. He has never retracted any of the statements he made that amount to discrimination among tribes. For example: “ We massacred those chaps badly…” or “surrender by July 31…”
Many other statements after this surrender ultimatum convey a different image. The government side even has gone as far as swearing that ICC will not get Kony from their hand. This is an about turn for the government and one, which reinforces the desire for peace and brotherly coexistence. I, in my own heart, salute the speaker for making such a strong and unambiguous statement, not because it defies the ICC, but that it recognizes where our salvation as Ugandans lie. If it is too good to be true, then maybe it is because the war has dragged on for far too long to be true also. However the measure of the agreement or talk is not in the agreement signed but the sincerity, commitment and determination to see peace return to Uganda, or in other words, the implementation of the resolutions.
Kony
Very little is known about this man. Even the bit that is written is extremely unrepresentative of this fighter. It is a popular sentence in the Uganda newspapers and wildly copied abroad that Kony or LRA want to rule Uganda according to the 10 Commandments. A fairer presentation should have included Kony’s genesis and the extrapolation would have indicated a wish to replace Museveni’s NRA policies with the 10 Commandments. The wild allegations about Kony and LRA are purely extrapolation of diseased minds considering northerners as biological substances. I am an Acholi and I believe I know the critical reasons for Kony’s being in the bush. In the early days of NRA when they asked people to bring the guns back, many people complied and as soon as they were disarmed, soldier of NRA attacked them at night saying they were coming to retrieve their utensils that were taken from Luwero. People were killed women were raped and men sodomized in broad daylight. This continued until people like Kony found there was no better way to protect oneself than by arming and defending their groups. As soon as they did this, the government became even more furious and literally began a campaign to obliterate Acholi from the land. So, how would any journalist write that Kony want to rule Uganda according to the 10 Commandments? It is pure self-defense.
The People
If you are in the southern part of Uganda, you hear about LRA attacks and it sounds to your ears unbelievable and you take no actions because it seems so far away. In the north you know you are in a hopeless situation because you do not know whether you will survive the day. You fear daylight and darkness equally: during the day because they can see you, at night because you can’t see them. Some people will make a fortune out of the misery of the northerners while others will lose a fortune for the same reason.
If the peace talk succeeds (brings positive changes in the country) both Museveni and Kony will be respected by the people of Uganda. The next agenda is to retire the two from public life. At this time Uganda can truly talk about amending the constitution to remove those articles that are contrary to the wishes of the people. The government should be dissolved and a general election called. This would be the best time to install true democracy in Uganda government system and dissolve the UPDF and recruit a new Uganda army.
Friday, July 07, 2006
Towards Genuine Peace
The media has been used to condition the readers mind to an untenable position that the LRA and UPDF are equally to blame for the atrocities and war in northern Uganda. This is supposed to be the "middle ground." It is supposed to be the view of the moderates. But the Uganda government and its supporters have consistently painted a more negative picture of the LRA while we never have had the chance to hear from the LRA. Whereas each combating side is bent on making statement of their innocence, we still have a right to know who really is behind the death and destruction of a whole people and culture in Acholiland. Secondly, why can't the problem go away? Recently, Otti, the second in command of the LRA, has been interviewed by the Black Star News of New York and since the interview was over satellite communication, his answers to the questions were not rehearsed and therefore, very revealing. Otti also said that they burned down some camps so that people could go back to their homes. The picture is beginning to emerge why peace talk is not possible under Museveni. The ability of the LRA leaders to talk to the world is giving a different picture of the cause and intent of the Museveni perpetrated war.
The most glaring and convincing is the fact that LRA now categorically denies that the camp was created by them or because of their activities. And that is the single most important issue to Acholi people. They would prefer to be killed in their home rather than in concentration camps. Let the Uganda government tell us clearly why it cannot defend our people but instead find it easier to use the helicopter gunship indiscriminately against the people. To us this is evidence of Uganda government genocidal streaks. Otti stated that Museveni government gave the people 24 hours to leave their homes and move into camps that had not even been prepared for human habitation in any ways! Those who attempted to resist were summarily executed by the helicopter gunship and indiscriminate bombings of the villages. Without proper sanitation, food and shelters, the people were then exposed to death through overcrowding. The culture began to die at the same time as family units were absolutely destroyed. And for those who could not make it to the camps, they were strafed by helicopter gunship. This operation was code-named "Scorched earth campaign." That name is indicative of the government genocidal intent. As happened with the Israeli in Gaza, this was "violating international law in its Gaza offensive by inflicting heavy destruction and endangering civilians in acts of collective punishment banned under the Geneva Conventions." Museveni did this in Acholi. The Acholi live out of the land and they store their foodstuff in granaries. So when they were forced to move to the camps, they were in effect being dispossessed of all earthly belongings. The helicopter gunship was brought in to chase the remaining people from their homes. Many were killed and as a result no one could claim their rights. In the ensuing chaos, the UPDF loaded their entire foodstuff and ferried it to the south. It does not matter that the UPDF would claim all the people as LRA collaborators; it is the duty of the government to ensure that they protect the people. Now, with no food and no homes to return to, the people were forced into the camps. Many may have thought it was temporary but soon found out that their lives was changed forever. This is callous; this is genocide.
It is hard to believe that the government had no control of what was going on and therefore the best way to deal with the LRA insurgency was total annihilation of the homesteads of everyone in the whole of Acholi district. Would Museveni have done the same thing in the area where he comes from? Of course, not. If the many people who were herded into the camps were really LRA supporters as the government would want us to believe, then it would have been an almost impossible task to separate them from their main group, the LRA. It is therefore more plausible that the government has the aim of moving the people form the land and that is why the camps were created and the people were not allowed to go back and get their food or gather information of what really happened. The LRA claim is simply to make it easy for the army to carry out the genocide in the name of fighting the rebels. Assuming that the soldiers were there for the benefit and protection of the people displaced, they would have been protected in every sense of the word because in skirmishes, it was the rebels that got killed. This would have included escort back to their homestead to collect what belonging and supply they may have left behind. That is the work of the army: to protect the people from attacks and harms from all known causes.
There is a movement where the people who have been known as cattle keepers, people of Banyarwanda ethnic origin, are trying to move from the west into the north. Apach has recently expelled some 500 of them. This is the main thrust of Museveni kingdom. An excerpt from interview with BSN gives us a glimpse into what really is happening in the northern Uganda war.
BSN: What else can you say to the people of Acholi region [the war zone]?
OTTI: The people should unite so that we can protect our land and prevent the Ankoles from taking it. This has been our land for hundreds of years.
BSN: You say Museveni's soldiers committed atrocities, do you have evidence?
OTTI: Abundantly. These atrocities you see occurring that he says are committed by the LRA his soldiers are doing. We never had the means of communications before to tell our story.
As regards the peace talks, it is instructive to remember all the peace negotiations that Museveni has been through and what became of them. An excerpt from Congopanoram.info below is quite revealing.
Museveni is like Hitler in many ways except the color of his skin. Hitler was not a German but an Austrian. Likewise Museveni is not a Ugandan but a Tutsi from Rwanda who came with his mother as a refugee. Hitler attacked one country after another. He planned his attack of Russia and other countries while negotiating PEACE TREATIES with his future victims. British Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, naively believed that he could achieve peace with Hitler through mere negotiations. Hitler was planning his attack of Britain while mesmerizing Chamberlain with peace agreements. Museveni is doing precisely the same.
As from Charles O Kagwa:
"The,"First casualty of war is Truth" very true indeed, sad but unfortunately true” The world we live in is a composition of lies, greed and manipulations little truth can be secured”. In Uganda case, the leader is a very important ally to those who have interest to exploit the region, with resources like Gas and Oil plenty in South Sudan, Riches in D R Congo, and Uganda is still a very vital base I see NO reason why the greedy stakeholders should address truth in the Northern Uganda genocide. Unfortunately even neutral countries have joint the scramble for influence and exploitation, forming allies and cares no more for human rights abuses they preach in their own countries. The war in Great lakes provides good opportunity for plunder and employment also for research so it will most likely continue. How many peace accord, have been violated by NRM? More than five, Nairobi Accord 1985, UPDA Pece Accord 1988, UPA with Jesus Ojirot in Teso 1989, Akena Adoko UPDA 1989 all signed but violated. How many Peace jokes effort have been tried? Asked religious Leaders!"
While many people would pursue peace at all costs, the evidence of dealing with Museveni paints a very sinister picture. The people involved in the talks will certainly explore all loopholes that would cause failure of the talk to materialize into genuine peace. Museveni might be sending his emissary to talk peace while he vigorously pursues war to the end. So, he should refrain from making statements like "surrender by July 31."
We need the peace talk in Juba to succeed. Too many lives have been lost and many others are languishing in squalid camps with no hope for a better future. The people trapped in the so-called IDPs represent one of the gravest dangers to Uganda. They are desperate and very unhappy and can do anything because they have nothing to lose. If one can remember the Bolshevik Revolution then it is not unreasonable to see that these people could destroy their oppressor that has been codenamed Uganda government.
Another troubling observation is the big number of Museveni family in the top echelon of the government. Believe me, such people will never share power with the rebels who are bent to remove them from power. I do not see how their interest is going to be safeguarded in the peace talk. If these people can tone down their desires and accept to take their place among other Ugandans as equal, then we are moving towards a better and integrated Uganda.
And, finally, peace will be achieved if Acholi people replace the military commanders in Acholi district and as to concern that they will or might wish to attack Museveni's other forces, none of them should be allowed to cross Karuma armed and vice versa for Museveni's NRA. Only then will participants shake hands truly with open hearts to give Uganda one more chance at peace. This is the only safeguard against Museveni's machination as he did at the Nairobi peace talk and prevents further bloodshed and pogrom by Museveni.
The most glaring and convincing is the fact that LRA now categorically denies that the camp was created by them or because of their activities. And that is the single most important issue to Acholi people. They would prefer to be killed in their home rather than in concentration camps. Let the Uganda government tell us clearly why it cannot defend our people but instead find it easier to use the helicopter gunship indiscriminately against the people. To us this is evidence of Uganda government genocidal streaks. Otti stated that Museveni government gave the people 24 hours to leave their homes and move into camps that had not even been prepared for human habitation in any ways! Those who attempted to resist were summarily executed by the helicopter gunship and indiscriminate bombings of the villages. Without proper sanitation, food and shelters, the people were then exposed to death through overcrowding. The culture began to die at the same time as family units were absolutely destroyed. And for those who could not make it to the camps, they were strafed by helicopter gunship. This operation was code-named "Scorched earth campaign." That name is indicative of the government genocidal intent. As happened with the Israeli in Gaza, this was "violating international law in its Gaza offensive by inflicting heavy destruction and endangering civilians in acts of collective punishment banned under the Geneva Conventions." Museveni did this in Acholi. The Acholi live out of the land and they store their foodstuff in granaries. So when they were forced to move to the camps, they were in effect being dispossessed of all earthly belongings. The helicopter gunship was brought in to chase the remaining people from their homes. Many were killed and as a result no one could claim their rights. In the ensuing chaos, the UPDF loaded their entire foodstuff and ferried it to the south. It does not matter that the UPDF would claim all the people as LRA collaborators; it is the duty of the government to ensure that they protect the people. Now, with no food and no homes to return to, the people were forced into the camps. Many may have thought it was temporary but soon found out that their lives was changed forever. This is callous; this is genocide.
It is hard to believe that the government had no control of what was going on and therefore the best way to deal with the LRA insurgency was total annihilation of the homesteads of everyone in the whole of Acholi district. Would Museveni have done the same thing in the area where he comes from? Of course, not. If the many people who were herded into the camps were really LRA supporters as the government would want us to believe, then it would have been an almost impossible task to separate them from their main group, the LRA. It is therefore more plausible that the government has the aim of moving the people form the land and that is why the camps were created and the people were not allowed to go back and get their food or gather information of what really happened. The LRA claim is simply to make it easy for the army to carry out the genocide in the name of fighting the rebels. Assuming that the soldiers were there for the benefit and protection of the people displaced, they would have been protected in every sense of the word because in skirmishes, it was the rebels that got killed. This would have included escort back to their homestead to collect what belonging and supply they may have left behind. That is the work of the army: to protect the people from attacks and harms from all known causes.
There is a movement where the people who have been known as cattle keepers, people of Banyarwanda ethnic origin, are trying to move from the west into the north. Apach has recently expelled some 500 of them. This is the main thrust of Museveni kingdom. An excerpt from interview with BSN gives us a glimpse into what really is happening in the northern Uganda war.
BSN: What else can you say to the people of Acholi region [the war zone]?
OTTI: The people should unite so that we can protect our land and prevent the Ankoles from taking it. This has been our land for hundreds of years.
BSN: You say Museveni's soldiers committed atrocities, do you have evidence?
OTTI: Abundantly. These atrocities you see occurring that he says are committed by the LRA his soldiers are doing. We never had the means of communications before to tell our story.
As regards the peace talks, it is instructive to remember all the peace negotiations that Museveni has been through and what became of them. An excerpt from Congopanoram.info below is quite revealing.
Museveni is like Hitler in many ways except the color of his skin. Hitler was not a German but an Austrian. Likewise Museveni is not a Ugandan but a Tutsi from Rwanda who came with his mother as a refugee. Hitler attacked one country after another. He planned his attack of Russia and other countries while negotiating PEACE TREATIES with his future victims. British Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, naively believed that he could achieve peace with Hitler through mere negotiations. Hitler was planning his attack of Britain while mesmerizing Chamberlain with peace agreements. Museveni is doing precisely the same.
As from Charles O Kagwa:
"The,"First casualty of war is Truth" very true indeed, sad but unfortunately true” The world we live in is a composition of lies, greed and manipulations little truth can be secured”. In Uganda case, the leader is a very important ally to those who have interest to exploit the region, with resources like Gas and Oil plenty in South Sudan, Riches in D R Congo, and Uganda is still a very vital base I see NO reason why the greedy stakeholders should address truth in the Northern Uganda genocide. Unfortunately even neutral countries have joint the scramble for influence and exploitation, forming allies and cares no more for human rights abuses they preach in their own countries. The war in Great lakes provides good opportunity for plunder and employment also for research so it will most likely continue. How many peace accord, have been violated by NRM? More than five, Nairobi Accord 1985, UPDA Pece Accord 1988, UPA with Jesus Ojirot in Teso 1989, Akena Adoko UPDA 1989 all signed but violated. How many Peace jokes effort have been tried? Asked religious Leaders!"
While many people would pursue peace at all costs, the evidence of dealing with Museveni paints a very sinister picture. The people involved in the talks will certainly explore all loopholes that would cause failure of the talk to materialize into genuine peace. Museveni might be sending his emissary to talk peace while he vigorously pursues war to the end. So, he should refrain from making statements like "surrender by July 31."
We need the peace talk in Juba to succeed. Too many lives have been lost and many others are languishing in squalid camps with no hope for a better future. The people trapped in the so-called IDPs represent one of the gravest dangers to Uganda. They are desperate and very unhappy and can do anything because they have nothing to lose. If one can remember the Bolshevik Revolution then it is not unreasonable to see that these people could destroy their oppressor that has been codenamed Uganda government.
Another troubling observation is the big number of Museveni family in the top echelon of the government. Believe me, such people will never share power with the rebels who are bent to remove them from power. I do not see how their interest is going to be safeguarded in the peace talk. If these people can tone down their desires and accept to take their place among other Ugandans as equal, then we are moving towards a better and integrated Uganda.
And, finally, peace will be achieved if Acholi people replace the military commanders in Acholi district and as to concern that they will or might wish to attack Museveni's other forces, none of them should be allowed to cross Karuma armed and vice versa for Museveni's NRA. Only then will participants shake hands truly with open hearts to give Uganda one more chance at peace. This is the only safeguard against Museveni's machination as he did at the Nairobi peace talk and prevents further bloodshed and pogrom by Museveni.
Saturday, November 05, 2005
What Do All These Mean?
Many things are happening in Uganda that would cause one to fear for the country.
First:
From the Monitor newspaper of January 20, 2006
Emmanuel Gyezaho, Evelyn Lirri & Francis Mugerwa
Mubende
A SPEEDING army truck yesterday dispersed a crowd that had gathered to listen to Uganda Peoples Congress presidential candidate Miria Obote at Kasambira Gombolola headquarters in Mubende district.
The army truck Reg. No. DO 1DF004 first sped past the rally venue, stopped abruptly after 100 metres, made a U-turn and sped back sending the crowd scampering for safety.
Second:
“EMMA MASUMBUKO
MAKERERE The National Resistance Movement Secretary General, Mr Amama Mbabazi, has said the ruling Movement still has the capacity to go to the bush to defend the country from dictatorial regimes.He was speaking at the launch of the National Youth Conference at Makerere University on Saturday. Mbabazi told students leaders from various institutions that though it is their role to ensure continuity of peace and prosperity ushered by the Movement government, “the elders will not fold their hands if the youth decide otherwise”.“I may look old but if it is necessary to go back to the bush to save Ugandans from suffering, I can still join that struggle since I was part of the team that changed poor leadership in Uganda,” he said. “
Third:
On the military side: Muhoozi Kainerugaba, who heads a regiment of the Presidential Guard Brigade is Museveni's own son. This is the closest to a private army Museveni has ventured. Then comes General Aronda Nyakairima, a close supporter of Museveni, who has been made Chief of Defense Forces, replacing General Kazini. Aronda will do Musevni's bidings. Major General Kayihura who was Museveni’s aide and a military commissar in the UPDF replaced the Inspector General of Police, General Wamala. Museveni never liked the police and never trusted the police because of their penchant for evidence or releasing "suspects" {criminals in NRM/Museveni lingo) for lack of it. Now the police can arrest you on trumped up charges. And if they can't, the army will sure get you!
Conclusion:
All these people mentioned will have no jobs when a new party forms the government. All of them have a lot of questions to answer to Ugandans ranging from the way soldiers were deployed in Congo to looting of mineral from that country. Now, if they can conceal, they will do so. If they can steal, they will and if they are willing to go back to the bush then why even bother leaving the power in their hand? Museveni has laid out a carefully crafted plan to retain power under various possible circumstances, with or without winning the election. For each scenario, Museveni has the winning numbers.
First:
From the Monitor newspaper of January 20, 2006
Emmanuel Gyezaho, Evelyn Lirri & Francis Mugerwa
Mubende
A SPEEDING army truck yesterday dispersed a crowd that had gathered to listen to Uganda Peoples Congress presidential candidate Miria Obote at Kasambira Gombolola headquarters in Mubende district.
The army truck Reg. No. DO 1DF004 first sped past the rally venue, stopped abruptly after 100 metres, made a U-turn and sped back sending the crowd scampering for safety.
Second:
“EMMA MASUMBUKO
MAKERERE The National Resistance Movement Secretary General, Mr Amama Mbabazi, has said the ruling Movement still has the capacity to go to the bush to defend the country from dictatorial regimes.He was speaking at the launch of the National Youth Conference at Makerere University on Saturday. Mbabazi told students leaders from various institutions that though it is their role to ensure continuity of peace and prosperity ushered by the Movement government, “the elders will not fold their hands if the youth decide otherwise”.“I may look old but if it is necessary to go back to the bush to save Ugandans from suffering, I can still join that struggle since I was part of the team that changed poor leadership in Uganda,” he said. “
Third:
On the military side: Muhoozi Kainerugaba, who heads a regiment of the Presidential Guard Brigade is Museveni's own son. This is the closest to a private army Museveni has ventured. Then comes General Aronda Nyakairima, a close supporter of Museveni, who has been made Chief of Defense Forces, replacing General Kazini. Aronda will do Musevni's bidings. Major General Kayihura who was Museveni’s aide and a military commissar in the UPDF replaced the Inspector General of Police, General Wamala. Museveni never liked the police and never trusted the police because of their penchant for evidence or releasing "suspects" {criminals in NRM/Museveni lingo) for lack of it. Now the police can arrest you on trumped up charges. And if they can't, the army will sure get you!
Conclusion:
All these people mentioned will have no jobs when a new party forms the government. All of them have a lot of questions to answer to Ugandans ranging from the way soldiers were deployed in Congo to looting of mineral from that country. Now, if they can conceal, they will do so. If they can steal, they will and if they are willing to go back to the bush then why even bother leaving the power in their hand? Museveni has laid out a carefully crafted plan to retain power under various possible circumstances, with or without winning the election. For each scenario, Museveni has the winning numbers.
Sunday, September 18, 2005
Gen. Kony's Lord's Resistance Army Turns into 'Crude Oil!'
There is a strong connection between Southern Sudan, Kenya and Uganda. The recent peace accord between the SPLM and Sudan government was negotiated and signed in Kenya, while Uganda gave SPLM support and accommodation. Meanwhile, Sudan hosted the LRA.
Now the table is turning. Garang was sworn in as first vice president of Sudan and the south effectively given self-government or autonomy. In six-year time the south will decide in a referendum whether to secede from Sudan or not.
Garang then made a visit to Kenya and decided to pass through Uganda on his return trip to Sudan. On his way back to his base in New Site in Sudan, Garang was killed in a Uganda presidential helicopter crash. That crash has been mired in controversies prompting Museveni to come out with several conflicting statements about it. In one, he claimed that '"Some people say accident. It may be an accident, it may be something else," Museveni said, according to radio and news agency reports. He said the helicopter was "very well equipped . . .The one I am flying all the time. I am not ruling anything out. Either the pilot panicked, or there was some side wind, or the instruments failed, or there was an external factor."' The Sudanese were baffled.
Before he left Rwakitura, Museveni's Ranch, Garang had made a statement that "Kony won't be hiding there for long. It is not only Kony, but also all the militias who have been operating in the area. We need to provide peace, security and stability, so the militias including those that were formerly supported by the government, must be disbanded."
The terms of the Sudan Comprehensive Peace Agreement effectively splits Sudan into two 'states' and with the existence of large reserve of crude oil particularly in the south, many companies and groups are already vying for prime spot in the country. It would not be surprising if Salim Saleh, Museveni's brother, moved his base into Sudan to 'finish Kony and his LRA.'
What would Museveni the tactician do in such a situation? Less than a month, Silva Kiir the man who replaced Garang made a similar visit to Museveni on September 7, 2005. Garang died in helicopter crash July 30, 2005 after discussing LRA with Museveni. Kiir also discussed the possibility of Sudanese soldiers joining forces with Ugandan army to fight the Lords Resistance Army based in southern Sudan. Now, all of a sudden, Kony and his LRA has shifted further north of the 'red line' deeper into Sudan and Museveni needs to get closer to them! Is Kony the red herring to allow Museveni occupy Southern Sudan?
As reported:
On September 4, 2005 PRESIDENT Yoweri Museveni has asked Sudanese President Omar el-Bashir to allow the UPDF to pursue LRA rebel leader Joseph Kony, who has fled beyond the Red Line.
A few days later:
KAMPALA, 15 Sep 2005 (IRIN) - A group of about 40 raiders believed to be fighters of the Ugandan Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) rebel movement attacked villages in southern Sudan earlier this week, setting homes on fire and abducting several people, officials said on Thursday.There was no report of casualties.
The plot thickens when the LRA, which has hitherto not operated across the White Nile, attacked villages, burned houses and traveled west with the intention of entering the DRC. The cycle is complete. Museveni is positioning himself for a piece of the action in Sudan. In this scenario, Southern Sudan might as well bid goodbye to peace!
In the case of Congo's mineral resources, Museveni paired with Kagame to topple Gen. Mobutu and installed Laurent Kabila. Then the mineral rich areas in the east were occupied by Ugandan and Rwandese troops. These armies were under separate command. In fact, there were several face-offs between Rwandese and Ugandan armies that prevented Museveni from subverting Rwanda's sovereignty.
Will Salva Kiir allow Museveni to wedge Uganda soldiers between Juba and Khartoum? Interestingly, Salva Kiir, when asked about the need for "one Sudan", after Garang's demise, said that "Let us cross the bridge when we reach it". He was referring to the referendum on the issue of a united Sudan, which is due to be held in six years. Museveni may be trying to speed up that day.
Now the table is turning. Garang was sworn in as first vice president of Sudan and the south effectively given self-government or autonomy. In six-year time the south will decide in a referendum whether to secede from Sudan or not.
Garang then made a visit to Kenya and decided to pass through Uganda on his return trip to Sudan. On his way back to his base in New Site in Sudan, Garang was killed in a Uganda presidential helicopter crash. That crash has been mired in controversies prompting Museveni to come out with several conflicting statements about it. In one, he claimed that '"Some people say accident. It may be an accident, it may be something else," Museveni said, according to radio and news agency reports. He said the helicopter was "very well equipped . . .The one I am flying all the time. I am not ruling anything out. Either the pilot panicked, or there was some side wind, or the instruments failed, or there was an external factor."' The Sudanese were baffled.
Before he left Rwakitura, Museveni's Ranch, Garang had made a statement that "Kony won't be hiding there for long. It is not only Kony, but also all the militias who have been operating in the area. We need to provide peace, security and stability, so the militias including those that were formerly supported by the government, must be disbanded."
The terms of the Sudan Comprehensive Peace Agreement effectively splits Sudan into two 'states' and with the existence of large reserve of crude oil particularly in the south, many companies and groups are already vying for prime spot in the country. It would not be surprising if Salim Saleh, Museveni's brother, moved his base into Sudan to 'finish Kony and his LRA.'
What would Museveni the tactician do in such a situation? Less than a month, Silva Kiir the man who replaced Garang made a similar visit to Museveni on September 7, 2005. Garang died in helicopter crash July 30, 2005 after discussing LRA with Museveni. Kiir also discussed the possibility of Sudanese soldiers joining forces with Ugandan army to fight the Lords Resistance Army based in southern Sudan. Now, all of a sudden, Kony and his LRA has shifted further north of the 'red line' deeper into Sudan and Museveni needs to get closer to them! Is Kony the red herring to allow Museveni occupy Southern Sudan?
As reported:
On September 4, 2005 PRESIDENT Yoweri Museveni has asked Sudanese President Omar el-Bashir to allow the UPDF to pursue LRA rebel leader Joseph Kony, who has fled beyond the Red Line.
A few days later:
KAMPALA, 15 Sep 2005 (IRIN) - A group of about 40 raiders believed to be fighters of the Ugandan Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) rebel movement attacked villages in southern Sudan earlier this week, setting homes on fire and abducting several people, officials said on Thursday.There was no report of casualties.
The plot thickens when the LRA, which has hitherto not operated across the White Nile, attacked villages, burned houses and traveled west with the intention of entering the DRC. The cycle is complete. Museveni is positioning himself for a piece of the action in Sudan. In this scenario, Southern Sudan might as well bid goodbye to peace!
In the case of Congo's mineral resources, Museveni paired with Kagame to topple Gen. Mobutu and installed Laurent Kabila. Then the mineral rich areas in the east were occupied by Ugandan and Rwandese troops. These armies were under separate command. In fact, there were several face-offs between Rwandese and Ugandan armies that prevented Museveni from subverting Rwanda's sovereignty.
Will Salva Kiir allow Museveni to wedge Uganda soldiers between Juba and Khartoum? Interestingly, Salva Kiir, when asked about the need for "one Sudan", after Garang's demise, said that "Let us cross the bridge when we reach it". He was referring to the referendum on the issue of a united Sudan, which is due to be held in six years. Museveni may be trying to speed up that day.
Friday, September 09, 2005
Museveni Makes a Surprise Skirmish into Sudan
Museveni Makes a Surprise Skirmish into Sudan
When Museveni went to Sudan to attend the funeral of General Garang he decided to test a few theories along the way to Yei. In the process he was able to violate the sovereignty of Sudan and test the response he would get if it were a real invasion of Sudan. He attempted a similar trick with Kagame in Rwanda, but it did not work. According to report in the Nation, "A source said Khartoum is particularly concerned that President Museveni entered Sudanese territory without informing the central authority. According to military sources, the president entered Yei under heavy military escort including battlewagons and heavy artillery."
Museveni has used this trick before after concluding the Nairobi peace accord with the UNLA Military Junta of General Tito Lutwa, which has been dubbed "peace jokes." Museveni had demanded that his troops be allowed unrestricted access to the barracks to mingle with the rest of the army. Instead, he used the opportunity to grab weapons and launch an onslaught on the UNLA from within. That should explain why Museveni "entered Yei under heavy military escort including battlewagons and heavy artillery."
Now Museveni's minister for defense, Amama Mbaazi wants $200 million to finish Kony. Meanwhile, Museveni asked Khartoum to "allow" him to follow Kony up to north of Juba Road because Kony has moved north of that road! At the same time Museveni claimed in Gulu that he could finish Kony in 30 minutes thereby stretching the imagination of we ordinary Ugandans. If Uganda army is now located north of Juba road a big logistic nightmare would have been solved in preparation for following "Kony" all the way to Khartoum. In line with Museveni style, the SPLA would now be foolish enough to renege on the peace talk that allowed power sharing and go for the seat of Omar Bashir where General Kony is supposed to be running to. What else would Museveni want from SPLA?
Museveni is the one to lose from a stable Sudan after the peace accord signed in Kenya because it would make him look out of place with the northern Uganda war which has no meaning whichever way you look at it except to generate millions of dollars for Museveni in the name of fighting terrorism. The late Garang and his deputy, Salva Kiir, fought a long war that has now been ended and they have started moving towards coexistence. They know what is best for their people. All that Museveni want to do is wreck the SPLM peace with Khartoum because it puts him in a bad light.
I, seriously, would wish the Sudanese government to allow Museveni to move his troops in Gulu to north of Juba road so that peace can return to Acholiland.
Khartoum, grant us that one wish!
When Museveni went to Sudan to attend the funeral of General Garang he decided to test a few theories along the way to Yei. In the process he was able to violate the sovereignty of Sudan and test the response he would get if it were a real invasion of Sudan. He attempted a similar trick with Kagame in Rwanda, but it did not work. According to report in the Nation, "A source said Khartoum is particularly concerned that President Museveni entered Sudanese territory without informing the central authority. According to military sources, the president entered Yei under heavy military escort including battlewagons and heavy artillery."
Museveni has used this trick before after concluding the Nairobi peace accord with the UNLA Military Junta of General Tito Lutwa, which has been dubbed "peace jokes." Museveni had demanded that his troops be allowed unrestricted access to the barracks to mingle with the rest of the army. Instead, he used the opportunity to grab weapons and launch an onslaught on the UNLA from within. That should explain why Museveni "entered Yei under heavy military escort including battlewagons and heavy artillery."
Now Museveni's minister for defense, Amama Mbaazi wants $200 million to finish Kony. Meanwhile, Museveni asked Khartoum to "allow" him to follow Kony up to north of Juba Road because Kony has moved north of that road! At the same time Museveni claimed in Gulu that he could finish Kony in 30 minutes thereby stretching the imagination of we ordinary Ugandans. If Uganda army is now located north of Juba road a big logistic nightmare would have been solved in preparation for following "Kony" all the way to Khartoum. In line with Museveni style, the SPLA would now be foolish enough to renege on the peace talk that allowed power sharing and go for the seat of Omar Bashir where General Kony is supposed to be running to. What else would Museveni want from SPLA?
Museveni is the one to lose from a stable Sudan after the peace accord signed in Kenya because it would make him look out of place with the northern Uganda war which has no meaning whichever way you look at it except to generate millions of dollars for Museveni in the name of fighting terrorism. The late Garang and his deputy, Salva Kiir, fought a long war that has now been ended and they have started moving towards coexistence. They know what is best for their people. All that Museveni want to do is wreck the SPLM peace with Khartoum because it puts him in a bad light.
I, seriously, would wish the Sudanese government to allow Museveni to move his troops in Gulu to north of Juba road so that peace can return to Acholiland.
Khartoum, grant us that one wish!
Monday, August 15, 2005
Regional Security?
Events that have occurred in the last days of July and the early part of August this year 2005 have indicated that the NRM leaders do not respect us as individuals. The very notion that the fundamental freedoms as enshrined in the United Nations Charter are directly applicable to each individual is viewed differently by the NRM. Also the propensity for the NRM translating issue only in it own preferable ways came out clearly when Museveni himself said that nothing could be ruled out in Garang’s helicopter’s crash. No sooner than the independent FM station joined in the debate did Museveni do a complete about face. He not only declared that, Mwenda, the host of the FM station could not only say what he Museveni had already said, but he even made sure that Mwenda was arrested and the radio station closed down because he was 'playing with regional security.'
But the truth is that anything that affects any of the leaders in our regions affects us all. Therefore, collectively as a civic duty we are bound to seek to know why something has happened so that we can formulate the most appropriate response. Garang’s death affect many people in the regions that include Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Sudan, Chad, Congo, Somali and Egypt just to mention a few countries. Northern Uganda has not known peace for as long as Museveni has been in power. With the installation of Garang as first vice president of Sudan, the situation was expected to change. Southern Sudan was also expecting much better conditions and they put all their trust in the vision of Dr. John Garang. It is instructive to know that the reaction to Garang’s death in which more than 100 people died was not because who killed Garang. It was simply an expression of deep and unacceptable loss that no one had a way of addressing. It was total disbelief and inability to accept that Garang whom just yesterday they pinned their hopes and aspirations on, was today gone forever. Never to be seen again or heard from. The riot was a reaction to the tragic loss of a one whom they had become endeared to but not because of how he died. Of course, during the riot other factors may increase or decrease the intensity of the riot. In other words, one could manipulate the riot in a given direction as towards a group or idea or goal. There is no shortage of that in the region!
In Kampala it was an opportune moment to rein in the pesky Monitor and its popular radio station hosted by Andrew Mwenda. The signal came in an outburst reminiscent of Idi Amin’s days in which Museveni threatened to close down any newspaper that “plays around with regional security.” Immediately, broadcasting commission wrote a letter closing the radio station on the ground that it aired ‘seditious’ material. So, while the people are mourning Garang, Museveni is reaping benefit by clamping down on the opposition, drawing the attention away from the recent tampering with the constitution and the failed referendum exercise. In fact, this is the time when Museveni slides the timeline all the way back to January 26,1986.
So, whenever you hear Museveni lashing out at everybody a la Amin, and security matter is thrown in anyhow among the sentences for the right effect, and the crowd roars with approval, know that the time has come for him to take some very drastic and irrational action. It usually comes in the form of ‘military matter,’ ‘national security,’ ‘regional security’ or any such combination that would allow them to take action without being held accountable.
But the truth is that anything that affects any of the leaders in our regions affects us all. Therefore, collectively as a civic duty we are bound to seek to know why something has happened so that we can formulate the most appropriate response. Garang’s death affect many people in the regions that include Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Sudan, Chad, Congo, Somali and Egypt just to mention a few countries. Northern Uganda has not known peace for as long as Museveni has been in power. With the installation of Garang as first vice president of Sudan, the situation was expected to change. Southern Sudan was also expecting much better conditions and they put all their trust in the vision of Dr. John Garang. It is instructive to know that the reaction to Garang’s death in which more than 100 people died was not because who killed Garang. It was simply an expression of deep and unacceptable loss that no one had a way of addressing. It was total disbelief and inability to accept that Garang whom just yesterday they pinned their hopes and aspirations on, was today gone forever. Never to be seen again or heard from. The riot was a reaction to the tragic loss of a one whom they had become endeared to but not because of how he died. Of course, during the riot other factors may increase or decrease the intensity of the riot. In other words, one could manipulate the riot in a given direction as towards a group or idea or goal. There is no shortage of that in the region!
In Kampala it was an opportune moment to rein in the pesky Monitor and its popular radio station hosted by Andrew Mwenda. The signal came in an outburst reminiscent of Idi Amin’s days in which Museveni threatened to close down any newspaper that “plays around with regional security.” Immediately, broadcasting commission wrote a letter closing the radio station on the ground that it aired ‘seditious’ material. So, while the people are mourning Garang, Museveni is reaping benefit by clamping down on the opposition, drawing the attention away from the recent tampering with the constitution and the failed referendum exercise. In fact, this is the time when Museveni slides the timeline all the way back to January 26,1986.
So, whenever you hear Museveni lashing out at everybody a la Amin, and security matter is thrown in anyhow among the sentences for the right effect, and the crowd roars with approval, know that the time has come for him to take some very drastic and irrational action. It usually comes in the form of ‘military matter,’ ‘national security,’ ‘regional security’ or any such combination that would allow them to take action without being held accountable.
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Museveni Bares His Teeth
Museveni has clearly told the people of Uganda in no uncertain language that the Movement (a code name for Museveni) will continue ruling Uganda irrespective of the referendum. The referendum is his way of ferreting out the opposition with bait for political pluralism then liquidating them. At the same time he is ensuring that anyone that remains in the NRM must follow what he Museveni wants. Anytime you disagree with him, Museveni, you will be kicked out the NRM, and subsequently out of political power. You will then be subjected to the machination of the NRM who are dubbed 'the people' in the referendum exercise.
To choose a side in the referendum, there are two symbols: The Tree and the Hut with a closed door. Museveni is leading the team campaigning for the Tree and other Movement supporters or die-hard are campaigning for the Hut. So, if you vote for the Tree, you vote for Museveni. If you vote for the Hut, then you vote for maintaining the current system, which is being lead by Museveni himself. That is why so many people find the exercise meaningless.
In a newspaper report:
Museveni said that the referendum is not a contest between political parties and the Movement insisting that it was important to free those who feel conscripted into the Movement, disarm those that have been spreading damaging propaganda against his government in the international community and to allow the minority that have refused to embrace the Movement ideology to belong to their own home.
"We are not asking you to vote on what is better between the Movement and political parties; that one we decided a long time ago. The Movement wants to rid itself of those people," Museveni said. "There is nothing wrong with the Movement; it is the best. The question is how long should we wrestle with people who have persistently refused to join us for the last 19 years?" he said. End of newspaper report.
Looking at it another way, political parties have already been registered by an act of Parliament. So, if the notion that the majority of Ugandans are already NRM members is true, why waste money on a referendum that makes no sense anyway? The majority will simply vote for the NRM and save the 22 billion for other urgent projects.
Last month MPs backed a controversial amendment to the draft constitution, which would scrap limit on presidential terms. And now the referendum is going to be used to stifle multiparty and entrench the NRM as the only political system. And Museveni will rule as long as his system stands. There you have it, ladies and gentlemen. No Change or Kisanja wins.
To choose a side in the referendum, there are two symbols: The Tree and the Hut with a closed door. Museveni is leading the team campaigning for the Tree and other Movement supporters or die-hard are campaigning for the Hut. So, if you vote for the Tree, you vote for Museveni. If you vote for the Hut, then you vote for maintaining the current system, which is being lead by Museveni himself. That is why so many people find the exercise meaningless.
In a newspaper report:
Museveni said that the referendum is not a contest between political parties and the Movement insisting that it was important to free those who feel conscripted into the Movement, disarm those that have been spreading damaging propaganda against his government in the international community and to allow the minority that have refused to embrace the Movement ideology to belong to their own home.
"We are not asking you to vote on what is better between the Movement and political parties; that one we decided a long time ago. The Movement wants to rid itself of those people," Museveni said. "There is nothing wrong with the Movement; it is the best. The question is how long should we wrestle with people who have persistently refused to join us for the last 19 years?" he said. End of newspaper report.
Looking at it another way, political parties have already been registered by an act of Parliament. So, if the notion that the majority of Ugandans are already NRM members is true, why waste money on a referendum that makes no sense anyway? The majority will simply vote for the NRM and save the 22 billion for other urgent projects.
Last month MPs backed a controversial amendment to the draft constitution, which would scrap limit on presidential terms. And now the referendum is going to be used to stifle multiparty and entrench the NRM as the only political system. And Museveni will rule as long as his system stands. There you have it, ladies and gentlemen. No Change or Kisanja wins.
Friday, July 15, 2005
Museveni Lays The Last Straw on Uganda's Back
IRAQ is rapidly approaching a watershed moment: the unveiling of its new constitution. This event will probably be seen in retrospect as either the moment that the leaders of Iraq reconsecrated their troubled nation, or as the opening act of the country's descent into civil war. It is troubling, then, that events are proceeding with undue haste and a lack of public input, either of which might doom the process and invite a conflagration that would make the insurgency look like a garden party.
Excerpt from NY Times by
J Alexander Their
Published: July 14, 2005
Stanford, Calif.
In a similar vein, events unfolding in Uganda parallel that of Iraq as it attempts to form a government of national unity. There are more serious issues that demand the actions of the Uganda Parliament more than this vain referendum exercise in which the people have no idea what is required of them. People in Acholi and other parts are living in camps and the children have known no peace. Every night they trek to the town for safety. This matter should be on the referendum but it is not even considered in parliament.
The dramatic change in the constitution for the benefit of one man marks a watershed in Uganda history. This event was not reached through consensus but bribery.
Not every time a leader dreams of new ideas should the people be approached go through a referendum exercise. Such actions are very costly and do not reflect the free choice of an informed populace. Instead it could only reflect the response of the sycophants and those benefiting directly from maintaining the current status quo. Forcing a referendum down the peoples throat is the surest way of entrenching dictatorship under the guise that “the people has spoken.” We know that the ordinary people have neither the means nor the cohesion to spontaneously come together in such an important topic.
When the matter of changing the constitution was first brought to parliament, it was defeated. But Museveni would have none of that. He manipulated the parliament to have his way. Subsequent votes show that the Museveni clique won. Why did this happen? Because voting was not necessary to achieve this aim and many members simply complied with Museveni’s wish. Parliament is rubberstamp. Museveni would get what he wanted irrespective of the voting. And there were/are MPs that are considered Museveni’s property. These people have no way to avoid doing the Museveni jig. Everything was done in a great hurry without giving people time to build consensus and trust.
Kony has been a convenient scapegoat but what is going to happen will make Kony insurgency look like ‘a garden party.’ This is neither a threat nor a prophecy. It is merely an observed fact of life under dictatorial regimes.
Excerpt from NY Times by
J Alexander Their
Published: July 14, 2005
Stanford, Calif.
In a similar vein, events unfolding in Uganda parallel that of Iraq as it attempts to form a government of national unity. There are more serious issues that demand the actions of the Uganda Parliament more than this vain referendum exercise in which the people have no idea what is required of them. People in Acholi and other parts are living in camps and the children have known no peace. Every night they trek to the town for safety. This matter should be on the referendum but it is not even considered in parliament.
The dramatic change in the constitution for the benefit of one man marks a watershed in Uganda history. This event was not reached through consensus but bribery.
Not every time a leader dreams of new ideas should the people be approached go through a referendum exercise. Such actions are very costly and do not reflect the free choice of an informed populace. Instead it could only reflect the response of the sycophants and those benefiting directly from maintaining the current status quo. Forcing a referendum down the peoples throat is the surest way of entrenching dictatorship under the guise that “the people has spoken.” We know that the ordinary people have neither the means nor the cohesion to spontaneously come together in such an important topic.
When the matter of changing the constitution was first brought to parliament, it was defeated. But Museveni would have none of that. He manipulated the parliament to have his way. Subsequent votes show that the Museveni clique won. Why did this happen? Because voting was not necessary to achieve this aim and many members simply complied with Museveni’s wish. Parliament is rubberstamp. Museveni would get what he wanted irrespective of the voting. And there were/are MPs that are considered Museveni’s property. These people have no way to avoid doing the Museveni jig. Everything was done in a great hurry without giving people time to build consensus and trust.
Kony has been a convenient scapegoat but what is going to happen will make Kony insurgency look like ‘a garden party.’ This is neither a threat nor a prophecy. It is merely an observed fact of life under dictatorial regimes.
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
Museveni's Expose
This address to Acholi elders/leaders is the greatest insult to Acholi and Uganda as a whole. No Head of state worth the title would have acted and spoken as Museveni did like that.
Museveni has been using divide and rule since he usurped power through the barrel of the gun up to now. Divide and rule is not a British phenomenon. The fact that there were many Acholi in the army reflected the exploitation of the tribe by the British at that time. This was made easy by the fact that the Acholi were well settled and well organized to defend their land. They had very strict rules that governed the going to war. Acholi would not start a war merely to show their strength. But there are principles worth dying for and for those principles, Acholi would go to war as a last resort. Fairness was an important aspect of considering war. As a result many of its neighbors lived in peace with it. The British came using various tactics to conscript Acholi into a standing army of the British Protectorate. They interrupted the economic life of the Acholi and replaced it with military culture. The only means of sustaining livelihood under the British for Acholi was to be conscripted into the army. Those who were conscripted were released with benefits that encouraged others to join the army. It had nothing to do with being "a martial people" as Museveni is now peddling.
What kind of crap is Museveni talking here?
"Those lies and distortions went to the heads of whatever leadership was available at that time which, in turn, amplified and spread them to the rest of the population."
Can you see where Museveni is leading to? He is basically saying that since the Acholis were thought of as "martial race," whatever he means, he Museveni is the one to prove the British wrong.
But why did he have to do this? Because the so call 10-Point Program that Museveni used to wage war against the elected government of Dr. Obote would not stand the rigorous scrutiny from the Acholi. They would be the first people to confront Museveni with any anomalies in the 10-Point Program. But as a tribe the Acholi had become disillusioned by Uganda politics and they sought to leave that behind to those that so wished to follow. Furthermore, at no period in the checkered Uganda history have the Acholi seen peace under any of the government in power in Uganda. Under the first UPC government, Brigadier Pyerino Okoya and his wife were murdered in cold blood. Then with Amin's coup, more Acholi soldiers were killed. Amin was overthrown and still more Acholi soldiers were being killed under dubious circumstances. Many were being taken home in coffins during the Luwero Triangle war of Museveni. So, at last they decided to leave Kampala to return to their homes in Acholi district when Museveni dishonored the Nairobi Peace Talk Agreement. General Tito Lutwa did his part to bring Ugandans to the table to discus their grievances and bring peace to the nation, but Museveni would have none of that.
Our real issue as Ugandans is the relevance of the Constitution vis-a-vis the tribal and sectarian attitudes towards each other.
The three dimension force or army that Museveni is talking about is not for national unity. This army is Museveni’s army that he has forced upon the people of Uganda to allow him to talk that kind of thrash. This army is to protect Museveni and his cohorts, to allow them do whatever they want in Uganda. It is therefore tragicomic to call it a force for democracy.
"
Bad politics The undoing of Uganda right from the days of colonialism was the problem of bad politics. Bad politics means politics that is devoid of principles that are designed to uplift the people of Uganda out of their backwardness
"
The only thing I can say loudly is that Museveni has failed Uganda and has thrust us back into dark ages. So, it is not longer possible for Museveni to command the respect of even the most foolish Uganda. We have waited to see the reasons why Museveni went to the bush to topple the elected government. All we see is conditions getting worse for all people except his cronies from the bush. All army command positions are given to his closest tribesmen; in fact, to his clansmen only! The powerful post and ministries are all in MuseveniÂ’s cronies hand. Uganda is more divided than at any other time in history. Museveni has used up his time and he should now leave Uganda alone!
Museveni has been using divide and rule since he usurped power through the barrel of the gun up to now. Divide and rule is not a British phenomenon. The fact that there were many Acholi in the army reflected the exploitation of the tribe by the British at that time. This was made easy by the fact that the Acholi were well settled and well organized to defend their land. They had very strict rules that governed the going to war. Acholi would not start a war merely to show their strength. But there are principles worth dying for and for those principles, Acholi would go to war as a last resort. Fairness was an important aspect of considering war. As a result many of its neighbors lived in peace with it. The British came using various tactics to conscript Acholi into a standing army of the British Protectorate. They interrupted the economic life of the Acholi and replaced it with military culture. The only means of sustaining livelihood under the British for Acholi was to be conscripted into the army. Those who were conscripted were released with benefits that encouraged others to join the army. It had nothing to do with being "a martial people" as Museveni is now peddling.
What kind of crap is Museveni talking here?
"Those lies and distortions went to the heads of whatever leadership was available at that time which, in turn, amplified and spread them to the rest of the population."
Can you see where Museveni is leading to? He is basically saying that since the Acholis were thought of as "martial race," whatever he means, he Museveni is the one to prove the British wrong.
But why did he have to do this? Because the so call 10-Point Program that Museveni used to wage war against the elected government of Dr. Obote would not stand the rigorous scrutiny from the Acholi. They would be the first people to confront Museveni with any anomalies in the 10-Point Program. But as a tribe the Acholi had become disillusioned by Uganda politics and they sought to leave that behind to those that so wished to follow. Furthermore, at no period in the checkered Uganda history have the Acholi seen peace under any of the government in power in Uganda. Under the first UPC government, Brigadier Pyerino Okoya and his wife were murdered in cold blood. Then with Amin's coup, more Acholi soldiers were killed. Amin was overthrown and still more Acholi soldiers were being killed under dubious circumstances. Many were being taken home in coffins during the Luwero Triangle war of Museveni. So, at last they decided to leave Kampala to return to their homes in Acholi district when Museveni dishonored the Nairobi Peace Talk Agreement. General Tito Lutwa did his part to bring Ugandans to the table to discus their grievances and bring peace to the nation, but Museveni would have none of that.
Our real issue as Ugandans is the relevance of the Constitution vis-a-vis the tribal and sectarian attitudes towards each other.
The three dimension force or army that Museveni is talking about is not for national unity. This army is Museveni’s army that he has forced upon the people of Uganda to allow him to talk that kind of thrash. This army is to protect Museveni and his cohorts, to allow them do whatever they want in Uganda. It is therefore tragicomic to call it a force for democracy.
"
Bad politics The undoing of Uganda right from the days of colonialism was the problem of bad politics. Bad politics means politics that is devoid of principles that are designed to uplift the people of Uganda out of their backwardness
"
The only thing I can say loudly is that Museveni has failed Uganda and has thrust us back into dark ages. So, it is not longer possible for Museveni to command the respect of even the most foolish Uganda. We have waited to see the reasons why Museveni went to the bush to topple the elected government. All we see is conditions getting worse for all people except his cronies from the bush. All army command positions are given to his closest tribesmen; in fact, to his clansmen only! The powerful post and ministries are all in MuseveniÂ’s cronies hand. Uganda is more divided than at any other time in history. Museveni has used up his time and he should now leave Uganda alone!
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Confused Editorial from the Monitor of April 7 2005
The Monitor editorial of the 7th April 2005 is one of the weakest and most confusing editorials to have been written for readers at a time when the country is bordering a crisis. It is almost equivalent to the “Irresistible Force and the Immovable Object" case where no meaningful action can be taken. It would have been good to know that there is going to be no more secret voting in parliament. But this open voting is only for the constitutional amendment, because it is so important that posterity should see how our representatives voted. This is yet again one example of the NRM/Museveni junta manipulating parliament to get what they want!
The Editorial says:
Amending the Constitution is no small matter. The men and women who have the power to represent or quash our aspirations should be ready to stand up and be counted. But we also know that the reasons for the push for open voting were not entirely altruistic. The government and proponents of this method appear to want to send a message to MPs that “We are watching you.”
The editor was addressing the removal of secret voting from parliament in the pending amendment to the constitution. The NRM has been in power for more than seventeen years now. And now when it is facing a stiff resistance to changing the constitution to allow Museveni further term to rule Uganda, it wants to get it by way of threat.
In other words, if the members of parliament defeat the ammendment to the constitution through secret ballot, the NRM would have no one to go after. But they will certainly go "back to the bush." On the other hand, open voting would allow easy identification of those who may vote against the amendment and single them for some form of punishment as a good example for people to see what can happen to those who dare oppose the NRM. The good part is that the people will have seen and will not support the NRM this time around. Still it is the last gamble that they can play without going into their usual routine (Luwero, skulls, Mucholi, Obote, back to power)
Take a stand! This is a time for specific action. We do not have time for this kind of classroom logic. I am not against taking into consideration or looking at all possible scenarios before making a decision. But after doing so, specific action should be taken or definite side should be chosen. This is what makes a difference between a good leadership and a bad one. That editorial of April 7 2005 is incomplete because it leaves us in confusion and should not have been written. Editorial should be clear-cut and represent a strong stand that the editor is taking; a moral suasion and not classroom logic.
The Editorial is appended below.
MPs should stand up and be counted
As expected, Parliament on Wednesday voted to do away with secret voting on the Constitution Amendment Bill. The government and the Movement majority supported a motion providing for open voting on constitutional amendments. Supporters of open voting argue that it is a transparent method that forces people’s representatives to account to their constituents. Opponents argue that many Members of Parliament would be easily intimidated into voting for the government’s proposal to remove term limits and such related controversial amendments if voting were to be conducted in the open. They add that those who oppose the government’s proposals would be subjected to harassment later the voting were by secret ballot, it is argued, many MPs who would have feared to vote openly against the government position would do so because of the protection that secrecy would afford them. Both sides have a point. While there is a legitimate case to be made about how voting by secret ballot protects MPs from intimidation by ruling governments, there is an equally compelling case to be made for the principle of open voting in the legislature. Members of Parliament should be accountable to their constituents. The easiest and most reliable way for voters to establish whether their representative is in fact representing their interests in Parliament is if they are able to follow his or her votes on the major issues before the House. Amending the Constitution is no small matter. The men and women who have the power to represent or quash our aspirations should be ready to stand up and be counted. But we also know that the reasons for the push for open voting were not entirely altruistic. The government and proponents of this method appear to want to send a message to MPs that “We are watching you.” Whatever the motives of the proponents and opponents of open voting, not all is lost. Members of Parliament can still go into division lobby and record their votes. The country should know where MPs stood on the third term, on the regional tier system, on dual citizenship, on giving the president powers to dissolve Parliament, in fact on all the proposed constitutional amendments. Let our representatives show us, and posterity, where they stand.
The Editorial says:
Amending the Constitution is no small matter. The men and women who have the power to represent or quash our aspirations should be ready to stand up and be counted. But we also know that the reasons for the push for open voting were not entirely altruistic. The government and proponents of this method appear to want to send a message to MPs that “We are watching you.”
The editor was addressing the removal of secret voting from parliament in the pending amendment to the constitution. The NRM has been in power for more than seventeen years now. And now when it is facing a stiff resistance to changing the constitution to allow Museveni further term to rule Uganda, it wants to get it by way of threat.
In other words, if the members of parliament defeat the ammendment to the constitution through secret ballot, the NRM would have no one to go after. But they will certainly go "back to the bush." On the other hand, open voting would allow easy identification of those who may vote against the amendment and single them for some form of punishment as a good example for people to see what can happen to those who dare oppose the NRM. The good part is that the people will have seen and will not support the NRM this time around. Still it is the last gamble that they can play without going into their usual routine (Luwero, skulls, Mucholi, Obote, back to power)
Take a stand! This is a time for specific action. We do not have time for this kind of classroom logic. I am not against taking into consideration or looking at all possible scenarios before making a decision. But after doing so, specific action should be taken or definite side should be chosen. This is what makes a difference between a good leadership and a bad one. That editorial of April 7 2005 is incomplete because it leaves us in confusion and should not have been written. Editorial should be clear-cut and represent a strong stand that the editor is taking; a moral suasion and not classroom logic.
The Editorial is appended below.
MPs should stand up and be counted
As expected, Parliament on Wednesday voted to do away with secret voting on the Constitution Amendment Bill. The government and the Movement majority supported a motion providing for open voting on constitutional amendments. Supporters of open voting argue that it is a transparent method that forces people’s representatives to account to their constituents. Opponents argue that many Members of Parliament would be easily intimidated into voting for the government’s proposal to remove term limits and such related controversial amendments if voting were to be conducted in the open. They add that those who oppose the government’s proposals would be subjected to harassment later the voting were by secret ballot, it is argued, many MPs who would have feared to vote openly against the government position would do so because of the protection that secrecy would afford them. Both sides have a point. While there is a legitimate case to be made about how voting by secret ballot protects MPs from intimidation by ruling governments, there is an equally compelling case to be made for the principle of open voting in the legislature. Members of Parliament should be accountable to their constituents. The easiest and most reliable way for voters to establish whether their representative is in fact representing their interests in Parliament is if they are able to follow his or her votes on the major issues before the House. Amending the Constitution is no small matter. The men and women who have the power to represent or quash our aspirations should be ready to stand up and be counted. But we also know that the reasons for the push for open voting were not entirely altruistic. The government and proponents of this method appear to want to send a message to MPs that “We are watching you.” Whatever the motives of the proponents and opponents of open voting, not all is lost. Members of Parliament can still go into division lobby and record their votes. The country should know where MPs stood on the third term, on the regional tier system, on dual citizenship, on giving the president powers to dissolve Parliament, in fact on all the proposed constitutional amendments. Let our representatives show us, and posterity, where they stand.
Saturday, April 02, 2005
Zimbabwe's Election
First I would like to note that the Zimbabwe election has two major components: 1. International communities consisting of USA and Britain or coalition of the willing and the MDC party in Zimbabwe. 2. ZANU-PF and majority of the population.The first component believed that MDC was going to win the election unless it was rigged by ZANU-PF. They claimed that there was intimidation although Mugabe relaxed the tight grip weeks before the election.The second component also believed that ZANU-PF was going to win the election. And as has been shown by the latest count, they did win. They blamed the poor showing of the MDC due to inappropriate or wrong strategy. The MDC should have been courting the Zimbabweans instead of courting the international USA and Britain.
Personally, I believe that Mugabe has stayed in power too long and should retire now. But the war that is going on in Zimbabwe seem to be totally different from one of mere democracy and presidential tenure. Britain and USA seem to be reflecting a feeling against the removal of land from former white farmers. So unless they stay away, no meaningful democratic movement may win the election in Zimbabwe. It is also important to note that President Bush won a second term on the back of Christian fundamentalists and Mugabe came back on the back of the landless Zimbabweans.
Personally, I believe that Mugabe has stayed in power too long and should retire now. But the war that is going on in Zimbabwe seem to be totally different from one of mere democracy and presidential tenure. Britain and USA seem to be reflecting a feeling against the removal of land from former white farmers. So unless they stay away, no meaningful democratic movement may win the election in Zimbabwe. It is also important to note that President Bush won a second term on the back of Christian fundamentalists and Mugabe came back on the back of the landless Zimbabweans.
Sunday, March 27, 2005
Prelude to Disintegration
Everything that is happening in Uganda indicates that the corrupt regime of Museveni is gaining momentum for final disintegration. There is going to be no guns fired. This is simply the peoples power at work. There will be some unscrupulous people who will attempt to hijack it but they will be crushed because the people have had enough suffering in the hands of various opportunists. So, if you are an opportunist, my advice to you at this time is to wait on the side until sanity has returned.
The Museveni empire/rule was built on chaos and misguided tribal sentiments and a horde of dissonant ideas:
- That the north versus south was the issue
- War in Acholi was keeping peace in Buganda and so on.
- That Acholis and Lugbaras were banyanyas and biological substances
- That only the NRA/NRM/Museveni could assure Ugandans of peace
It was divide and rule pure and simple.
The constitution was manipulated and doctored to suit the NRM but even then, it was pure brute force that kept Museveni in power all these years. And Ugandans, in their ways, have been tolerant of Museveni for various reasons, one of which is that they simply wish to get on with their lives. This is always mistaken for support for the existing regime.
Museveni missed many chances of becoming a truly great Ugandan leader in spite of the utter use of the military for his political purposes. People begged him and showed him the way, but he refused.
That many of the Museveni supporters in the army were from the west does not detract from the fact that those very same people are independent nationally oriented individuals who for one reason or another followed or joined the NRM. However, the sycophants like Bantariza wake up make their usual cry of LRA in the morning, herd people in the north to the concentration camp withouth means for survival, and call that a development program. A day's worth of work has been done. They then get rewarded by adoring soldiers who have no idea these leeches are the bane of Uganda and the reason why he is carrying a gun against his fellow countrymen.
The Bugandans have agitated for various forms of special treatment, but their messages never get through clearly. Opportunists jump in and confuse the issues that should be looked at, and in the end the central government is able to garner more support to the detriment of Ugandans and Bagandans in particular. Now we are moving towards that conditions in which a regime is suddenly going to be forced out of power and very soon, too. This should be the time for sanity and respect for all sections and communities in Uganda. We need no army to ensure peace in Uganda if the people are to remain supreme. We do need police power for civil purposes so that other political activities can be undertaken to establish the framework of Uganda government.
Museveni and his cronies are not going to take this lying down. As a matter of fact they are going to inject as much confusion as they can in the opposition parties. Messages of discord will be propagated. I dare say that the speech by Gilbert Bukenya telling Catholics that they will be the next president is very much in line with a Museveni tactic. It serve no useful purpose in ridding Uganda of NRM hegemony and can very well weaken any political party aligned with Catholics. Do you see where things are going?
I hope that the people of Uganda will not choose this path of divisionism but instead embark on creating a framework for a robust participatory and lawful administration.
Thanks be to God
Sunday, March 20, 2005
The Die Is Cast
The die has been cast. Museveni is surely running for election. But, more than that, it means that Museveni's plan to become president for life is now being implemented. Think of it: Why would Museveni change a whole constitution in order to benefit another president? The truth is that Museveni and his henchmen are not willing to leave power to another party. They would not change a constitution merely to allow Museveni to run. That would be risky because he could lose the election thereby installing an opponent to a life presidency. And that is not the aim of the demand for a change in the constitution.
This is a serious crisis. Museveni has been ruling Uganda for the last twenty years under dubious code names for democracy and each time Ugandans watch without as much as a simple raising of a hand. Museveni eluded detection by hoodwinking the majority to think in terms of northerners versus him leading Uganda. They say Animal Farm is a classic but that is an understatement. It is actually the bible of achieving power and keeping it.
As we approach the month of April 2005, here are the probable scenarios that will unfold in Uganda:
- Harassment and intimidation of opponents and non NRM supporters as has already happened to Peggy Ntegyereize of Kampala, will become widespread.
- People will lose their livelihood, then their homes as has happened in Acholi.
- Then, there will come a spate of arrests and confinements in various ungazetted locations.
- Next will come extra judicial killings then a state of emergency will be declared, elections will be postponed and all political parties banned forever.
- As a result, many people will go underground, form factions and armed units fighting initially independent and uncoordinated guerilla wars.
- And, finally, when NRM/NRA is sufficiently weakened, the various factions from all corners of Uganda shall unite to form the new Supreme Uganda Army, ushering in a new era of independence, equality and dignity and development for all. Museveni will be known as the last tyrant Uganda has known.
All these may occur simultaneously or one after the other, but the fourth stage is the point of no return with a complete ban on all political activities except those supporting NRM. So, Ugandans can prepare to live with this increasing tyranny or oppose it with all the force in their power now and avoid traveling through all these six stages. The fate of the country is in your hands.
Friday, March 18, 2005
Peace Related Work
This excerpt from Online Journal of Peace whose web address is given below may shed light in why peace talks have been failing in Uganda. There is a general underlying effort to 'finish them off' that makes government to aim at capturing rebel leaders during peace talks instead of conducting sincere talks.
- First of all there is no desire on part of the government to restore peace in northern Uganda.
- Secondly, there is no clear assessment of the reason for the war.
- And lastly, the venue for peace talk is not conducive to peace talk.
Below is the excerpt.
In spite of the defeat of Lakwena in 1987 and the 1988 peace accords, the war up to 1991 continued in much the same vein as it had prior to these events. A.G.G Pinycwa has commented that, "It is the persistence of the rebellion despite the defeat of Alice Lakwena in 1987 that irked and prompted Major General David Tinyefuza [sic] to launch the four month (April to July) intensive military operation of 1991 in which much of the Northern Region was for some time held incommunicado with the rest of the country…."(18) In fact, by Tinyefunza's own account to Parliament in 1996, as Minister of State for Defense in 1991, he should not have been the one to conduct this operation. However, the situation on the ground was such that the rebels appeared to be winning the war controlling the administration centers of both districts. In Tinyefunza's own words "I told you (Parliament) the army in Gulu was under siege; rebels were camped at Gulu post office…The forces of the enemy had occupied Pajim barracks and the town of Kitgum…"(19) Operation North, as this 1991 operation was known, is said to have been extremely brutal and, by many accounts, fueled feelings of disdain by Acholi toward the NRM. Though Operation North failed in its ultimate objective to end the insurgency once and for all, it took some time for the LRA to collect itself and the next couple of years saw a reduction in rebel activity.
http://www.trinstitute.org/ojpcr/p3_2westbrook.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
