Why Uganda chose order over chaos

_______________

OPINION

By Rose Namayanja Nsereko

As Uganda concludes another electoral cycle, it is important to pause, not to posture, but to reflect honestly on where we have come from, what we learned, and what remains unfinished.

Before 1986, Uganda was a country in deep distress. The challenges were not abstract. 

They were lived realities: indiscipline in the armed forces, politicisation of religion, the entrenchment of sectarianism, shortages of basic goods, insecurity on the roads, and the breakdown of state authority. Politics was a zero-sum contest, and ordinary citizens bore the cost.

When the National Resistance Movement (NRM) came to power, its first task was not popularity but the restoration of order. A disciplined national army, which was freely mixing with the wananchi, replaced chaos; it was unheard of to hear a soldier using Luganda or any other vernacular language. 

Politics was deliberately separated from religion and ethnicity. The culture of criminal impunity was confronted. Shortages of essential goods were addressed. Roads were rebuilt, institutions revived, and stability was gradually restored.

These were not cosmetic gains. They were foundational.

It is for this reason that, when Uganda returned to competitive elections, the central question was never simply about winning votes, but about protecting peace, hence President Museveni’s 75% win in 1996. The early electoral experiences revealed how fragile that peace could be if other people-centred policies were not initiated. This led the President to unveil programmes like Entandikwa at the sub-county level and Universal Primary Education (UPE) in 1997, among others. 

However, divisions within the NRM structures and failure to follow up the above programmes also contributed to weak mobilisation; in some areas, complacency cost us some votes. 

These experiences forced hard introspection.

One of the most important lessons was that leadership must never detach itself from the people. Political authority cannot survive on historical legitimacy alone. It must be renewed through presence, service delivery and accountability. Moral authority and political authority are not the same thing, and confusing the two can be costly.

Over time, the state adjusted.

Decentralisation through strengthened local governments, the introduction of UPE, and later Universal Secondary Education were deliberate efforts to reconnect leadership with citizens’ daily realities. 

Where implementation faltered, the opposition narratives gained ground, not always because they offered better solutions, but because unmet expectations create space for protest politics.

By 2013, it became clear that peace without livelihoods was insufficient. This recognition gave rise to the renewed focus on economic empowerment programmes, particularly those targeting households directly. Operation Wealth Creation was one such intervention, aimed at addressing weaknesses in earlier agricultural support initiatives.

In 2021, the Parish Development Model (PDM) marked another turning point. Its central idea was simple but powerful: take resources directly to the people, reduce leakage and restore trust by ensuring that citizens see and feel the government support at the most local level. PDM was also a response to legitimate concerns that intermediaries had, in the past, captured benefits meant for communities. 

The results have not been uniform. In some urban areas, especially Kampala and Wakiso, where the number of households in those parishes/wards was high, political disaffection remains pronounced. Yet, in regions once ravaged by war, particularly northern and north-eastern Uganda, peace and stability are no longer aspirations but lived realities. That contrast alone is instructive as far as the 2026 presidential results are concerned. 

By the time we went to the polls, over 3,700,000 households in the whole country were direct beneficiaries of PDM, and no amount of propaganda on radio or social media would negate the fact that PDM was such a gain worth protecting. This could be a contributing factor that accounts for NRM’s resounding victory, almost similar to that of 1996.

Equally important has been the revival of grassroots political organisation by the NRM, mass registration and updating of party structures, including millions of members registered by last year, re-energised local leadership and restored a sense of ownership within the Movement. For the first time since 1996, this was the only presidential election where, after nominations, President Museveni did not appoint a national task force but instead tasked the party branch committees to lead the offensive. 

Still, honesty demands acknowledgement of what remains unresolved. Electoral violence, whoever commits it, undermines the very order the country worked so hard to rebuild. 

Failure by institutions to act decisively when crimes occur erodes public trust. Internal divisions weaken collective purpose. These are not problems caused by the opponents alone; many are, as candidly admitted in internal reflections, of our own making. Yet, Uganda’s enduring choice has been clear.

Again and again, when confronted with uncertainty, Ugandans have chosen stability over upheaval, consolidation of progress over rupture, and order over chaos. As the country looks ahead, the task is not to defend the past uncritically, nor to romanticise the opposition for its own sake, but to protect the gains while correcting the gaps. Peace must be guarded, service delivery strengthened, and discipline enforced

Uganda’s direction, anchored in stability, gradual reform and national cohesion, is a choice worth defending.

The writer is the Deputy Secretary-General of National Resistance Movement