Museveni approach to critics a lesson
THE manner in which political critics are dispensing venom against President Museveni these days can tempt the faint heartened to question the level of free speech in Uganda.
Onapito Ekomoloit To The Point
THE manner in which political critics are dispensing venom against President Museveni these days can tempt the faint heartened to question the level of free speech in Uganda.
Fortunately, when it comes to deflecting barbs from his opponents, the president has no better defender than himself. He long declared that with the advent of free elections under the Movement as the mode of accessing political power, we entered the golden era of "microphone politics."
The tried and failed approach of the old politics was to banish any one who criticised the President six feet under. Actually the state-controlled killers never even afforded their victims the luxury of a burial-they were just made to disappear! Never mind whether the dead was none other than a respected Chief Justice.
But President Museveni — who often jokes that he believes in the Law of Moses — he has championed answering fire with fire and water with water.
When dealing with terrorists, like the Allied Democratic Front (ADF) and Joseph Kony's so called Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), he has applied what the Acholi call dino (pounding like in millet). Of course, he has also offered the carrot, through the amnesty law and even direct negotiations like it was done with Ali Bamuze's remnants of the National Rescue Front.
Similarly, when replying those who have swiped at him via the microphone (in the media or at public functions), the President too has taken to microphone to pay them in their own currency. He has either gone to radio studios or just called into talk shows discussions to answer his critics with words-not bullets. Alternatively, he has used the presidential platform to do the verbal dueling. And make no mistake, Museveni's verbal warfare is not what you would remotely describe as demagoguery.
On the contrary, his approach is educational, dwelling on detailed explanation of issues — always with a historical background. At the risk of sounding repetitive, the president makes his explanations so persistent and consistent. At the same time, the President’s belief in answering back with a detailed explanation has extended to newspapers. He has increasingly distinguished himself as a prolific writer, who churns out lead-story making articles. His “missives†are every editor's dream story source.
The whole point here is that we have a president who believes in letting people speak, and when they speak he listens. It is only someone who listens to or reads with interest what you say/write who replies as passionately as the President does.
Ironically, some of his critics — perhaps still suffering from the hangover of presidents who did not give a damn about public opinion — wonder why the president has to personally write articles explaining his position. The insinuation is that he does not trust his lieutenants. For the record, they do a lot of writing in his interest.
The critics should instead be happy that the president is responsive to their views. And since he is not a lazy man by any stretch of imagination, it is perfectly fine that he burns the midnight candle — he is legendary at it — and personally pens articles to newspapers.
Perhaps the greater lesson from the President is to some of his supporters who are tempted to behave as if the sky is about to fall, whenever they hear or read rabid attacks against government or even the president himself.
They all need to take a leaf of tolerance from some one who has clearly seen it all. Like him, they should learn to counter criticism with calm, honest and exhaustive explanation.
Yet at the end of the day, the laws must protect citizen Museveni, like they do any of us. He too must enjoy protection against the injuries of unfair attacks that amount to defamation, libel and other offences.
So as we pour vitriol against Museveni and the Movement at political meetings and on the airwaves, let us remember that we have an ally who believes it is a fair game. We can say nasty things safe in the knowledge that state agents will not be seeking to separate our heads from the necks.
More importantly, we should know that out there Ugandans — through their votes — are willing to reward credible explanations. That is why President Museveni has twice successfully kept custody of State House, after selling his case to the people.
We have a functioning market place of ideas. The President’s opponents should just sharpen their marketing skills. The resignation and desperation that one sometimes detects in the criticism of the President are unjustified — even in the event of a “Third Termâ€. Ugandans will know what they want, and who can give it them.
Ends
THE manner in which political critics are dispensing venom against President Museveni these days can tempt the faint heartened to question the level of free speech in Uganda.
Fortunately, when it comes to deflecting barbs from his opponents, the president has no better defender than himself. He long declared that with the advent of free elections under the Movement as the mode of accessing political power, we entered the golden era of "microphone politics."
The tried and failed approach of the old politics was to banish any one who criticised the President six feet under. Actually the state-controlled killers never even afforded their victims the luxury of a burial-they were just made to disappear! Never mind whether the dead was none other than a respected Chief Justice.
But President Museveni — who often jokes that he believes in the Law of Moses — he has championed answering fire with fire and water with water.
When dealing with terrorists, like the Allied Democratic Front (ADF) and Joseph Kony's so called Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), he has applied what the Acholi call dino (pounding like in millet). Of course, he has also offered the carrot, through the amnesty law and even direct negotiations like it was done with Ali Bamuze's remnants of the National Rescue Front.
Similarly, when replying those who have swiped at him via the microphone (in the media or at public functions), the President too has taken to microphone to pay them in their own currency. He has either gone to radio studios or just called into talk shows discussions to answer his critics with words-not bullets. Alternatively, he has used the presidential platform to do the verbal dueling. And make no mistake, Museveni's verbal warfare is not what you would remotely describe as demagoguery.
On the contrary, his approach is educational, dwelling on detailed explanation of issues — always with a historical background. At the risk of sounding repetitive, the president makes his explanations so persistent and consistent. At the same time, the President’s belief in answering back with a detailed explanation has extended to newspapers. He has increasingly distinguished himself as a prolific writer, who churns out lead-story making articles. His “missives†are every editor's dream story source.
The whole point here is that we have a president who believes in letting people speak, and when they speak he listens. It is only someone who listens to or reads with interest what you say/write who replies as passionately as the President does.
Ironically, some of his critics — perhaps still suffering from the hangover of presidents who did not give a damn about public opinion — wonder why the president has to personally write articles explaining his position. The insinuation is that he does not trust his lieutenants. For the record, they do a lot of writing in his interest.
The critics should instead be happy that the president is responsive to their views. And since he is not a lazy man by any stretch of imagination, it is perfectly fine that he burns the midnight candle — he is legendary at it — and personally pens articles to newspapers.
Perhaps the greater lesson from the President is to some of his supporters who are tempted to behave as if the sky is about to fall, whenever they hear or read rabid attacks against government or even the president himself.
They all need to take a leaf of tolerance from some one who has clearly seen it all. Like him, they should learn to counter criticism with calm, honest and exhaustive explanation.
Yet at the end of the day, the laws must protect citizen Museveni, like they do any of us. He too must enjoy protection against the injuries of unfair attacks that amount to defamation, libel and other offences.
So as we pour vitriol against Museveni and the Movement at political meetings and on the airwaves, let us remember that we have an ally who believes it is a fair game. We can say nasty things safe in the knowledge that state agents will not be seeking to separate our heads from the necks.
More importantly, we should know that out there Ugandans — through their votes — are willing to reward credible explanations. That is why President Museveni has twice successfully kept custody of State House, after selling his case to the people.
We have a functioning market place of ideas. The President’s opponents should just sharpen their marketing skills. The resignation and desperation that one sometimes detects in the criticism of the President are unjustified — even in the event of a “Third Termâ€. Ugandans will know what they want, and who can give it them.
Ends