Prime
Why we need genuine national dialogue
Moses Khisa
What you need to know:
- Meaningful engagement. But what kind of dialogue do we need and under what sort of modalities? It has to be a dialogue that confronts head-on the problems we face and the need to change course.
Our political system is broken. There is great uncertainty about the future political stability of Uganda. We have a very fragile social situation with latent ethnic tensions and glaring economic inequalities.
The land question will likely to be the next frontier of social conflict. Those with huge monies, most likely illicit, have commandeered large tracts of land, leaving largest masses landless. The masses of young men riding passenger motor cycles gave away their ancestral lands on the cheap.
We have an imperial and life president who has subordinated critical State institutions to the narrow pursuit of power. The nepotism in public offices has ceased to appear embarrassing to the rulers, with the chief ruler having several of his family members in government positions. There is mounting demographic and social crises. Armies of young people desperate for a livelihood but caught in hopelessness. Many graduates at different levels do not receive a meaningful education that prepares them for a productive and worthwhile life.
We have a toxic social environment. Crime and lawlessness. A Kampala-based economy that has made the city a cocktail of social classes and problems with a tenuous physical infrastructure and a dearth of basic social services.
There is political uncertainty and social anxiety. Strong sentiments of ethnic and regional marginalisation and unfairness in sharing the ‘national cake.’ Our many civil wars have left enormous scars, especially in the greater northern Uganda.
The government in power since 1986, has become patently inefficient and demonstrably incapable of meeting the expectations of a modern State and government. Political corruption has been institutionalised and is integral to the structure and survival of the regime.
Repeated assaults on the Constitution have imperilled constitutionalism and attenuated the idea of a rule-based society. The minimum consensus embodied in the 1995 Constitution has been grossly rolled back, giving rise to political confrontation rather than constructive engagement between the holders of power and the challengers in Opposition.
The sum of it is that Uganda is a country at crossroads. We need to get to the drawing board, to refresh and reflect. We urgently need to reimagine a different future away from the decay and dysfunction of the current regime.
We need a concerted and constructive national dialogue, to regenerate national consensus and chart a new course for the country. We needed this yesterday. But what kind of dialogue do we need and under what sort of modalities? It has to be a dialogue that confronts head-on the problems we face and the need to change course.
Is it possible to have meaningful and productive national dialogue given that what we have is essentially a military authoritarian regime draped under a façade of democracy and constitutional rule?
Such a regime concedes to dialogue when placed under intense popular pressure or when it suffers significant internal divisions and cleavages among the political elite and within the defence and security forces.
Last year, the rulers roundly denounced the national dialogue process being spearheaded by civil society organisations. They chided the idea as having no legal or constitutional standing. They claimed they had recently “won” elections and had no reason to engage in any political dialogue.
Yet in a surprise and curious turn, they have now embraced the process and are even willing to commit to funding it. This raises the question of why the turnaround?
The organisations and individuals pushing the agenda for national dialogue should be saluted for the effort. But for the sceptics, things stand on shaky ground.
The most important set of actors in a political dialogue are the rulers because they control the State, have a grip on the tools of force and finance. These rulers today are in no hurry to dialogue about anything because of the braggadocio derived from their firm control of State power.
The organisers and sponsors of the national dialogue process need to realise that the NRM party and the Government of Uganda essentially boils down to one man: Mr Museveni.
If he is to be part of the dialogue, his approach will be to give a long lecture about Uganda’s history and how he fought to liberate us, is still committed to liberating us and has no time to waste on useless things. He will give statistics about his supposed achievements, but will not concede to the fact that the country is in crisis and needs to envisage a future beyond him.
