ugnet_: Renewed Fighting in Bunia As NGOs Call for Rapid Intervention Force
Renewed Fighting in Bunia As NGOs Call for Rapid Intervention Force UN Integrated Regional Information Networks May 27, 2003 Posted to the web May 27, 2003 Nairobi Fighting erupted again on Tuesday in Bunia, the principal city of the embattled Ituri District of northeastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the UN Mission in the DRC, known as MONUC, reported. MONUC said it could not confirm the figures of six dead and five injured reported by the Union des patriotes congolais (UPC), the ethnic Hema militia currently in control of central Bunia. However, MONUC reported that mortar fire on Monday had killed one and injured five members of the Front de resistance patriotique de l'Ituri, an ethnic Lendu militia trying to dislodge the UPC from the city. "The situation in Ituri remains extremely volatile. Without the arrival of a Chapter Seven force, the humanitarian community will not be able to continue programme implementation," one Bunia resident predicted. "An outbreak of fighting in Bunia within the next 24 hours cannot be excluded. Factions hostile to the UPC will most certainly seek a military solution on the ground, thereby completely ignoring MONUC as mediator. It would appear that the coming 48 hours could be decisive." Chapter Seven of the UN Charter authorises the UN to use military force in response to "any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression". However, member states contributing soldiers to UN peace missions are often reluctant to commit their troops to such a level of activity. [For more information on Chapter Seven, go to http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter7.htm] A consortium of European NGOs on Tuesday echoed the call for a move to Chapter Seven. In a statement issued by the Reseau Europeen Congo and the Great Lakes Advocacy Network from Brussels, the relief and development organisations called for the rapid deployment of a UN international intervention force in Ituri. "Relying on the deployment or effective implementation of the transitional government in the DRC or on the intervention of Uganda and Rwanda is the equivalent of allowing the chaos to continue, with more massacres of civilians in Ituri," the statement said. "MONUC, the UN, and the member nations of the UN Security Council risk finding their credibility even further diminished." This most recent round of armed hostilities followed the weekend theft and destruction of some 300,000 doses of various vaccines, financed by the UN Children's Fund, which had been housed in the Bunia General Hospital, MONUC reported. The warehouse of the UN World Health Organisation was also pillaged, according to MONUC, with medical equipment and vaccine refrigerators stolen. Also on Tuesday, a MONUC human rights verification team reported that 70 houses in the Simbilyabo section of Bunia had been burned to the ground, while the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reported that some 50,000 civilians fleeing Bunia had arrived in the area of Eringeti, located some 35 km north of Beni.
ugnet_: Burundi African Peace Mission Commanders in Place
Burundi African Peace Mission Commanders in Place UN Integrated Regional Information Networks May 26, 2003 Posted to the web May 26, 2003 Bujumbura The high command of the African peace mission in Burundi is now complete, with the arrival in the capital, Bujumbura, on Monday of 11 officers from Mozambique. They join officers from Ethiopia and South Africa already in Burundi. "The army staff of the African Mission in Burundi (AMIB) is now complete, with the arrival of the 11 Mozambican officers. Sixteen officers from Ethiopia - among them the deputy commander of AMIB - have been in Bujumbura since 11 May. South Africans - including the force commander - have been in place since March, so the process of deploying all peacekeeping troops is moving forward," Maj Botha, a spokesman of the South African Protection Support Detachment, told reporters in Bujumbura. "We hope all remaining troops will be in Bujumbura in the early days of June," he added. The entire force will ultimately comprise 2,870 troops: 1,600 South Africans, 290 Mozambicans and 980 Ethiopians. They will help demobilise, disarm and reintegrate combatants of three Hutu rebel groups fighting against the Tutsi-led army as part of the ceasefire agreements signed by three rebel movements and the government in October and December last year. Combatants of two minor rebel groups - the Forces pour la defense de la democratie (FDD) faction led by Jean-Bosco Ndayikengurukiye, and the Forces nationales de liberation faction of Alain Mugabarabona - have declared themselves ready to be cantoned. Three cantonment areas are currently being established respectively in eastern, central and northwestern Burundi. An AMIB press release on Sunday said the first cantonment area to be deployed will be at Muyange in the northwestern province of Bubanza, by June 2003, and will be manned by South Africans. The Mozambican deployment in the first cantonment area is planned for later in June. No agreement about cantonment has been reached between the main Hutu FDD rebel faction, led by Pierre Nkurunziza, and the government.
ugnet_: UN says 50,000 fled Congo fighting......
GENEVA (Reuters) - The United Nations said Tuesday an estimated 50,000 Congolese had fled fighting in the eastern part of Congo, and it hoped to begin distributing food to the displaced this week. People fleeing Bunia in Ituri region have trekked south for up to 10 days through forests to avoid militia attacks and reach Beni in North Kivu province, according to the U.N.'s World Food Program, whose team arrived over the weekend. "The people are exhausted, hungry and in urgent need of basic medical assistance, clean water and shelter," said Robert Dekker, WFP head of operations for Goma. "The trek involves crossing two rivers and some internally displaced people described watching babies being swept away by the river currents," he said. The United Nations wants an international force sent to the Ituri region. Drugged up militia fighters, some suspected of cannibalism, have killed hundreds of people with machetes, guns and bows and arrows, but the small U.N. force in Bunia has neither the mandate nor the firepower to intervene. Under large-scale food distribution due to start Friday, the displaced will receive one month's supply of pulses, maize, beans and oil, according to spokeswoman Christiane Berthiaume. She said at a news briefing in Geneva that the agency would need $16 million to feed the displaced through the end of the year. An appeal to donors for funds was being prepared. The Rome-based WFP recently sent 200 tons of food from Goma to Beni, enough to feed some 25,000 people for a month, but the number of displaced has exceeded expectations, she added. 05/27/03 11:24 ET
ugnet_: Rights Groups Urge Respect for Ceasefire
Meanwhile, Burundian news agency, Netpress, on Friday quoted President Domitien Ndayizeye as saying that rebel groups which did not sign up to the peace process would be "very aggressively fought". Ndayizeye, a Hutu, took over as president on 30 April from Pierre Buyoya, a Tutsi, in accordance with the terms of a peace agreement to end the country's civil war.
Rights Groups Urge Respect for Ceasefire
UN Integrated Regional Information Networks
May 26, 2003
Posted to the web May 26, 2003
Nairobi
Local and international human rights campaigners on Sunday denounced violence which they said was "blindly directed at the civilian population" in Burundi, and urged the army and rebels to respect a ceasefire agreement reached on 2 December 2002.
A statement issued in Paris by the Federation internationale des droits de l'homme (FIDH), and its member organisation Ligue Burundaise des droits de l'homme (Iteka), condemned violations of the ceasefire which were "mortgaging the settlement of the Burundian conflict".
var bnum=new Number(Math.floor( * Math.random())+1);document.write("");
According to the statement, there was fierce fighting in April in several provinces, notably Bujumbura Rural, Muramvya, Gitega, Ruyigi, Kayanza and in Bujumbura city. It said that a FIDH mission which visited Bujumbura from 15-20 April found "yet again a climate of fear and insecurity prevailing in the Burundian capital".
The human rights campaigners called on the transitional government to pursue dialogue with rebels so that progress made in the peace process was not wiped out.
Meanwhile, Burundian news agency, Netpress, on Friday quoted President Domitien Ndayizeye as saying that rebel groups which did not sign up to the peace process would be "very aggressively fought". Ndayizeye, a Hutu, took over as president on 30 April from Pierre Buyoya, a Tutsi, in accordance with the terms of a peace agreement to end the country's civil war.
News agencies on Friday quoted the leader of the main rebel group, Conseil national pour defense de la democratie-Forces pour la defense de la democratie (CNDD-FDD), Pierre Nkurunziza, as saying the group would do its best to ensure implementation of the ceasefire agreement, but it reserved the right of "self-defense".
ugnet_: AIDS BILL SIGNING TODAY
WASHINGTON (May 27) - Signing a $15 billion authorization to fight AIDS abroad gives President Bush more leverage to press other wealthy nations to work harder against the killer disease as he prepares for a European summit. In a ceremony Tuesday at the State Department, Bush was to sign a five-year plan designed to help prevent and treat AIDS, especially in more than a dozen African and Caribbean nations. If fully implemented, the legislation is supposed to prevent 7 million new infections, care for 10 million HIV-infected people and AIDS orphans and provide anti-retroviral therapy for 2 million. The president had urged Congress to get the bill to his desk before he traveled to the June 1-3 ''Group of Eight'' summit in Evian, France, where he is expected to use it to solicit other countries to contribute more to the cause. The G-8 comprises the leaders of the world's seven richest countries - the United States, Japan, Germany, France, Britain, Italy and Canada - plus Russia. ''Other wealthy nations - specifically G-8 member nations - must follow suit with similar funding increases,'' said Jose Zuniga, president of the International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care. The new AIDS package, which Congress completed last week, recommends that 55 percent of direct aid go to treatment programs, 20 percent to prevention, 15 percent to palliative care and 10 percent to children orphaned by the disease. It also would allow, but not require, the administration to contribute up to $1 billion in 2004 to the international Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. ''This is a whole new day in the fight against this epidemic,'' said Mark Isaac, vice president of the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation. The foundation fights HIV and AIDS and other serious and life-threatening diseases affecting children. To appease conservatives, the measure says one-third of the money going toward prevention be set aside for projects that promote abstinence - an issue that was prominent in the final congressional debate. The bill says religious groups will not lose funding because they oppose certain preventive methods, such as condom distribution. Supporters of the legislation said Uganda has been successful in lowering infection rates with its ''ABC'' program of ''Abstinence, Be Faithful and Condom use when appropriate.'' Others say it is a mistake to focus on any one strategy when local customs vary widely. ''We were speaking to the first lady of Uganda the day the bill was being considered in the Senate,'' Isaac said. ''And she was quite firm in saying that people in the countries most affected are the most knowledgeable about what kind of prevention works best locally. We need to give them a full range of options.'' While the legislation nearly triples current U.S. contributions to AIDS programs, Congress still must approve actual spending levels in its annual budget appropriations process. The bill calls for spending $3 billion a year, but the administration is seeking only $1.7 billion in fiscal 2004, $2 billion if related programs for malaria and tuberculosis are included. ''The president moved with great speed, but now Congress has to move with the same speed and dispatch,'' Isaac said. AP-NY-05-27-03 0535EDT Copyright 2003 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.
ugnet_: New Era looms in Rwanda-BBC
Last Updated:Tuesday, 27 May, 2003, 15:34 GMT 16:34 UK Email this to a friend Printable version New era looms in Rwanda The government promises elections later this yearA huge majority of Rwandans has backed a draft constitution designed to prevent another genocide, electoral officials say. Some 93% of the electorate voted "Yes" in Monday's referendum, said electoral commission chairman Chrysologue Karangwa. Turnout was 87% of registered voters. Earlier, President Paul Kagame said that the first presidential elections since 1988 would be held in August and parliamentary polls in September. About 800,000 ethnic minority Tutsis and moderate Hutus died in the campaign of ethnic cleansing orchestrated by extremist Hutu authorities in 1994. The new constitutional framework safeguards against the dominance of a single political party and bans the incitement of ethnic hatred. But critics say it is geared toward keeping the Rwandan Patriotic Front in power and includes significant powers to curtail civil rights. Sharing power "I am not surprised by the high turnout or the big yes vote," said Mr Karangwa. "The constitution has been prepared by Rwandans themselves." DRAFT CONSTITUTION Prevents one party-dominance Bans inciting ethnic hatred Allows parliament to curtail free speech The draft constitution stipulates that no party can hold more than 50% of the seats in cabinet, even if they secure an absolute majority in parliamentary elections. It also provides that the president, prime minister and president of the lower house cannot all belong to the same party and includes a new provision outlawing the incitement of ethnic hatred. But one article in the proposed constitution in effect prohibits political campaigning at grassroots level, restricting it to provincial and national institutions. Critics charge this is designed to strengthen the RPF's hold on power. Rights 'threat' The draft also contains frequent reference to "national unity" as a priority. Going against national unity was the reason given for the dissolution of the country's second-largest party, the Democratic Republican Movement, by the RPF-led parliament earlier this month. The Rwandans need some healthy nationalism to pull themselves back together Helen Tewolde, Eritrean Canadian Have Your Say Human rights groups, while noting the attention paid to rights within the draft, have also cautioned that it allows parliament to restrict those rights. "The [draft] constitution confers on the government broad powers to curtail speech or meetings that are deemed divisive," said the New York-based Human Rights Watch. The presidential and parliamentary elections will follow once the draft constitution is approved, the government says. Email this to a friend Printable version Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
ugnet_: How Democratic is Uganda? (Feature)
How Democratic is Uganda? (Feature) UN Integrated Regional Information Networks May 27, 2003 Posted to the web May 27, 2003 Kampala [This report does not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations] It is 16 years since president Yoweri Museveni, having just seized power in a military coup, promised an end to dictatorship in Uganda. The tired, war-weary Ugandans could have been forgiven for not believing him. His coup was the fourth since 1971 and came at the end of an epidemic of civil strife and systematic state terror. Sixteen years on, controversy is raging over whether Museveni's promise to restore democracy was sincere, or simply "hollow talk". No-one doubts that life for many Ugandans has improved since Museveni's National Resistance Movement (NRM) took power. The country's economy has expanded faster than any other in Africa; education and health services are improving; Uganda is the only country in Africa to have stemmed the tide of new HIV infections. CIVIL RIGHTS Yet in spite of these achievements, analysts say it is unclear whether Uganda has improved its civil rights record. Presidential and parliamentary elections were held as promised, yet many Ugandans feel these have been compromised by the ruling elite's tendency to stifle opposition. In addition, dubious police powers like those conferred in the 2001 Suppression of Terrorism Bill, have led to widespread abuses by the army and security services, according to human rights groups. These include torture and arbitrary detention of dissidents in illegal "safe houses". Museveni's recent insistence that the constitution be changed to allow him to run for a third term has called into question his stated commitment to democracy. Uganda currently has three main opposition parties - the Democratic Party (DP), the Uganda People's Congress (UPC), headed by exiled former president Milton Obote, and the Reform Agenda (RA). All of them are outlawed. If they try to hold gatherings, private or public, they are dispersed by police. Two weeks ago a graduation party for the head of the DP's youth wing was broken up by police firing shots into the air. "It was a peaceful meeting in a private home", DP president Paul Ssemogerere told IRIN. RESTRICTIONS ON PARTIES To be allowed to operate, the government says the parties have to register under the 2002 Political Parties and Organisations Act (PPOA). Yet the act has been criticised for the draconian restrictions it places on parties, leaving them as mere pressure groups. Amongst other things, it forbids them to front candidates to campaign in presidential or parliamentary elections, or to have an office outside the capital. For this reason, it was challenged by the parties in Uganda's Constitutional Court and in March, the court ruled in their favour. Central to the government's defence of the restrictions was the often-repeated claim that the NRM is not a party but a meritocratic "system of government". NRM members are all elected by the people and competition for public office is open to all, so there is no autocratic one-party-state. This the court rejected. "The NRM's claim not to be a party is a deception," Ssemogerere told IRIN. "We have always said it and it has been proved by the court judgement. This was a landmark decision." All senior party figures agree that this means they can operate without having to register until the PPOA is amended. Yet efforts to do so have been stopped by police. Uganda Attorney General Francis Ayume told IRIN that this was because they still have to register. "The requirement to register is a constitutional requirement", he says. "Even if the act was not there, they would still have to register." Ayume says the parties know full well that they can register and ignore the two disputed sections of the act that the court overturned, but he believes they are just trying to gain political capital. "They are free to gather but how do we know that they are gathering for lawful purposes?", he asks. "We go to the registry. If they would just register the police would have no business with them." Ayume is appealing against the court decision and the case is still being heard. The government also points to the 1995 referendum on the new constitution for Uganda, which showed overwhelming support for the continuation of the NRM system. But Uganda's political organisations say it was flawed. "Without liberating parties first there is no way the referendum could be free and fair," explains Ssemogerere. "And anyway it is wrong in principle. These fundamental rights are not to be decided by the majority. The right to associate holds even if only one person wants to exercise that right." James Rwanyarare, chairman of the UPC, told IRIN that "the constitutional process was drafted by NRM sympathisers". "We tried to have our input but we were beaten up and arrested by the police and the military. There is force and intimidation at work here," he said.
ugnet_: Re: How Democratic is Uganda? (Feature)
In a message dated 5/27/2003 12:09:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "In addition, dubious police powers like those conferred in the 2001 Suppression of Terrorism Bill, have led to widespread abuses by the army and security services, according to human rights groups. These include torture and arbitrary detention of dissidents in illegal "safe houses". Most certainly, for a country which wants to be seen by members of the international community as one which believes and champions democractic values, wide spread abuse by the amry and the security forces of political opponents, no doubt sends a totally negative message of political repressions to members of the International Community. Matek
ugnet_: Using Zambia's Tactics, Can Museveni be Forced Out?
Opinion - East African -Nairobi - KenyaMonday, May 26, 2003 FRANK NABWISO Using Zambia's Tactics, Can M-7 be Forced Out?Jaberi Bidandi Ssali, Uganda's long-serving Minister of Local Government who was last week sacked by President Yoweri Museveni, and John Tembo, the former Vice President of Zambia, have a number of similarities between them. The two men come from the Bantu language grouping. Both are also brave and down-to-earth men. Tembo, a retired army general, is the man who spearheaded the rejection of a third term for President Frederick Chiluba after the expiry of his two-term period from 1991 to 2001. Bidandi Ssali, who has been a politician since 1961, is becoming the chief spokesman of many Ugandans, who oppose Museveni extending his rule beyond 2006. At the time of its independence in 1964, Zambia had only six million people and little highly trained manpower. It had less than 1,000 people with "O" level certificate and less than 100 university graduates. Kaunda's monumental contribution to Zambia included acceleration of university education and turning Zambians into liberal-minded persons with a strong dose of pan-Africanism. Another unique factor is Zambia's big number of urban dwellers. Besides Lusaka, the capital city, there are six major towns on the Zambian copperbelt, ie Ndola, Luanshya, Chingola, Kitwe, Mufulira and Chilababombune. These mining towns have always played a determinant role in Zambian politics. Kaunda himself graduated into a skilled political organiser on the copperbelt, and Chiluba was for a long time in charge of the Zambian Confederation of Trade Unions. Some analysts of Zambian politics now argue that it is the liberal-mindedness of the Zambian people in politics, plus the large number of urban dwellers, that contributed to the transformation of the country into a multiparty state in 1991. It is further argued that after Zambians had liberated themselves from Kaunda's one-party politics and other dictatorial tendencies, they could not allow Chiluba to go the same direction. However, a lot of credit should be given to Tembo for coming out so courageously to oppose Chiluba. Such courage is not common in Africa, especially when it involves one knowing that he or she will lose a vice-presidential job, as Tembo did, or a ministerial one in the case of Bidandi Ssali. Unlike Zambia, however, Uganda started well at independence in 1962. Uganda's economy was strong and it had a well-developed civil service, trained by British colonialists. In addition, Uganda had a big number of intellectuals, thanks to the presence of Makerere University, which had evolved from a technical school established in 1922. But Uganda did not get a strong dose of pan-Africanism during the Obote I regime in 1962-71. Instead, the ugly face of tribalism persisted. And when Idi Amin replaced Obote in 1971 through a military coup d'etat, the Ugandan economy collapsed altogether. Even the Obote II regime from 1980 to 1985 failed to improve the economy and to sweep its political arena. Indeed, it could not settle down in the saddles of power, because Yoweri Museveni's National Resistance Movement had already launched its guerrilla war. And up to now, Uganda has not yet stabilised. Since 1986, the Museveni government has been fighting all sorts of rebel groups which have been springing from time to time, including the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) in northern Uganda led by Joseph Kony. Lastly, Uganda is predominantly a rural state. The majority of Ugandans (over 80 per cent) are peasant farmers, most of them women. These are the people that one has to transform before there can be revolutionary changes. These are also the people that Museveni has been focussing on in his campaigns to retain political power. In brief, therefore, the socio-economic and political terrain in Uganda is not similar to that of Zambia. And that is where Bidandi Ssali's problems arise. The Museveni era has increased tribalism and sectarianism in the country, so it is still difficult for genuine nationalists to emerge and be listened to. Moreover, Museveni is still the blue-eyed boy of the IMF, World Bank, the Western countries in general, and pseudo-investors. They want him to remain in power so that they can exploit Uganda more. Additionally, both Ugandan intellectuals and the middle class are too fragile to cause serious political changes. Many parliamentarians do not see their role as being to ensure accountability of the government to the people. Instead, they see their role as being to support whatever Museveni's government says. It is only Museveni and the army who can cause significant changes in the politics of Uganda. But this might not be possible because of Museveni's control over the army and his ethnic connections with the top soldiers. It is difficult to see how Bidandi Ssali will win such a difficult war. But as some people say, politics is a game of many possibilities and anything can happen in
ugnet_: Re: How Democratic is Uganda? (Feature)
In a message dated 5/27/2003 12:09:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Without liberating parties first there is no way the referendum could be free and fair," explains Ssemogerere. "And anyway it is wrong in principle. These fundamental rights are not to be decided by the majority. The right to associate holds even if only one person wants to exercise that right." I tend to aggree with this observation. Matek
ugnet_: Bush Wants East Africa to Allow GM Foods
Regional- East African -Nairobi - KenyaMonday, May 26, 2003 Bush Wants East Africa to Allow GM FoodsBy KEVIN J. KELLEY SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT THE US is pressing East African countries to accept imports of genetically modified (GM) foods and to move forward with the production of their own GM crops. President George W. Bush and the top US trade official, Robert Zoellic, both argued last week that African countries could enhance their food security if barriers to GM farm products were removed. Africas agricultural productivity could be dramatically increased through use of "new high-yield bio-crops," Bush said in a speech on May 21. The American president blamed the European Union for impeding US efforts to promote biotechnology agriculture in Africa. Citing an EU moratorium on approval of genetically modified foods, Bush said, "this has caused many African nations to avoid investing in biotechnologies for fear that their products will be shut out of European markets." Mr Zoellic, the US Trade Representative, pointed specifically to Ugandas refusal to allow tests of a genetically modified banana designed to resist disease. Half of Ugandas banana crop has been destroyed during the past 20 years by fungal diseases and root-eating worms. Preliminary work on a GM banana potentially immune to these threats has been carried out at a laboratory in Belgium. But the Ugandan government, worried about the EUs reaction, has not permitted scientists to conduct field tests of the banana in Uganda. Kenya appears more receptive to claims that biotech agriculture can help prevent famine by increasing crops resistance to drought and disease. Kenyan agricultural researchers are reportedly experimenting with GM versions of maize, sweet potatoes, cassava and cotton. And Agriculture Minister Kipruto Kirwa has said that the government would embrace biotechnology to increase food production. But at a summit of the seven poorest countries held in Nairobi last month, Kenya's position on GM foods was strongly criticised, with delegates from other African countries expressing suspicion that Kenya's position was influenced by the US biotechnology giant, Monsanto, which they said had "an unholy, secretive relationship with leading researchers at the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (Kari)." A leading Zambian biochemist, Dr Mwananyanda Lewanika, said that this suspicion was fuelled by the fact that the Biotechnology Trust Africa was funded by Monsanto and that Kenyan scientists had criticised the Zambian government on the position it took on GM foods during the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg last year. A report carried by Knight Ridder, a US news agency, in January said that Kenyan scientists have been investigating whether GM maize imported from a research centre in Mexico could withstand the effects of the stem borer, a pest that destroys 400,000 tonnes of Kenyan maize per year. Kenya's Assistant Environment Minister, Prof Wangari Maathai, however, said that the circumstances under which Kari researchers developed and released some genetically modified crops two years ago were still unexplained. The Greens lobby in Europe says that the aggressive campaign to have African countries accept GM foods, even though their safety was questionable, was part of a conspiracy to cripple the ability of poor countries to feed themselves. "This conspiracy has taken the form of the introduction of GM seeds," said Ms Christine Andela, a delegate from Cameroon at the Nairobi summit. "Propagated by gene giants, Monsanto, Syngenta, Dupont and Bayer," she said, "such seeds are fast reducing Africas genetic diversity that is crucial to food security and food sovereignty." The Greens recalled the proclamations of US Senator Hubert Humphrey at the height of the controversy surrounding the US' GM food aid to Zambia. Humphrey said: "to get people to lean on you and be dependent on you in terms of their co-operation with you, it seems to me that food dependence would be terrific." They hailed Zambians for rejecting GM food aid and for subjecting recommendations made by the World Bank and the IMF to a national debate. In July 2002, both Zambia and Zimbabwe said that in spite of a major food crisis in both countries, neither would accept GM aid (maize in particular) as part of international humanitarian assistance. Zimbabwe subsequently said it could accept GM food aid, provided that it was milled prior to distribution, but Zambia said in October that its total ban on the importation of GM foods would stand. In Kenya, the US news agency said that officials ensured that the experimental GM crops remained isolated from non-modified varieties and did not make their way to the market. In 2001, the US donated 94,000 tonnes of maize and 19,300 tonnes of corn-soy milk to alleviate hunger in drought-stricken parts of Kenya. About one-third of the US maize crop and 80 per cent of US soybeans are grown from
ugnet_: Germany clears way for possible EU Congo mission
Germany clears way for possible EU Congo mission BRUSSELS, May 26 (Reuters) - Germany has dropped objections to a possible European Union peacekeeping mission in Congo, making a first military operation in Africa by the 15-nation bloc more likely, diplomats said on Monday. EU foreign ministers said last week they would consider sending troops to support an emergency U.N. force in eastern Congo, where inter-ethnic fighting has killed hundreds and made thousands homeless and hungry. EU diplomats said Berlin was initially cool to the request by U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, arguing that Congo was a long way from Europe, a difficult military challenge and a conflict on which there was no agreed EU foreign policy. But Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer told EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana last Friday that while Germany was unlikely to participate, it would not block such action, the diplomats said. Solana is expected to make a recommendation to the next EU foreign ministers' meeting in Luxembourg on June 16 after receiving a report from a French military reconnaissance mission in Congo's Bunia region, and a more detailed request from Annan. Paris has said it is willing to send peacekeepers to the former Belgian colony only as part of a multinational force. France would probably be the lead nation in a brigade-sized European force that would likely include some British troops but would not need to use NATO military assets, the sources said. Solana would look to Nordic EU nations with experience of robust U.N. peacekeeping operations to round out the force. Belgium would not send troops because of colonial sensitivities but could help with logistics. The EU is building a rapid reaction force of up to 60,000 troops for tasks from peacekeeping to separating warring parties and launched its first military mission last month with a force of just 350 in the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia.
ugnet_: Gov't Seeks Damages From US Over Terror Alerts
"Such legislation carry with it a great potential for misuse by corrupt, dictatorial or retrogressive regimes, especially in the developing world to silence alternative political opinion, limit the freedom of _expression_ and impede human rights work," he said." Gov't Seeks Damages From US Over Terror Alerts The Nation (Nairobi) May 26, 2003 Posted to the web May 27, 2003 Kevin Kelley And Muriithi Muriuki Nairobi Kenya has asked the US government to compensate it for losses suffered from recent terrorism alerts. Trade and Industry Minister Mukhisa Kituyi told US officials at a meeting in Washington DC that Kenya was being threatened with attacks by international terrorists because of its friendship with their country. "We are not going to abandon our friendship with America. But we do need financial help to ameliorate the impact of the terrorist threat on our tourism sector," Mr Kituyi told Assistant Secretary of State Walter Kansteiner on Thursday. Mr Kansteiner, the State Department's top official on African affairs, replied that he would consider the request. In a warning updated on May 16, the United States urged its citizens to defer all non-essential travel to Kenya at that time. The minister was due to leave on Thursday night after a 10-day visit that he described as "extremely productive". In meetings at World Bank headquarters in Washington, Mr Kituyi was formally notified that Kenya will soon be receiving $100 million (Sh7 billion) in grants from the institution. Meanwhile, people convicted of terrorism face a life sentence if a new Bill becomes law. The Suppression of Terrorism Bill, 2003, published by in Kenya Gazette, details measures for the detection and prevention of terrorist activities in the country. But an East African Law Society official criticised the Bill for violating the universal principle of human rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights of which Kenya is a signatory. Mr Otiende Amolo said the proposed law flouted constitutional protections guaranteed by the Constitution. "Such legislation carry with it a great potential for misuse by corrupt, dictatorial or retrogressive regimes, especially in the developing world to silence alternative political opinion, limit the freedom of _expression_ and impede human rights work," he said. Mr Amolo said the offences created in the Bill are already covered by penal statutes such as the Penal Code and the Public Health Act.
ugnet_: The Museveni era has increased tribalism and sectarianism in the country
Hear hear hear YEA ALL !! [ Geninuine nationalist can , should and often do emerge even in spite of the enviroment now pertaining in Yoweri Museveni Uganda. However, we must at all times watch out for "fifth columinst" who are in cahoots with our oppressors ( the MI6, CIA e.t.c) and whose goal is to perpectually subjugate us. Great African liberator like , Malcolm X , have often warned us of the HOUSE NEGRO!!! Matek The Museveni era has increased tribalism and sectarianism in the country, so it is still difficult for genuine nationalists to emerge and be listened to. Moreover, Museveni is still the blue-eyed boy of the IMF, World Bank, the Western countries in general, and pseudo-investors. They want him to remain in power so that they can exploit Uganda more. Additionally, both Ugandan intellectuals and the middle class are too fragile to cause serious political changes. Many parliamentarians do not see their role as being to ensure accountability of the government to the people. Instead, they see their role as being to support whatever Museveni's government says. It is only Museveni and the army who can cause significant changes in the politics of Uganda. But this might not be possible because of Museveni's control over the army and his ethnic connections with the top soldiers. It is difficult to see how Bidandi Ssali will win such a difficult war. But as some people say, politics is a game of many possibilities and anything can happen in Africa. Dr Frank Nabwiso is a Member of Parliament for Kagoma constituency
ugnet_: UN Report on Ugandan Democracy
How Democratic is Uganda? (Feature) UN Integrated Regional Information Networks NEWSMay 27, 2003 Posted to the web May 27, 2003 Kampala [This report does not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations] It is 16 years since president Yoweri Museveni, having just seized power in a military coup, promised an end to dictatorship in Uganda. The tired, war-weary Ugandans could have been forgiven for not believing him. His coup was the fourth since 1971 and came at the end of an epidemic of civil strife and systematic state terror. Sixteen years on, controversy is raging over whether Museveni's promise to restore democracy was sincere, or simply "hollow talk". No-one doubts that life for many Ugandans has improved since Museveni's National Resistance Movement (NRM) took power. The country's economy has expanded faster than any other in Africa; education and health services are improving; Uganda is the only country in Africa to have stemmed the tide of new HIV infections. CIVIL RIGHTS Yet in spite of these achievements, analysts say it is unclear whether Uganda has improved its civil rights record. Presidential and parliamentary elections were held as promised, yet many Ugandans feel these have been compromised by the ruling elite's tendency to stifle opposition. In addition, dubious police powers like those conferred in the 2001 Suppression of Terrorism Bill, have led to widespread abuses by the army and security services, according to human rights groups. These include torture and arbitrary detention of dissidents in illegal "safe houses". Museveni's recent insistence that the constitution be changed to allow him to run for a third term has called into question his stated commitment to democracy. Uganda currently has three main opposition parties - the Democratic Party (DP), the Uganda People's Congress (UPC), headed by exiled former president Milton Obote, and the Reform Agenda (RA). All of them are outlawed. If they try to hold gatherings, private or public, they are dispersed by police. Two weeks ago a graduation party for the head of the DP's youth wing was broken up by police firing shots into the air. "It was a peaceful meeting in a private home", DP president Paul Ssemogerere told IRIN. RESTRICTIONS ON PARTIES To be allowed to operate, the government says the parties have to register under the 2002 Political Parties and Organisations Act (PPOA). Yet the act has been criticised for the draconian restrictions it places on parties, leaving them as mere pressure groups. Amongst other things, it forbids them to front candidates to campaign in presidential or parliamentary elections, or to have an office outside the capital. For this reason, it was challenged by the parties in Uganda's Constitutional Court and in March, the court ruled in their favour. Central to the government's defence of the restrictions was the often-repeated claim that the NRM is not a party but a meritocratic "system of government". NRM members are all elected by the people and competition for public office is open to all, so there is no autocratic one-party-state. This the court rejected. "The NRM's claim not to be a party is a deception," Ssemogerere told IRIN. "We have always said it and it has been proved by the court judgement. This was a landmark decision." All senior party figures agree that this means they can operate without having to register until the PPOA is amended. Yet efforts to do so have been stopped by police. Uganda Attorney General Francis Ayume told IRIN that this was because they still have to register. "The requirement to register is a constitutional requirement", he says. "Even if the act was not there, they would still have to register." Ayume says the parties know full well that they can register and ignore the two disputed sections of the act that the court overturned, but he believes they are just trying to gain political capital. "They are free to gather but how do we know that they are gathering for lawful purposes?", he asks. "We go to the registry. If they would just register the police would have no business with them." Ayume is appealing against the court decision and the case is still being heard. The government also points to the 1995 referendum on the new constitution for Uganda, which showed overwhelming support for the continuation of the NRM system. But Uganda's political organisations say it was flawed. "Without liberating parties first there is no way the referendum could be free and fair," explains Ssemogerere. "And anyway it is wrong in principle. These fundamental rights are not to be decided by the majority. The right to associate holds even if only one person wants to exercise that right." James Rwanyarare, chairman of the UPC, told IRIN that "the constitutional process was drafted by NRM sympathisers". "We tried to have our input but we were beaten up and
ugnet_: Re: The Museveni era has increased tribalism and sectarianism in the country
Matek could you repost the whole article with source and authur if posible please. Thank you Toro. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 6:16 PM Subject: The Museveni era has increased tribalism and sectarianism in the country Hear hear hear YEA ALL !![ Geninuine nationalist can , should and often do emerge even in spite of the enviroment now pertaining in Yoweri Museveni Uganda. However, we must at all times watch out for "fifth columinst" who are in cahoots with our oppressors ( the MI6, CIA e.t.c) and whose goal is to perpectually subjugate us. Great African liberator like , Malcolm X , have often warned us of the HOUSE NEGRO!!!Matek The Museveni era has increased tribalism and sectarianism in the country, so it is still difficult for genuine nationalists to emerge and be listened to. Moreover, Museveni is still the blue-eyed boy of the IMF, World Bank, the Western countries in general, and pseudo-investors. They want him to remain in power so that they can exploit Uganda more. Additionally, both Ugandan intellectuals and the middle class are too fragile to cause serious political changes. Many parliamentarians do not see their role as being to ensure accountability of the government to the people. Instead, they see their role as being to support whatever Museveni's government says. It is only Museveni and the army who can cause significant changes in the politics of Uganda. But this might not be possible because of Museveni's control over the army and his ethnic connections with the top soldiers. It is difficult to see how Bidandi Ssali will win such a difficult war. But as some people say, politics is a game of many possibilities and anything can happen in Africa. Dr Frank Nabwiso is a Member of Parliament for Kagoma constituency
ugnet_: Fresh tribal fighting erupts in Congo's Bunia
"Both Hema and Lendu militias have been used as proxy fighting forces by Rwanda and Uganda, who got mixed up in Congo's war since its start in 1998" Fresh tribal fighting erupts in Congo's Bunia KINSHASA, May 27 (Reuters) - Rival tribal militia clashed on Tuesday in the Democratic Republic of Congo's northeastern town of Bunia, despite a truce to halt ethnic bloodletting that has left hundreds of people dead this month, U.N. officials said. U.N. commander Colonel Daniel Vollot told Reuters from Bunia that five Lendu militiamen were killed and three Hema wounded in the fighting. A U.N. spokeswoman said a 14-year old boy covered with burns had arrived at Bunia's overstretched hospital on Tuesday, saying his parents had been killed by unidentified militiamen and his village, six km (four miles) to the south, had been burned down. Militias linked to the Lendu and Hema tribes have long battled for supremacy in the mineral-rich Ituri area, which has suffered most of the worst atrocities in Congo's 4-1/2 year war. The U.N. mission in Bunia found more than 300 bodies after drugged fighters armed with machetes, spears and arrows went on a killing spree earlier this month. Many of the corpses had parts missing after what some suspect to be cannibal butchery. A ceasefire came into effect on May 17 but sporadic fighting has continued, threatening to derail a fragile political accord for a transitional government aimed at ending Congo's war. The U.N. has called for a multinational force to intervene. Its small mission in Bunia, with neither the mandate nor the firepower to stop the violence. Britain, France and South Africa have said they would consider sending troops. Both Hema and Lendu militias have been used as proxy fighting forces by Rwanda and Uganda, who got mixed up in Congo's war since its start in 1998. Aid agencies say tribal fighting over land and resources in the Ituri region has killed about 50,000 people, mainly civilians, since June 1999, and forced about 500,000 to flee the province. 05/27/03 14:52 ET
ugnet_: Re: [FedsNet] Engalabi Crocs ve gators
Mr. Odong P'Duny: I found your note very interesting, and here is why. As you may have seen from the urls I posted in my last note, there are only 23 extant 'crocodilian' species. They are divided into 3 families: Alligatoridae, Crocodylidae and Gavialidae. All the 8 species in the Alligatoridae family are confined to SE USA, E. China, Central S. America. That is none have ever been recorded in Africa. Your claim that about an Acholi gator would be of enormous interest to the scientific community, if it turned out to be correct. You can help us get to the bottom of this by first telling us what the the local name(s) of this creature is (are), and what name(s) you have for the 'regular' crocodile. And then give as full a description of the 'gator' as posible, especially theappearanceof its head. Better yet, if you know of any reference(s) about this, I'd be most interested to peruse it. At this time my conjecture is that you are mistaking an immature 'regular' croc (i.e. Nilecrocodile) for a gator. Another conjecture is that perhaps we might be dealing with another species, but even this is improbable, given what is known about the ecology of these beasties. Anyway, here goes: "Real" crocodiles belong to the family crocodylidae. This one has 14 species, 3 of which call Africa home: the 'regular' croc (Crocodylus niloticus) or Nile croc, the Slender mouthed croc (C. cataphractus) and the so called African dwarf croc (Osteolaemus tetraspis). The Nile croc, the adult of whichaverages 5m (ca 15 feet) in length, is the most cosmopolitan of African crocs, and is the only one to have left the continent -- being found on the westerncoast of the island of Madagascar. There is considerable overlap in the distribution of the Slender mouthed and the African dwarf crocs. But both are essentially Western African beasts. Their easternmost range is the DRC, but does not include even the tip of Uganda. In fact, theEastern range of the Dwarf (Osteolaemus = ='bony throat') does not even approach the Ugandan border. Yet it is this dwarf comes closest to your description of the Acholi gator growing upto 1.5m. I have got some pics of the dwarf croc somewhere and an interesting (Nile) croc and its survival ability/instinct from croc hunters in the early 1900's that I'll relate at another date. But if you cann't wait for the story, consult some of the earlier issues of the the Uganda Journal. In the meantime, check this out:what is a croc?http://exn.ca/Stories/2001/08/20/52.asp Ssemakula ps:I think weought move this thread over to Ugandanet. Original Message Follows From: odong Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [FedsNet] Engalabi (was:I'm Not Personal Property, says Bidandi) Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 19:52:10 -0700 (PDT) Adwong Semakula, Im certainly not 'mufti' on this 'animal planet' issues. But your assertion that aligators are not found in Africa needs more clarification. To the best on my knowledge, in Acholi we have this 1-1.5m long reptile that crawls near streams, wells and springs. At first glance you would think it is a young crocodile. I have grown up calling these reptiles alligators. Perhaps that was a misnomer. I do not know the American cousin of the aligator, but I guess they are much bigger, if I remember well the recent documentary on reptiles. Adwong Semakula, what would you call these African cousins? Thanks, Odong P'Duny J Ssemakula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: A minor quibble. To the best of my knowledge, alligators are not known in Africa. However, their cousins, the crocodiles are, and they can grow to enormous sizes. Recently a six (6) foot long head was unearthed in the neighborhood of Chad. MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
ugnet_: International Crisis Group Calls for New Approach to Disarmament and Reintegrati
International Crisis Group Calls for New Approach to Disarmament and Reintegration UN Integrated Regional Information Networks May 27, 2003 Posted to the web May 27, 2003 Nairobi A new approach is needed to the disarmament and reintegration of Hutu rebels in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), according to a new report by the International Crisis Group (ICG) issued on Friday. The report, entitled "Rwandan Hutu Rebels in the Congo: a New Approach to Disarmament and Reintegration", states that the current mechanism for disarmament of armed groups through the UN Mission in the DRC (MONUC) is a "failure". It calls on the Security Council "to rethink the operation urgently" and reinforce MONUC's mandate to allow it to use force in self-defence and in defence of civilians. MONUC itself must also speed up its troop deployments in eastern DRC. Efforts by IRIN to obtain a reaction from MONUC to the report have been unsuccessful. "The disarmament and repatriation plan to be carried out by MONUC is fundamentally flawed," Francois Grignon, the ICG's Central Africa project director, said. "It treats disarmament as strictly a security issue, and a Congolese issue. The internal Rwandan political dimension has not received serious attention." According to ICG, MONUC has disarmed and repatriated a few hundred Hutu fighters out of 15,000 to 20,000 rebels spread over 150,000 sq km, and the main Hutu rebel group to be disarmed, the Forces democratiques pour la liberation du Rwanda (FDLR), has many allies among the warlords and militias of eastern DRC. "And until Rwanda moves towards greater political openness and reconciliation, they will not disarm," ICG stated. "The fact that Rwanda and the DRC have so far kept their military options open further diminishes prospects for disarmament and demobilisation of Rwandan rebels." Disarmament by force is not an option, according to ICG. What is needed are stronger diplomatic efforts, with Rwanda in particular and between Rwanda and the DRC, to address the security, political and economic concerns of the non-genocidaire FDLR rank and file. "The recent violence in Ituri, where hundreds of people have died in horrific circumstances, illustrates MONUC's impotence," ICG stated. "MONUC needs the urgent deployment of a rapid reaction force to restore order in Ituri and prevent further massacres of the civilians it is already mandated to protect. It also needs military capacity to deter the Hutu rebels from destabilising Rwanda and to back up renewed diplomatic efforts for voluntary disarmament." With the installation of a transitional government in Kinshasa planned for June, ICG has urged the UN Security Council to "seize the opportunity presented by the creation of a new government to give a new dynamism to disarmament efforts". "The international community as a whole must convince the Rwandan government that the solution to ending the spiral of violence is its own political opening, and a genuine national debate on the country's future," it added.
ugnet_: WHAT IS A CONSTITUTIONAL REFRENDUM?
Netters I am going to post this one on a large forum for I need some inside story from as many scholars out there as possible. During my observation of the politics as it goes on in Africa we have got some very new political menus that some of us the old folks need a push up to understand what they mean. And my question is regarding themenu which has just taken place in Rwanda. Rwanda as a state has gone through a very expensive exercise to do some thing called " A Constitutional Referendum" And my questions are actually very few:- 1) What is a Constitutional referendum? 2) Who has a right to call for a Constitutional Referendum? 3) How often is a Constitutional referendum called in a Democratic/non-Democratic country? 4) How binding are the results of a Constitutional referendum, for example Although the Government of Rwanda has done this exercise, it is still very soon going to call for an election, so if this election is called and the citizenry elects another government,are the results of this referendumstill binding or not? I am going to leave it at that for now, I hope to learn very extensively from all your input. Edward Mulindwa Toronto The Mulindwas Communication Group"With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy" Groupe de communication Mulindwas "avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie"
ugnet_: PLEASE DO NOT SHRUG OFF THE NEXT RWANDA
Canada's offer to help Congo is puny, says security analyst PETER LANGILLE. It's time to activate a special force we proposed after the last bloodbathByPETER LANGILLE Tuesday, May 27, 2003 Few places on Earth need help more than the Democratic Republic of Congo. Civilians, including thousands of panicked refugees, are at the mercy of armed, drugged militias, which appear intent on slaughter. In early May, Oxfam appealed to the UN Security Council to deploy a rapid-reaction, peace-enforcement effort. UN commanders in the present mission have cabled New York daily, pleading for reinforcements. Sound familiar? Many compare the situation to Rwanda. Already this messy five-year war has led to the deaths of at least three million people. It may soon get worse. Fighting has intensified in the northeast with the departure of the Ugandan army, which left behind arms so that their proxy, the Hema tribe, could continue battling the Rwandan-supported Lendu tribe. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has asked UN member states to provide troops and deploy an emergency international force through a "coalition of the willing." France will, if supported, lead the coalition, and Canada has said it could contribute two military transport planes or perhaps 200 soldiers. It's reported that the Prime Minister's Office is studying the feasibility of another deployment, given our commitments of about 220 troops to diverse UN peace operations, 1,200 troops with NATO in Bosnia, and plans to send approximately 1,600 soldiers to Afghanistan later this summer. This isn't good enough. Canada could and should be doing more. Despite cutbacks, Canada retains a regular force of 19,500 soldiers in three brigade groups, augmented by 15,500 reserves, which provides a total force of 35,000 troops. The key question for the PMO is whether Canada's land force is really overstretched. Our total deployment abroad is 1,500 troops; assuming the need to train replacements and rotate personnel after six months abroad, as well as the need to provide rest and recuperation for those returning, it appears that 4,500 soldiers are already committed. Yet, even with the pending deployment to Afghanistan later in the summer of another 1,600 soldiers, the army retains substantive capacity. Why can't two battalions of mechanized (wheeled) infantry (approximately 1,200 troops) be sent to the Congo? Our government might also consider a mechanism designed specifically for such an emergency. Canada is one of 15 countries participating in the multinational Standby High Readiness Brigade (SHIRBRIG) for UN peace operations, which has been operational since 1999. After a relatively successful trial run monitoring the ceasefire between Eritrea and Ethiopia, the brigade was again declared available in January, 2002. The objective underlying the brigade's eight years of co-operative planning was to provide the UN with a jump-start, rapid deployment force of as many as 5,000 troops within 30 days notice (each participating state reserves the right to decide whether to deploy national personnel on a case-by-case basis). SHIRBRIG, unlike most national contributors, is a complete, self-sufficient brigade with its own headquarters, logistics and communications. The participating militaries are familiar with one another and work to common doctrine and standards. Deployments are limited to six months, making it essential to plan for replacements. The timing for Canada and the brigade may not be perfect, but it isn't bad. In December, the participating governments agreed that they would consider "robust" peace operations (making a jump to operations with authorization for the limited use of force). Regrettably, a robust response may soon be necessary to prevent further violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo. In January, Canada assumed the chair and presidency of the brigade. Retired lieutenant-general Ray Crabbe heads its small staff in Winnipeg, and one of the office's objectives is to raise the brigade's profile. Officials in Foreign Affairs and National Defence were aware that a request to deploy the brigade would likely be forthcoming within the year -- and that it might be difficult to refuse. According to polls, Canadians support further participation in UN peace operations. Having once been a world leader and major contributor to peacekeeping, Canada now ranks 31st in contributions to UN operations. But given Congo's crisis, it's unlikely that the Canadian people would be satisfied with sending military observers or even 200 troops. The Canadian Forces can help in the Democratic Republic of Congo. We have options and resources. And some of us recall that the brigade was developed after the Rwandan genocide as part of a Canadian, Dutch and Danish initiative to develop a UN rapid-deployment capacity that might avert the next bloodbath. Peter Langille is senior research associate and human security
ugnet_: Wholl have a longer political life, Bidandi and Kategaya or Museveni?
Ear to The Ground By Charles Onyango-Obbo Wholl have a longer political life, Bidandi and Kategaya or Museveni?May 28, 2003 Last week President Yoweri Museveni sacked long term buddy Mr Eriya Kategaya, who was First Deputy Premier and minister of Internal Affairs. Along with Mr Kategaya, he dropped minister for Local Government Bidandi Ssali. The two men had been very vocal in their criticism of Mr Musevenis push to lift the two-terms limit for president in the constitution, and thus open the way for a leader to rule until he or she dies or is murdered by a rival for the sweet chair. Ethics and Integrity minister Miria Matembe, minister of State for Internal Affairs Sarah Kiyingi, and minister for Security Muruli Mukasa also went. Of course, Dr Speciosa Kazibwe had also resigned as Vice President, and Dr Gilbert Bukenya landed the job (you have to be a medical doctor to be VP in Musevenis Uganda, as indeed the late Dr Samson Kisekka was an educated medicine man too). It has been argued in the press that Mr Museveni could have learnt from the rout of former Kenya president Daniel arap Mois ruling Kenya African National Union (KANU) last December, to get rid of dissenters early before the 2006 elections. That way, unlike KANU, Movement-Museveni will have enough time to overcome the bleeding from a fall-out with top party members, and not be swept away by a united opposition as happened in Kenya. That is one of the good explanations for Mr Musevenis action but only as far as the events of the last year go. The comparison between Kenya and Uganda however leads us 12 years back to better understand events in Uganda today. Among other things, why didnt Mr Moi retire instead of trying to do a Museveni, and amend the constitution to allow him stand for another term? Well, apart from issues of age, the economic crisis in Kenya, and possibly a lingering peasant goodness of heart, Mr Moi didnt have the choice to stay on. The combined force of the opposition and civil society in Kenya had reached a critical level which would have made any attempt to cling on virtually impossible. How this political balance of forces came to favour civil society and anti-regime politics in Kenya gives us a glimpse into why Mr Museveni is making a try at perpetuating himself in State House. When the democracy wave swept the world after the fall of the collapse of the Soviet Bloc, many countries in Africa were forced to end one-party rule, liberalise their economies, and hold free elections. None of these changes that happened in Kenya between 1990-92, resulting in the countrys first post-independence multiparty election improved conditions. Repression continued, corruption went out of control and liberalisation didnt reverse economic decline. One of the conclusions that the international communitywanted to see change reached was that there would be no improvements in Kenya, unless Mr Moi and KANUs power was weakened, allowing for a hopefully more enlightened opposition to take power. Therefore a lot of effort went into supporting civil society organisations, that would undermine the power of the KANU regime. Thus in Kenya, even environmental organisations were very political. To attract donor funds for your NGO, even if it was a childrens one, it had to have a political agenda of sorts. The result was that by 2000, Kenya had what was reckoned to be the largest civil society sector in Africa after South Africa most of them politically active to force KANU to change by weakening its power. The response of the Moi government, realising it was losing the grassroots battle was to try and stop funding to civil society organisations by having it channelled through the government. Most donors didnt go along with that, and responded more by cutting back funding. In short, a lot of international donor money, and diplomatic work went into weakening Mr Moi and KANU. In Uganda, after Mr Museveni took over in 1986, the opposite happened. The international community began from the assumption that Mr Museveni and his government were enlightened, honest, and wanted the best for the country. The problem was that the government institutions were too weak to deliver those good results. The international community came up with millions of dollars to give civil society groups to help government do the job. Thus while in Kenya civil society was funded essentially to undermine Mr Moi, in Uganda it was created in some instances, and supported in most instances so it might be an effective sub-contractor for the government. Thus while in Kenya being anti-Moi almost ensured you donor support, in Uganda being anti-Museveni ensured that you would not get the money. The cash was in being a partner to help the government. While in Kenya international funding was withdrawn to weaken Mr Moi, in Uganda it was increased to bolster the Museveni government. Even more dramatically, while in Kenya the donors took off with their
ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech
Hate malwa groups if you fear free speechThis That by Henry Ochieng May 28, 2003 That notable man of history George Bernard Shaw left us with many good things of which the following statement has recently interested me: All censorships, he said, exist to prevent any one from challenging current conceptions and existing institutions. All progress is initiated by challenging current conceptions, and executed by supplanting existing institutions. Consequently the first condition of progress is the removal of censorships. Three honourable men and a woman were left suddenly jobless in last weeks cynical and ruthless cabinet shake-up. An emerging believer in the evil doctrine of censorship, Charles Rwomushana, has since christened Mr Eriya Kategaya, who was among these four people, the leader of a malwa group. Obviously, Mr Rwomushana, who seems to have been given the job of running dark, cloak and dagger operations against the responsible Mr Kategaya is taking himself a little too seriously. Before the man (a political spy in State House) runs his mouth off into further scandal, an education into malwa politics might just be in order. In the first instance malwa happens to be a nutritious beverage, which when consumed in reasonable quantities can nourish the human body. The stuff has only been known to make a nuisance of itself when quaffed in liberal and reckless abandon. Only those who are ignorant of this fact make the inaccurate assessment that it is belittling to consume malwa even though it is more popular among the lower income earners of our society. This is a beverage that has managed to bring out one of the more impressive management capabilities of our people. Every malwa group, as we must be aware is pretty well organised. They have a chairman, secretary, treasurer, chief whip etc etc. These officers have well defined duties in enforcing the individual constitutions of their groups. At the daily sittings, as the members of those groups call their gatherings, a quorum is realised on or about the expected time. An agenda for the days discussion is normally introduced by the chair, who then allows each and every member of the group an opportunity to contribute. It is all done in a democratic and transparent way without discrimination. The spirit of freedom of speech and thought is very much alive in the malwa groups whether the issue being discussed is weighty or frivolous. An attack on malwa groupings should be understood in light of what is happening in the countrys politics It is in times when the country, as now, is dangerously being edged towards tyranny, when those at the helm are frightened of principled disagreement that trampling on the willing opposition and removing the spirit of free speech and thought becomes a rather attractive proposition. In times like this we cannot be astonished by allegations that the Hotel Africana group are confusing or stampeding the people. It is not surprising because the only reason they are being labelled is because they are rightly plotting to mobilise the country against this devious third term project of President Yoweri Museveni,. No amount of below-the-belt barks from governments attack dogs can in these circumstances shock and awe the liberals. In fact, those who cannot contemplate that others are free to think must interest themselves in the provisions of Article 29 of the 1995 constitution. There they will learn that the freedom to speak, express oneself and associate with whomsoever one so wishes, is inherently guaranteed. Even the state, which yearns for the omniscient characteristic, cannot legally proscribe that right because it is not granted by the state. Of the various forms of tyranny, the sort that seeks to suffocate free thought and speech must be resisted with greater force because once a regime is allowed to control the minds of men, the men are helpless. The fact that Mr Kategaya, Mr Bidandi Ssali and Ms Miria Matembe, who were clearly sacked for resisting the third term project are being accused of betraying President Museveni, has to be considered in context. Appreciate this fact from the reasons the three advanced for differing irreconcilably with Mr Museveni on the third term project. They all said they are in opposition for the sake of the countrys political growth. With their eyes set on such lofty heights, it becomes far-fetched to say they betrayed somebody. Now, because President Museveni will not be caught swallowing intoxicating liquids, it is likely that he happily shares Mr Rwomushanas aversion to malwa. In this sense, using the malwa metaphor to disparage the betrayers fits perfectly in his new political vision where contradictions will be quickly clarified with a sacking. It is inconceivable then that the spirit of freely exchanging of ideas and thoughts, which thrives in the ubiquitous malwa drinking clubs across the country, can be tolerated in a National Resistance Movement (NRM) party
ugnet_: Re: [Mwananchi] The Nile: water conflicts
Netters To those who follow what I post, do you remember when I stated that the waters of Nile must be sold? Here we go now, it is very sad for all these factors are infront of us and inspite of our taking the time to put these proposals infront of you for a better deliberation, we are called people who are paid and work for Museveni some times Obote some times Iddi Amin some times Robert Mugaabe on and on. It is very dangerous for we have failed to fight for even a very single source of our own God Given income, and a man like Mugaabe shows up and instead of all of us as Africans to try and we clean up his well intentioned agenda we call him a sucker and a racist. It is interesting that these days due to my constant calling to end the murderes in East Congo I am these days being paid by the Hutus. But look here you dam Africans, yes you have read very many books and your heads are empty. I brought up this Nile Water issue long ago both in these forums and under a New Real Government of Uganda, and I was called a UPC supporter who must shut up. I am telling you today that River Nile is affecting allot of lives in North Africa, and in the end UN is going to set terms to use it, we are going to pay for that water. Just watch. I can not even believe that Iddi Amin was smarter for he wanted to dig a trench to pass that river in Moroto which would have decreased its height, we would have ended up having a control on the volume flowing out of our resources. Can you imagine if Israel was Uganda and Uganda was in Israel, how many litters would have we got a year? Africans let us look after our resources and let us use them. Em The Mulindwas Communication Group"With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy" Groupe de communication Mulindwas "avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie" - Original Message - From: caroline To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 4:30 PM Subject: [Mwananchi] The Nile: water conflicts The Nile: water conflicts IRIN From its major source at Lake Victoria in east-central Africa, the White Nile flows north through Uganda and crosses the border into Sudan. After a journey of several thousand kilometres, and in the dusty heat of Khartoum it eventually meets the Blue Nile which, by that time, has made the precipitous descent from the Ethiopian highlands. From the confluence of the White and Blue Niles, the river then continues to flow northwards through the desert, into Egypt and on to the Mediterranean Sea. Colonial-era agreements outdated Contained within those voluminous waters, stretching some 6,000 km through some of Africa's most arid lands, is a still largely untapped potential for the development of large swathes of the continent. According to the World Bank, the Nile River Basin is home to an estimated 160 million people, while almost 300 million live in the ten countries that share the Nile's waters. Within the next 25 years, population within the Basin is expected to double, adding to the increased demand for water generated by growth in industry and agriculture. In recent years, however, the use of the Nile's waters for development has become something of a bone of contention among the 10 countries that share its basin - Burundi, Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan and Egypt. The contention partly arises from two agreements signed during the colonial era - the 1929 Nile Water Agreement and the 1959 Agreement for the Full Utilization of the Nile - that gave Egypt and Sudan extensive rights over the river's use. The upstream countries, including the East African countries of Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania, have expressed concern over the long-standing arrangements, arguing the treaties have served to give Egypt unfair control over the use of the river's waters. None of the colonial treaties involved all the riparian countries and therefore, did not deal equitably with the interests of the upstream countries, they say. Regional analysts say that Egypt and Sudan, on the other hand, have been reluctant to renegotiate the treaties and this has, at times, strained relations between the upper- and lower-riparian nations. Recent UN figures highlight the problems of water scarcity in the region. Of 180 countries listed for water availability per person per year in the recently released World Water Development Report, Kenya is ranked 154th, Uganda 115th and Ethiopia 137th. The upstream countries of Egypt and Sudan are ranked 156th and 129th respectively. During the 1990s, attempts to resolve disagreements surrounding the Nile Basin and develop a regional partnership within which countries of the basin could equitably share the Nile's waters, got under way. However, real progress has been slow, and Kenyan, Ugandan and Tanzanian
Re: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech
Ssemakula At least Museveni loves Baganda, for now we are very powerful in Uganda. It does not matter what you say about him. This is a man who gave us the kingdoms back, he is soon giving us Federalism and he has killed very many Northerners who are the political problem of Uganda. And we must continue to be on the bus singing Museveni Oye !!! Ffe kasita twebaka. This is not a right time to abandon him. Em The Mulindwas Communication Group"With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy" Groupe de communication Mulindwas "avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie" - Original Message - From: J Ssemakula To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 8:03 PM Subject: Re: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech These days Mu7's maxim seems to be: "If I need your opinion, I'll give it to you". (who said that?) Original Message Follows From: "gook makanga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 23:21:15 + Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
ugnet_: Fighting in Volatile Ituri Province Displaces Thousands
a) "This agreement angered the government of Uganda, which is engaged in a power struggle with Rwanda over the region. Each country claims to be acting in the interest of their own security" b) Ituri province has been subject to inter-ethnic fighting between the Hema and Lendu communities. The former are cattle raisers, while the latter are farmers. BOTH GROUPS WERE BACKED AND ARMED BY UGANDA. Fighting in Volatile Ituri Province Displaces Thousands African Church Information Service May 26, 2003 Posted to the web May 27, 2003 Callie Long Ituri Fighting between rival militia groups in Ituri province in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has displaced more than 22,000 people. The Lutheran World Federation (LWF) in Goma, a member of Action by Churches Together (ACT) International (a humanitarian agency), has confirmed that displaced villagers have been pouring into Beni territory from Ituri. They have now reached about 22,515. According to information from a church in Beni, Eglise du Christ au Congo (ECC), this number includes 10,132 children, 7,494 women and 4,434 men, mainly from Bunia, Mungbalo and Drodro. LWF and ECC say the displaced people are in dire need of humanitarian assistance. Ituri province has been subject to inter-ethnic fighting between the Hema and Lendu communities. The former are cattle raisers, while the latter are farmers. Both groups were backed and armed by Uganda. Violence erupted in May 2002 as Ugandan troops left Ituri province due to international pressure. The situation seemed to have stabilised in January this year as the Army of Congolese Patriots (APC) of Thomas Lubanga (a Hema) took full control of Bunia town. Later, Lubanga signed a bilateral agreement with the Rwanda backed RCD-Goma for military assistance. This agreement angered the government of Uganda, which is engaged in a power struggle with Rwanda over the region. Each country claims to be acting in the interest of their own security. Last February, Ugandan troops expelled the Union Patriotique Congolaise (UPC) from Bunia town and restored a fragile peace in the town. However, Rwanda balked at the thought of Ugandan control over Ituri province, employing the help of the international community to force Ugandan army out of the province. Again, Ituri was left without a proper interim organised armed force to maintain stability. The 200 policemen sent from Kinshasa were not up to the task. Thomas Lubanga again moved in, attacking Bunia. Meanwhile, four other independent militias had formed. The fighting in Bunia was uncontrolled and killings and atrocities reached an unprecedented level. Thousands of people were once again displaced. And now, just when different political factions are meeting in Kinshasa to try and unify the country, following resolutions of the Global and Inclusive Agreement signed in South Africa in March 2003, renewed conflict has beset Ituri.
Re: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech
Mulindwa, So every muganda should sing, Akalulu ka Museveni yekka!. y From: Mulindwa Edward [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 20:11:47 -0400 Ssemakula At least Museveni loves Baganda, for now we are very powerful in Uganda. It does not matter what you say about him. This is a man who gave us the kingdoms back, he is soon giving us Federalism and he has killed very many Northerners who are the political problem of Uganda. And we must continue to be on the bus singing Museveni Oye !!! Ffe kasita twebaka. This is not a right time to abandon him. Em The Mulindwas Communication Group With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy Groupe de communication Mulindwas avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie - Original Message - From: J Ssemakula To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 8:03 PM Subject: Re: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech These days Mu7's maxim seems to be: If I need your opinion, I'll give it to you. (who said that?) Original Message Follows From: gook makanga Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 23:21:15 + -- Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech
Eh Munange Museveni musajja waffe. Em The Mulindwas Communication Group With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy Groupe de communication Mulindwas avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie - Original Message - From: Y Yaobang [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 11:04 PM Subject: Re: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech Mulindwa, So every muganda should sing, Akalulu ka Museveni yekka!. y From: Mulindwa Edward [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 20:11:47 -0400 Ssemakula At least Museveni loves Baganda, for now we are very powerful in Uganda. It does not matter what you say about him. This is a man who gave us the kingdoms back, he is soon giving us Federalism and he has killed very many Northerners who are the political problem of Uganda. And we must continue to be on the bus singing Museveni Oye !!! Ffe kasita twebaka. This is not a right time to abandon him. Em The Mulindwas Communication Group With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy Groupe de communication Mulindwas avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie - Original Message - From: J Ssemakula To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 8:03 PM Subject: Re: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech These days Mu7's maxim seems to be: If I need your opinion, I'll give it to you. (who said that?) Original Message Follows From: gook makanga Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ugnet_: Hate malwa groups if you fear free speech Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 23:21:15 + --- --- Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
ugnet_: THE FIGHTING IN CONGO
Fighting in Congo Ethnic violence has claimed thousands of lives in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the past few years. Sarah Left explains Tuesday May 27, 2003 What is happening in Congo? Rival ethnic factions in the country's Ituri province, near Uganda, have been taking part in a chaotic two-way slaughter that has left around 50,000 people dead since 1998. The latest town to attract attention is Ituri's capital, Bunia, where residents fled in fear of Hema and Lendu militias wielding machetes, spears and guns. The corpses of men, women and children lie rotting, burning and abandoned in Bunia's streets. The ethnic violence claimed approximately 800 lives in the town over two weeks. How did it come to this? The situation in Ituri must be seen in the context four and a half years of civil war in Congo, which has involved the armies of six African countries. As part of that war, soldiers from neighbouring Uganda exacerbated rivalries in Ituri by favouring one side over the other. When the Ugandan troops withdrew as part of a peace deal to end the larger civil war, local Hema and Lendu militias went to war with each other. What is the UN doing about the slaughter in Ituri? At the moment, very little. The UN secretary-general, Kofi Annan, has called for countries to contribute peacekeeping troops. Canada, France, Nigeria, Pakistan, South Africa and the UK have all expressed interest in the project, but so far no force has moved in to stop the fighting and support the small UN observer contingent already on the ground. How many people have died in the civil war? No one knows. Estimates range from 3.3 million to 4.7 million, with most succumbing to famine and disease. Why has the UN not intervened? Many would say that Congo simply lacks the strategic importance and oil reserves of Iraq, or the proximity of Kosovo and Bosnia. But there is also a pragmatic explanation: with whom would the UN side? Congo's government has limited reach in a deeply divided country nearly the size of western Europe. Even if UN troops stopped the slaughter in the short term, it would be a much tougher job to ensure security when the UN inevitably pulled out. Previous attempts by western governments to stabilise meltdown states in Africa - the US in Somalia, France in Rwanda - ended in disaster. One thing is certain: the current UN force of 4,000 in Congo is woefully inadequate to the task of protecting civilians in areas consumed by ethnic violence. If they had been in Bunia in force, lives could well have been saved. How did the civil war start? The Democratic Republic of the Congo - known as Zaire before former leader Laurent Kabila changed the name in 1997 (and not to be confused with neighbouring Congo-Brazzaville) - was ruled for over 30 years by Mobutu Sese Seko, a brutal dictator. Mobutu's grip on power was slipping nine years ago when a civil war in neighbouring Rwanda broke out. The Hutu, who make up the majority of the Rwandan population, began slaughtering the minority Tutsi. The genocidal murder of 800,000 Tutsis came to an end when Tutsi forces gained control of the country. The now outlawed Hutus fled to Zaire where they were sheltered by Mobutu. How did the Rwandan war spill over into Zaire? Rwanda - along with another neighbouring country, Uganda - wanted to round up the Hutu rebels and bring them back, but the government felt it could not simply invade Zaire without a better excuse. To cover up its actions, Rwanda and Uganda recruited Kabila to lead an indigenous revolt within Zaire to bring down Mobutu. The Rwandans and Ugandans felt that if Kabila won power, he would protect their countries by stamping out the Hutu rebels. What went wrong? Kabila was hailed as a conquering hero when he marched into Congo's capital, Kinshasa, in May 1997 to oust Mobutu. The people of Congo needed a change of leadership and hoped he would turn around the legacy of terror and corruption left behind by Mobutu. And Kabila's backers in Rwanda and Uganda felt they could now wage war on the Hutu rebels with his blessing. One year later, Kabila changed his mind about the Hutus and refused to force them back into Rwanda. The Rwandans and Ugandans abruptly switched sides and began to support rebels seeking to overthrow Kabila. For his part, Kabila courted support from Angola, Namibia and Zimbabwe, all of which had interests in using the vast nation of Congo for its own purposes. Angola wanted to fight the rebels from its own civil war who sheltered in Congo, and Zimbabwe was hoping to get rich off the mineral rights Kabila signed over. Has the civil war ended? The foreign armies have withdrawn, or mostly so, as the result of a peace deal signed in December. However, convincing unofficial militias - most importantly the Hutu Interehamwe from Rwanda - to cease the killing will prove far more difficult. It can be difficult to find out which, if any, foreign
