Those who prefer talking to fighting have already won
Aug 18, 2009
OPIYO OLOYA<br><i>PERSPECTIVE OF A ugandan in CANADA</i><br><br>Last week, in this column, I suggested that shipping non-Banyoro residents back to where they came from is a bad idea. Such a move is a gross violation of human rights; they ar
OPIYO OLOYA
PERSPECTIVE OF A ugandan in CANADA
Last week, in this column, I suggested that shipping non-Banyoro residents back to where they came from is a bad idea. Such a move is a gross violation of human rights; they are also likely illegal under Uganda laws. I also suggested that such a move could spark ethnic violence from all sides.
Today, I would like to put out some ideas for further discussion, debate and problem-solving. In putting these ideas on the table, I reject the argument that this is a Bunyoro problem and therefore only the Banyoro must bear the burden of pushing it forward. This is a Uganda problem that every Ugandan should become engaged in talking about.
Bunyoro was politically wrestled into colonial submission with hundreds of thousands losing their lives, then huge chunks of land were lost to gazetted national parks and non-Banyoro absentee landlords in the 1900 Agreement, forcing the region to suffer malignant marginalisation for over 100 years, resulting in current severe pressures from underdevelopment. Its population has sharply shot up as non-Banyoro settle in various areas, a problem that has seen ethnic Banyoro lose political voice to non-Banyoro in elected political offices. This is a summary which does not do justice to the point-by-point issue raised by Banyoro leaders, but space does not allow me to repeat each one of them. Instead, I see two main areas of discussion, one with an economic solution and the other a political one.
Now, just to be sure, whatever solution comes out will be political because it will require political will to ensure that the solution works. By economic solution, I am talking specifically about those issues to which we can put a monetary value however gigantic, areas such as land, economic marginalisation, and chronic underdevelopment. Meanwhile, by political, I am talking about the issue of political representations at the local, district and national levels.
I suggest that three steps are needed to tackle the economic issues including lost land, economic reconstruction and recovery programme, special education schemes, road infrastructure, health services, land scheme which guarantees the rights of the indigenous to own their land and so forth. First, all the stakeholders from Bunyoro need to sit down with the Government of Uganda to negotiate the priorities, what needs to be done right now, in the intermediate and later. For example, if through negotiations, the land issue and land compensation are seen as priorities, then the second step is to put a monetary value to it.
Once a monetary value has been arrived at that all parties agree is the right amount, then the third step will talk about how to pay for the priorities. Where will the money come from? This is where there is need for political will to solve the problem. Bunyoro is a resource-rich area with potentially billions of dollars worth of resources including oil, forestry, and other minerals currently being explored. My suggestion would see a negotiation with stakeholders that would essentially require the Government to first take care of Bunyoro before putting one shilling in the central government coffers.
Now, for argument’s sake, let us say oil exploration indicates that 10,000 barrels per day of oil will start pumping next year from wells inside Bunyoro. And let us assume that oil exploration companies operating in Uganda will take substantial cuts to cover the costs of capital investments in the exploration. Now, a negotiation should be carried between the stakeholders in Bunyoro and the Government that result in what I call “better-than-half†pay-out of royalties going to Bunyoro toward various projects, say, in the first 20 years, while the Uganda government collects the lesser amount to be distributed elsewhere in Uganda.
Over time, the actual percentage of royalties flowing to Bunyoro could be renegotiated such that more funds flow out of Bunyoro to the central government. Such an agreement could be used as a template elsewhere in Uganda, with resources from specific areas substantially going toward development projects in those areas for a specified period, and then over time being re-directed to other areas that need to be developed. In my mind, such an approach will see a speedier development in Bunyoro and elsewhere in Uganda than when the attitude is “wait and see what we get from the Government of Uganda.
I know many will accuse me of sneaking a federal system (federo) through the back door, and shutting out resource-poor regions of Uganda from development. My answer is that this is a negotiated agreement between the Government of Uganda and decentralised regional governments regarding specific resources without losing sight of the national interest.
The government is still responsible for every Ugandan. Secondly, such a negotiated agreement should ensure against “double-dipping†where a region is already receiving substantial funding from its resources, but insists on additional money from the central government, money that should go to needy areas of the country. Now, the issue of political representation is equally difficult to sort out.
I would move away from President Museveni’s suggestion of “political ring-fencing†because over time, and with population shift, a substantial number of people will be left without political voice simply because they are non-Banyoro. If there was any need for “tampering†with the political representation, I suggest that it be in terms of increasing the number of representatives allowed from Bunyoro.
However, it should be left to the voters to decide who will represent them. I suspect that even when voters vote along ethnic lines, the representation will still mirror the demographics of Bunyoro. By that I mean areas of Bunyoro with larger non-Banyoro populations will likely elect non-Banyoro representatives while heavily Banyoro areas will elect Banyoro representatives. To ensure that Bunyoro heritage is not neglected or destroyed in all areas of Bunyoro, emphasis should be placed in preserving and strengthening its cultural institutions including the royal lineage.
Schools in Bunyoro, as elsewhere in Uganda, should place emphasis on teaching the local cultures at the primary level. When in Bunyoro, even as he is taught his culture at home by his parents, the Acholi child should learn about the Banyoro culture, when in Bugisu, the Madi child should learn the Bagisu culture, and so forth.
Do I think these are the definitive answers? Of course not. But, I can say this, those who learn to talk over problems rather than fight wars over them, have already won. The issue of Bunyoro should be a national debate with everyone pitching ideas such that we can move toward a national consensus. The Chinese have a say: The journey of a thousand miles begin with one step.
Opiyo.oloya@sympatico.ca
PERSPECTIVE OF A ugandan in CANADA
Last week, in this column, I suggested that shipping non-Banyoro residents back to where they came from is a bad idea. Such a move is a gross violation of human rights; they are also likely illegal under Uganda laws. I also suggested that such a move could spark ethnic violence from all sides.
Today, I would like to put out some ideas for further discussion, debate and problem-solving. In putting these ideas on the table, I reject the argument that this is a Bunyoro problem and therefore only the Banyoro must bear the burden of pushing it forward. This is a Uganda problem that every Ugandan should become engaged in talking about.
Bunyoro was politically wrestled into colonial submission with hundreds of thousands losing their lives, then huge chunks of land were lost to gazetted national parks and non-Banyoro absentee landlords in the 1900 Agreement, forcing the region to suffer malignant marginalisation for over 100 years, resulting in current severe pressures from underdevelopment. Its population has sharply shot up as non-Banyoro settle in various areas, a problem that has seen ethnic Banyoro lose political voice to non-Banyoro in elected political offices. This is a summary which does not do justice to the point-by-point issue raised by Banyoro leaders, but space does not allow me to repeat each one of them. Instead, I see two main areas of discussion, one with an economic solution and the other a political one.
Now, just to be sure, whatever solution comes out will be political because it will require political will to ensure that the solution works. By economic solution, I am talking specifically about those issues to which we can put a monetary value however gigantic, areas such as land, economic marginalisation, and chronic underdevelopment. Meanwhile, by political, I am talking about the issue of political representations at the local, district and national levels.
I suggest that three steps are needed to tackle the economic issues including lost land, economic reconstruction and recovery programme, special education schemes, road infrastructure, health services, land scheme which guarantees the rights of the indigenous to own their land and so forth. First, all the stakeholders from Bunyoro need to sit down with the Government of Uganda to negotiate the priorities, what needs to be done right now, in the intermediate and later. For example, if through negotiations, the land issue and land compensation are seen as priorities, then the second step is to put a monetary value to it.
Once a monetary value has been arrived at that all parties agree is the right amount, then the third step will talk about how to pay for the priorities. Where will the money come from? This is where there is need for political will to solve the problem. Bunyoro is a resource-rich area with potentially billions of dollars worth of resources including oil, forestry, and other minerals currently being explored. My suggestion would see a negotiation with stakeholders that would essentially require the Government to first take care of Bunyoro before putting one shilling in the central government coffers.
Now, for argument’s sake, let us say oil exploration indicates that 10,000 barrels per day of oil will start pumping next year from wells inside Bunyoro. And let us assume that oil exploration companies operating in Uganda will take substantial cuts to cover the costs of capital investments in the exploration. Now, a negotiation should be carried between the stakeholders in Bunyoro and the Government that result in what I call “better-than-half†pay-out of royalties going to Bunyoro toward various projects, say, in the first 20 years, while the Uganda government collects the lesser amount to be distributed elsewhere in Uganda.
Over time, the actual percentage of royalties flowing to Bunyoro could be renegotiated such that more funds flow out of Bunyoro to the central government. Such an agreement could be used as a template elsewhere in Uganda, with resources from specific areas substantially going toward development projects in those areas for a specified period, and then over time being re-directed to other areas that need to be developed. In my mind, such an approach will see a speedier development in Bunyoro and elsewhere in Uganda than when the attitude is “wait and see what we get from the Government of Uganda.
I know many will accuse me of sneaking a federal system (federo) through the back door, and shutting out resource-poor regions of Uganda from development. My answer is that this is a negotiated agreement between the Government of Uganda and decentralised regional governments regarding specific resources without losing sight of the national interest.
The government is still responsible for every Ugandan. Secondly, such a negotiated agreement should ensure against “double-dipping†where a region is already receiving substantial funding from its resources, but insists on additional money from the central government, money that should go to needy areas of the country. Now, the issue of political representation is equally difficult to sort out.
I would move away from President Museveni’s suggestion of “political ring-fencing†because over time, and with population shift, a substantial number of people will be left without political voice simply because they are non-Banyoro. If there was any need for “tampering†with the political representation, I suggest that it be in terms of increasing the number of representatives allowed from Bunyoro.
However, it should be left to the voters to decide who will represent them. I suspect that even when voters vote along ethnic lines, the representation will still mirror the demographics of Bunyoro. By that I mean areas of Bunyoro with larger non-Banyoro populations will likely elect non-Banyoro representatives while heavily Banyoro areas will elect Banyoro representatives. To ensure that Bunyoro heritage is not neglected or destroyed in all areas of Bunyoro, emphasis should be placed in preserving and strengthening its cultural institutions including the royal lineage.
Schools in Bunyoro, as elsewhere in Uganda, should place emphasis on teaching the local cultures at the primary level. When in Bunyoro, even as he is taught his culture at home by his parents, the Acholi child should learn about the Banyoro culture, when in Bugisu, the Madi child should learn the Bagisu culture, and so forth.
Do I think these are the definitive answers? Of course not. But, I can say this, those who learn to talk over problems rather than fight wars over them, have already won. The issue of Bunyoro should be a national debate with everyone pitching ideas such that we can move toward a national consensus. The Chinese have a say: The journey of a thousand miles begin with one step.
Opiyo.oloya@sympatico.ca