Otunnu is not Obama because Uganda is not USA

Sep 01, 2009

BY ASUMAN BISIKA<br><br>After a very long absence, Dr. Olara Otunu’s recent homecoming has excited the Ugandan media and teased the political leadership of both the opposition and government.

BY ASUMAN BISIKA

After a very long absence, Dr. Olara Otunu’s recent homecoming has excited the Ugandan media and teased the political leadership of both the opposition and government.

A lot of analysis and commentaries have been written about what role he can play in the national politics and how (or whether?) his participation would impact on the electoral dynamics in the 2011 elections. I also beg to submit my 10-penny views on the same subject.

At one of the radio talkshows where I am a regular, the host asked whether Otunnu would make a strong presidential candidate in the 2011 general elections. My fellow panelist, David Mukholi, of The New Vision, subtly dismissed Otunnu as incapable of connecting with the local people after spending over 20 years as a high-flying international career diplomat.

For one to understand Otunnu’s political strength (or weakness), one would have to first appreciate the political dynamics in Uganda. Ugandans are witnessing (or exhibiting?) the highest level of ethnic self-consciousness since the tribal communities (that form what we know today as Uganda) were cobbled together by the colonial administration. The national discourses that inform the electoral dynamics (and general political attitudes) in Uganda are now heavily influenced by tribe.

Uganda no longer has what one would call national leaders in the strict sense of the word. What we have is a cobble (or cabal) of tribal leaders who constitute (or pass off) as national leaders.

The bad thing is that this state of affairs has met a serious level of acceptance. Nearly all active political parties have posts reserved for people hailing from particular geographical areas. Witness: the biggest fall-out in the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) was over such a ‘geographically tied’ post.

In fact the national army, the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) is the only political constituency with a semblance of national character. Although it has been challenged over the ethnic and regional composition of its senior command structure, it is the only institution that possesses a horizontally national interest and presence.

The strength of the UPDF as a political constituency lies in their actionable capability (means) and disposition (political outlook) to directly impact on political dynamics (electoral or otherwise) without any recourse to processes.

At a lateral scale, look at this: we assume that the strength of the UPDF is 60,000 officers and men. They are represented by 10 Members of Parliament (mps); which means every 6,000 officers and men have an MP. As at the 1989 elections, an MP was supposed to represent about 70,000 people.

All the six elections (1961, 1962, 1980, 1989, 1996, 2001 and 2006) in Uganda have been held under what one would call ‘circumstances’ that stifle the adoption of national attitudes in the body politic. That is why reports on elections always have this line: under the ‘circumstances’, the elections were free and fair...blah blah…

In the 1962 elections, the campaign for Buganda nationalism was the factor while contributing to the ouster of Idi Amin (and closeness to the Tanzanian troops then) was the tipping factor in the 1980 elections.

Whereas one would say the 1989 elections were free and fair; the circumstances under which they were conducted constitute what one would still call circumstances: the elections were a gacaca (community) exercise devoid of vertical civic (in the traditional sense of the word) discourse.

And they were held under a blanket situation one would call co-option. Indeed, the word in 1989 was that the elections were for the ‘expansion of the National Resistance Council (the formerly rebel National Resistance Movement’s legislative arm’).

It is against this background that Otunnu would be advised to first have a political constituency. This constituency may be an electoral area or a consensual acceptance as a community, regional or party leadership. Or the NRM government can hand him the constituency of martyrdom if they (NRM) harass him to the hearts of Ugandans.

Gulu district leader Norbert Mao has earned every coin in his account as a leader from northern Uganda with national visibility. Who can forget his contest against the lion of Gulu (Mzee Andrew Adimola) during the Constituent Assembly Elections in 1994, the passionate 1996 bare-knuckled fight against the Lioness of Gulu (former minister Betty Bigombe) and the 2006 beating (walk in the park?) of Col. Walter Ochora in 2006 elections for the Gulu district top leadership?

Jimmy Akena has vowed not to give way for Otunnu to take over the UPC top leadership, Mao’s interest for the national presidency is still alive and leader of the Opposition Prof. Latigo Ogenga’s stature as national leader from northern Uganda is in undoubted. Plus: this is not America where a single speech shoved a certain Barack Obama to national visibility and later the presidency.

The writer is a journalist

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});