Somalia: is Museveni a collaborator of Neo-Colonialism?

AFRICAN BETRAYAL

The continued presence of Ugandan troops in Somalia is one that requires some evaluation and scrutiny. No one would argue that regional security is of utmost importance and prerequisite for economic growth. Our experiences with various bombs have threatened peace in East Africa and the authorities have pointed towards Al-qaeda and their vestiges – the al-shabaab as the main culprits.

We definitely recall the tragic August 7^th,  1998 twin bombs that targeted American Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Those bombs killed more than 258 people and left another staggering 5,000 injured. We have also not forgotten the tragic and senseless twin bombing that targetted revellers during FIFA’s World Cup finals event in Kampala on July 12, 2010 that left 74 people dead and another score of injuries.

That Uganda and East Africa became a target of al-qaeda inspired group – al-shabaab - has a lot to tell. The Al-shabaab have wanted Uganda and Burundi out of Somalia where they continue to protect a weak UN backed regime to stay in power. The strange part of this whole mission is that it has colorfully painted President Museveni as a merchant of war of our generation. He chooses to keep Ugandan troops in fighting expeditions even when some of the wars are contradictory to the values of Pan Africanism that h eat times professes.

For instance, the global war against terrorism is a war deeply rooted in history of global inequalities and the struggle over the control of territories and resources, mainly oil. While Uganda’s domestic demand for oil is on the rise, its participation in Somalia is a betrayal of Pan African spirits that seeks to liberate Africa for Africans. Uganda therefore has become a key agent of neo-colonialism, fighting to improve and re-establish a client states for the so-called world super powers.

One would truly wonder why President Barack Obama sent 100 highly specialized troops to Uganda, disguised in a mission to hunt down an elusive, depleted and decomposed Joseph Kony. We all know that currently, the real threats to the East African region is not Joseph Kony or LRA, but the lingering persistence and presence of radicalized groups such as al-shabaab. We also know that Sudan’s continued attack on the Republic of Southern Sudan over territorial disputes in Abyei and other oil rich regions will soon destabilize the region.

So, why must Uganda spend its resources fighting an equally elusive group of radicals that have no interest in Uganda instead of focusing on Kony and helping the new and fragile South Sudan stave off Khartoum? Of course, it would be suicidal for al-qaeda to build a base in the horn of Africa where they can further the destabilization of the region. But why should Uganda and Burundi have interests in Somalia and not Somalia’s immediate neighbors – Kenya, Somaliland, Eritrea, Ethiopia or in that case, Djibouti? Burundi is a poor country that has been recipient of handout from Uganda, why  must they focus on Somalia and not their fragile home economy and security?

The continued presence of Uganda in Somalia to fight a proxy war for the West is reminiscent of the historical collaborators of long distance trade and slavery in Africa. Slavery and subsequent colonization of black Africa was made possible purely on the good will of some African Chiefs and traditional leaders who conspired with Arabs and later Europeans to sanction these heinous crime against humanity. We are reliving the horrors of our predecesor generation that were sold into slavery. Our leaders are conspiring with our sworn oppressors to promote neo-colonialism and invite for more exploitation of the continent in exchange for their stay in power.

In return, the west finds no remorse in transplanting dictatorship in their client states. It is true that persistence of dictatorship in and around the world is a design of the West. As long as they have collaborators in power that satisfies their plunder of that country, these people are rewarded with sufficient means to repress the civilians.The war in Somalia has provided us with an opportunity to witness re-emergence of neo-colonialism in the most destructive form ever.  The recent surge in military support and activities by American Army justifies Uganda’s efforts of appeasing them in Somalia and interlinked with the brutality being meted on opposition. Unless we redefine our destiny, I fear that the NRM regime will trade Ugandans for cheap and give away their lands and resources to the advancing neo-colonialists. We must stand up and resist!

END.

Part I: How corruption sipped into our social fabric:

 CORRUPTION

Corruption in Uganda has reached a crisis level and it is now threatening the very moral fabric of our society. Every unit of our society has succumbed to this vice which has been normalized and socialized in a monumental manner. The question we must ask our generation over and over again is why we have let this monster permeate our society and our conscience such that it alone, dictates our common future.

In my previous dispositions, I posited that corruption is a function of neo-liberalism. The central premise for such assertion is that neoliberal ideologies that were imposed on the developing countries by the Brenton Woods institutions significantly destroyed social and political infrastructure of these countries. Most of the political infrastructure was a colonial construct that had gotten distorted by the advent of independence and rising socialist consciousness.

For instance, in Uganda, the sustenance of Co-operative Union ensured a sustained Agro-economy that provided soft landing for most small scale farmers from the vagaries of the global market. Through cooperatives, our farmers escaped market price fluctuations.

Now, through the open market systems, cooperatives were abolished on the ground that they offered unnecessary protection to a growing market such as Uganda. They also advanced other complimentary arguments that foreign investment in agriculture and other ventures would provide the silver bullet required for development and national debt repayments.

Neo-liberal proponents therefore introduced this monstrous principle in Africa and the rest of the developing world in haste, causing shocks. This is because its implementation did not avail significant time to prepare and mobilise human resources adequately in these countries to permit fair competition in the new economic model. Thousands of public servants were retrenched as governments were compelled to relinquish key responsibilities to its citizens. These would be given away to private and foreign firms.

 Notwithstanding the fact that international conglomerates and medium size investors would require time to study market dynamics and consumer patterns before gaining sufficient confidence to inject their capitals in these countries, most of the governments obliged to these harsh conditions upon its mere proposal. The education system was not revisited to prepare the locals to become competent global competitors. The health care sector was surrendered to speculations that private agencies would emerge to fill the gap left by the government. Most government institutions were purged of highly skilled human resources through retrenchment with the hope that new ideas and technology would perform their duties. Simply put, the expectations were way too high!

These gaps left by this rather awkward "liberalization" of the economy, only temporarily posted growth. In Uganda, people like AKEF, the Egyptian circus groups came in and left with millions worth of profits. Sudhir Ruperalia and his Indian compatriots found fertile grounds to exploit Ugandans through series of gambling (lottery & Casinos) and banking systems. South African bankers came in to purchase properties in Uganda and make millions in profit. The real Ugandan and their businesses started playing second fiddle to the bigger co-operate powers as their established industries, such as NYTIL and Coffee Marketing Board were being dismantled. Not before we could realize anything, our airwaves were filled with FM transmissions and then cell phone companies squeezed in. Uganda because a hub for "foreign investment". The death of industries in Jinja symbolized the harshness of this economic disease called Liberalization.

Why so much business, poverty, social and moral degradation and infrastructural collapse?

The purpose of every investment is for accumulation of profit. Most of the investors in Uganda are second class investors and most of them expropriate their capitals back to their homeland. We continue to witness painstaking levels of exploitation and abuse of local Ugandan worker in the hands of these so-called investors. Given the buzz of liberal economy, I argue in here that corruption has materialized in this equation as a result of striving for "rent allocation". When indigenous people try to enter the chaotic open marketplace, they have to compete against well organized and experienced foreign investors. With all the disadvantages against them, they opt to procure space compete.

The incentives the Ugandan government has in place for foreign investors have never been matched with that for local innovation. For instance, tax waivers or tax free grace periods tend to favour foreigners than the locals. The investment policies are equally skewed towards the foreigner. The ordinary Ugandan therefore has to endure the briber's dilemma if they are to remain afloat in the market and by extension in every aspect of the sickened society; else they quickly sink.

Corruption therefore is the means by which space in the so-called liberal market gets procured such that at every bureaucracy standpoint, one has to dispense millions of shillings to get an assurance of prospects and possibilities of upward mobility. And corruption takes many shapes and forms; it could come in terms of money, land, promises for shares in business venture, tuition refund for relatives or children of the person in authority and in some instances, sexual pleasures.

END