Uganda @64: Lost time, lost opportunities
Uganda’s greatest post-independence loss was time consumed by conflict, coups and instability, forcing the country to rebuild what should have been established decades ago, writes David Mukholi
David Mukholi. (File)
_________________
OPINION
As Uganda marks 64 years of independence today, there is a useful way to look beyond the usual question of how much the country has achieved since October 9, 1962. It is to ask: How much time did Uganda lose?
Uganda’s greatest post-independence loss was not merely physical destruction; it was the time consumed by conflict. Countries develop through sustained and uninterrupted effort. Uganda, by contrast, spent years repeatedly stopping, falling back and starting again. As a result, it repeatedly expended energy building and rebuilding what should have been established long ago. At independence in 1962, expectations were high. After 68 years of British rule, Ugandans believed self-government would bring freedom, equality and prosperity. The new nation had natural resources, an emerging elite class, traditional institutions (the kingdoms and tribes under clan systems), a productive agricultural economy and minerals like copper. The challenge was to transform these into pillars of development.
Colonialism had left contradictions. Uganda produced raw materials while Europeans and Asians controlled much trade and processing, and few Ugandans held senior administrative positions.
The British also introduced education and administrative structures, while finding organised societies such as Buganda, Bunyoro, Ankole and Toro. Therefore, Uganda had a foundation for nation building but lacked experience in managing political competition within a unified national framework.
The first decade, 1962–1972, should have consolidated Uganda. Instead, the country became consumed by political rivalry. The alliance between the Uganda Peoples’ Congress (UPC) and Kabaka Yekka (KY) collapsed, exposing regional, religious and institutional divisions.
The crisis peaked in 1966 when Prime Minister Milton Obote abrogated the Independence Constitution, ousted President Edward Mutesa and ordered an attack on the Kabaka’s palace, forcing Mutesa into exile. Obote declared himself president. Then, the 1967 Constitution abolished the traditional kingdoms and centralised power.
More time was lost in the 1970s. Idi Amin’s 1971 military coup ousted Obote, suspended constitutional governance, weakened public institutions and ushered in widespread terror. The expulsion of Asians in 1972 severely disrupted the economy. Uganda was no longer simply failing to advance; it was losing what it had built. Infrastructure deteriorated, services broke down, businesses closed, and skilled professionals left. Amin was preoccupied with oppressing the people to hold onto power.
Amin’s overthrow in 1979 did not restore stability. The disputed 1980 election, which returned Obote to power, was followed by armed resistance. Yoweri Museveni’s National Resistance Movement/Army (NRM/A) launched a guerrilla war centred in the Luwero Triangle. Obote was ousted in 1985 by Gen. Tito Okello, but fighting continued until the NRA captured Kampala in January 1986.
By then, nearly 24 years of independence had passed, much of it consumed by instability, coups, economic collapse and war. Had those years been peaceful, Uganda could have expanded schools, roads and industries, trained its workforce and modernised agriculture.
We cannot know exactly what Uganda would look like today if it had enjoyed peace and continuity since independence. But the principle is clear: years spent fighting cannot produce the same development as years spent building.
When the NRM took power in 1986, the task was not simply to build the prosperous nation promised at independence, but to rehabilitate and reconstruct a damaged one. The country could not bring back lost years, but it could rebuild roads, schools, hospitals, institutions and the economy. In other words, you cannot recover lost time, but you can recover lost ground.
The consequences were felt across generations. During the difficult years in the 1970s, children endured disrupted schooling and scarcity, while young people entering the labour market missed opportunities. Businesses were never created, and investments were abandoned.
Another consequence was delayed infrastructure and public services. Roads, health systems, schools and a skilled workforce require sustained investment over many years. During the turmoil of the 1970s and early 1980s, investment in these areas was severely disrupted, while existing infrastructure and services deteriorated.
Uganda therefore entered its period of relative stability in 1986 with a massive development backlog, having not only to build for the future but also repair what years of instability had damaged.
The post-1986 period ushered in the change; the 1995 Constitution, regular elections, economic liberalisation, private-sector expansion and infrastructure investment provided a foundation for growth. But insurgencies in Teso, West Nile and Northern Uganda again diverted resources to security and disrupted development. More time lost.
Imagine what Uganda might look like today had those years and resources not been consumed by internal conflicts.
Development is relative. While one country struggles to recover from conflict, others continue building. Malaysia, which had broadly comparable development prospects with Uganda around independence, moved much further ahead. Kenya also accumulated the benefits of greater continuity. This is because the two never lost time in conflict and politics.
Uganda today is nevertheless different from the nation that gained independence at Kololo in 1962. The economy is larger and more diversified, infrastructure has expanded, telecommunications have transformed commerce, and access to education has grown, much of it during the relative stability since 1986.
But progress cannot rewrite history. Years of instability contributed to the development backlog Uganda continues to face.
This explains why Ugandans can look at the same country differently. Those who lived through the insecurity and economic collapse of the 1970s and early 1980s remember how far Uganda has come. Younger generations, who did not experience those years, judge the country against decades of relative stability.
The lesson is simple: development requires time, but time only produces development when used continuously and productively. Uganda cannot recover the decades lost between 1962 and 1986, or the subsequent years consumed by insurgencies. Those years are gone. The task now is to ensure that no more time is wasted through political contestation, conflict, inefficiency, corruption or poor management so that Uganda can recover the ground it lost. That is how it may catch up with the development it might have achieved had its progress been repeatedly derailed by coups, wars and conflict.
X: @dmukholi1, dmukholi@gmail.com