Netters,
While I am disappointed that Mu7 was not motivated by democracy, but was forced by donors etc to open political space -- which we all (UPC, DP, Reform Agenda, even some Movementists, etc) have all been passionate about; ultimately, IMHO, it is not important however how or why Mu7 came to this conclusion.
The fact is that, the Movement is now going to openly be a political party, but only one of several. What we need to do is make sure that it abides by the standards expected of political parties with respect to political opposition -- as must we.
The immediate history of African politics in these conditions is that political parties will be thrown into disarray, etc and that the Movement is going to win the next free and fair election, handsdown. Unless, political parties unite against it -- much easier said than done. For instance, personally, I'd be loathe to uniting with the UPC in any shape or form -- in fact, the stakes would have to be incredibly high for such a thing to happen. But, that's just me.
Anyhow, what needs to happen soon is for us to put forth our respective party's vision for the country and to educate the electorate accordingly.
Are we up to the task? Which party can more meaningfully accomodate, embrace, and promote the peoples aspirations -- politically, economically, etc etc? Who has the best plan to do the the job? Who has the clearest vision, who is ready to deal? Whom can we entrust our (hopefully federal) future with?
-- In case you missed it, lately Kigongo and others has been trying to move heaven and earth to clothe the big bad wolf (Movement) in a sheepskin, Mu7 has even discovered he has a cabinet, ceremonial threads are being rolled out for the top brass, etc etc
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Anne Mugisha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [FedsNet] Opening Political Space
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 19:15:08 -0500
Chris,
You certainly have your eye on the ball. My applause is very measured as I
mentioned in the article. Note that it would be rather contradictory to
demand the opening of political space and once it is put on the table you
refuse to grab it. I say you grab it and immedaitely launch into asking for
its complete implementation and also continue demanding for whats remaining.
I sincerely believe that if the threat of war can solve Uganda's problems
this is always better than full scale war. But of course I also know that
we are dealing with a wily and deceptive leader. So I applaud with that
knowledge.
Anne
Anne Mugisha
>From: "Chris Opoka-Okumu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [FedsNet] Opening Political Space
>Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 18:48:14 -0500
>
>Anne,
>
>I have just perused your opinion. My views are different. I think that
>Museveni has been boxed in. Col. Besigye's declaration that conditions for
>war exist in Uganda and the continuous alleged preparation to wage war that
>has lately been in the press has done it. Museveni knows he is confronting
>Rwanda however much the gunmen on either side deny it. The pincer assault
>movement being prepared for him has not escaped his attention. Of course
>fellow lobbysts abroad have done much to dent M7 image abroad. Lately China
>Kiteisi has added to his woes. However I do not think that would matter to
>Museveni. He has just given the reasons of bowing to donor pressure to
>appaese the donor publicly and endear himself to them. The donors have been
>shamelessly double standarded with respect to Uganda and now they have
>their excuse to next timdee declare to you that your camapign and their
>pressure has done it and that now is your turn to give M7 a chance to
>professionalize the army and articipate in elections in which he sets the
>rules and blows the whistle while his personal army looms over you.
>Balooney!
>
>I also think that by ommitting the repeal of the POA, Art. 269 and Movement
>Act from your bench mark list, you have let M7 very lightly indeed. Note
>that it was reported that:"President Museveni reportedly urged his comrades
>to "make a tactical compromise" on multiparty politics in order to realise
>the "strategic objectives" of the Movement."
>
>What are the strategic objectives of the Miovement? You need to go back to
>your bush agenda . It is to kill all other political voices. It is "to
>bring popular democracy in Uganda such that the other political parties i.e
>UPC, DP, CP and NLP shall cease to exist and only NRM remains and that
>democracy shall always and solely be defined by NRM"
>
>So if the retreat is for strategic objectives of NRM and not because they
>believe that the country deserves the freedom to elect their leaders, is
>that a cause for your to applaud them?
>My view is that Museveni has made this tactical compromise to yank the rug
>from under the feet of those who would have a cause to justify a war if
>political pluralism is not immediatelty restored. With rumours of big scale
>war looming on the country, Museveni is attempting to neutralize the
>credibility for war.
>
>Chris Opoka-Okumu
>=================================
>----- Original Message -----
> From: Anne Mugisha
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 6:00 PM
> Subject: [FedsNet] Opening Political Space
>
>
> 02/18/03
>
>
>
> If the Monitor's reporting is correct and it usually is, President
>Yoweri Museveni has lived up to the old adage: He who pays the piper calls
>the tune. In the report the President is said to have attributed his new
>found wisdom to actively advocate for the opening of political space, to
>the wish of the donors or more accurately investors. He once again
>confirmed our belief that rather than listen to the legitimate agitation of
>political opponents and human rights activists for freedom of association,
>the President would rather bow at the feet of his benefactors, the
>donors/investors. While the rationale of his decision disappoints me as a
>political activist who has invested some time advocating for political
>space, I am more than pleased by the actual decision itself.
>
>
>
> I am also gratified because while President Museveni does not hesitate
>to jet to the Western world to borrow or beg for funds as he has told us
>many times, those of us who have gone to global capitals to expose the
>political repression in Uganda have often been belittled by sycophants who
>say we should take the case to the Ugandan public and not to the donors.
>When President Museveni wrote an infamous letter to Clare Short of the
>United Kingdom that reminded many of a school prefect whining to the head
>teacher about the bad behavior of some students; it exposed just how
>important, if not critical; the support of our development partners (read:
>benefactors) is to our very survival as a nation. So it is gratifying for
>all those activists who have taken the political repression battles to the
>donor capitals to know that our efforts have yielded fruit. The donors
>listened and made demands which we now know 'for sure' and 'for real' that
>the President cannot ignore.
>
>
>
> But we must also ask ourselves why the certain change of heart? After
>all didn't President Museveni declare in early 2002 when some Scandinavian
>government dared to be the first to tie the question of funding to the
>looting in Congo by the UPDF; that he did not need their money? Where has
>the arrogance gone? Surely the credit cannot only go to the agitation at
>the foreign capitals. I believe that President Museveni in spite of all
>his increasingly undemocratic credentials is still an excellent politician
>with his ear close to the ground. Every opinion poll carried out since the
>2001 elections has shown increasing disaffection with the Movement system
>of government and increasing support for multi-party politics. It is my
>strong belief that the donors and President Museveni would have gone on
>happily supporting the Movement political system until kingdom come unless
>they identified increasing demands for pluralism from the people themselves
>and until they saw serious organization of the political opposition around
>the freedoms that only seemed to crystallize around election or referendum
>periods. So while some will argue that President Museveni has once again
>grabbed the initiative I would submit that he has simply adjusted his
>political calculation to suit the political climate. The pressure must
>have been really intense to have brought the political time table forward
>by a year. Dr. Kiyonga had indeed told us that the debate for opening
>political space would commence in 2004. But the excessive pressure from
>insiders (Hon. Eriya Kategaya, Hon. Bidandi Ssali), political parties,
>pressure groups, the media, human rights activists coupled with the threat
>of violent armed conflict (real or imagined) have worked together to bring
>about one major political advancement for the country.
>
>
>
> The challenge for us as we continue to work tirelessly for full
>political liberalization is to rise to the challenge and organize our
>various political groups to contest impressively against the Movement Party
>by offering competitive political strategies and programs. But we must
>also realize that the opening of political space which is still only a
>rumor is only a start. It is important that the Presidential rumor become
>law. Then it must be a living law and not simply an imprint in our statute
>books designed to appease donors and investors! What we should be looking
>out for are the following:
>
> - Will the opening of political space become law soon enough to
>give old and new Parties a meaningful chance to participate fully in the
>2006 elections?
>
> - Do we have an independent Electoral Commission?
>
> - Will the other Parties have a chance against the Movement
>through measures like guaranteeing their rights to meet anywhere within the
>borders of Uganda and mobilize support?
>
> - Will the government guarantee the existence of political
>parties by financing and supporting them, to the same extent as the
>Movement Secretariat?
>
> - Will the army act independently at the time of elections and
>beyond?
>
> - Will the laws be amended to make a clear distinction between
>the Movement Party and the Movement government?
>
> - Will President Museveni step down in 2006 or will he now
>re-create himself and run for Presidency as Chairman of the Movement Party?
>
> Addressing these and other concerns is what will matter in bringing
>about true democracy, constitutionalism and rule of law. So check your
>jubilations and keep your eye on the ball!
>
>
> Anne Mugisha
>
> Member
>
> REFORM AGENDA
