|
Ear to The Ground
By Charles Onyango-Obbo |
The snake that bit Kategaya & Co. twice in 40 years
Jan 7, 2004
|
Last year was a very bad one for many politicians in the Movement who are acquaintances, friends, or whom I admire. Without saying which one is which, let me list a few of them: Former First Deputy Premier and Internal Affairs minister Eriya Kategaya, former Local government minister Bidandi Ssali, Ruhama MP and former IGG Augustine Ruzindana, former External Security Organisation chief David Pulkol, former Internal Security Organisation boss Brig. Henry Tumukunde. Though I disagreed with them on the Movement�s theory and practice of democracy, we got on famously on other issues and discussions with them were always enlightening. Sometimes I think if it were not for the counsel some of these people gave me while I was at The Monitor, I would probably not be alive writing this column. I will not rush to claim some prophetic powers, and say triumphant �I told them�, now that they have all fallen foul of President Yoweri Museveni. Rather, that I now understand better what some of them meant when they used to tell me; �Be careful, this tolerance you see in the Movement is still fragile. It can easily be replaced by fascism if pushed to the wall.� When The Monitor was closed for a week over the �helicopter story� in October 2002, Kategaya chaired the meetings between the government side, and the Nation Media Group to resolve the crisis. Kategaya�s assistant at the talks was Sarah Kiyingi, who was then minister of State for Internal Affairs. It is significant that both of them have since been sacked from government because of their opposition to Museveni�s push to amend the constitution and have a presidency for life � thus allowing him to run for elections again in 2006. The whole story of some of the behind-the-scenes events during the closure of The Monitor I cannot disclose, but Kategaya�s tactics were very interesting. He did not want to be bogged down by the details of how The Monitor got the story, whether it was true or not (his view was that those would be matters for the court to determine). His main interest was to get to an agreement that satisfies the government enough to re-open the paper. But he was also firm, when I spoke with him later, he was quite upset by everything, telling me it �was not necessary� for The Monitor to �precipitate� the crisis irrespective of how much we thought we had a good story. Why was Kategaya chosen to chair the talks? Because people like Kategaya (and Bidandi) always played the role of the gentler face of the Movement and, more importantly, Museveni. Thus when in 1992 the first attempt was made to have all-party talks with DP, UPC, CP and so forth, Kategaya was chosen to chair it. When a concession was worked out by Kategaya, because he had credibility as a mild person, it was accepted as a sign of reasonable compromise by the Movement and Museveni, whom he was assumed to be representing. However, because Museveni thrives on the image of a tough man and a Machiavellian politician, if he himself granted such a condition it would be seen as a sign of weakness � and the people with whom he did the deal would probably not seriously expect him to honour it. All the people I have listed, their many weaknesses notwithstanding, had the reputation of being either moderate or inclined to compromise � with the exception of Brig. Tumukunde. How do people become moderates? In Uganda most moderates are generally better educated, exposed, and thoughtful. Take that, and consider that the moderates are the ones who are being purged from leadership positions in government and being vilified by the Movement. The real damage of the marginalisation of people like Kategaya and Ruzindana, is that the Movement is getting to a point where it will have no active line of progressive voices. It probably already has no one to present to the country and the world a moderate face. Thus if The Monitor had been closed in October 2003, instead of October 2002, it would probably not have reopened. With the registration of the Movement as a party as we move into a �multiparty system� we are all but likely to have an organisation in which there is no progressive tendency. In short, the NRM-O looks set to be a fascist quasi-state party. This is not the first time for this to happen in Uganda. It happened in the UPC in 1964 when the progressives (whose ranks were later to include party youthwingers Bidandi, Kategaya) were ejected in a campaign led by Dr Milton Obote. This rout of the progressives in UPC was completed during Obote II (1980-1985) when a delegates conference ensured that none of them were elected to a top position in the party. Even the youthful hopeful, Dr David Anyoti, was forced to stand down in favour of the conservative old guard. UPC went on to one of the most disastrous periods of its history, because over the years the gradual purge of the enlightened elements in its ranks (and Idi Amin�s singularly brutal campaign against its members) had undermined its creative capabilities. The Museveni-Movement seems to have set down the same UPC path. The remarkable thing is that all this has happened when people like Kategaya are politically active, and thus being able to be victims twice�And by the same undemocratic snake. Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
� 2003 The Monitor Publications
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now
