Is Uganda ripe for a political crisis?

It doesn't really matter who is watching the 2011 elections. Their fairness and the durability of their results is a Ugandan problem, and no amount of attention by the US Secretary of State is likely to affect their outcome. When the US Congress stipulated a monitoring and reporting programme as a condition of its approval of 70.6 million dollars in budget support for Uganda in the 2010 fiscal year, it codified a regular practice of embassies everywhere. Any good diplomatic station studies the politics of its host country carefully and reports on them regularly. In this case the US Congress is merely asked to be officially included in the sharing of that information. It's an important signal that members or, more to the point, constituents of certain members are concerned about the outcome of the elections here. But this doesn't guarantee the US government will impose sanctions of any kind on Uganda even if the results cause an uproar in America.

By the time election day arrives next year, it will be too late to significantly affect the outcome. If you are worried about improper casting, our counting of votes, or if you are worried about political interference in the Electoral Commission or the courts, now is the time to apply pressure. Outside actors like the US Secretary of State or international monitoring agents can only react to irregularities when they are reported with evidence that Uganda's laws or international standards have been violated. This means that all the recent press about the EC and all the opinions circulating from government and opposition sources, from commentators and critics will have no effect unless they can be substantiated. If they are, there will be pressure to deal with them first through Uganda's courts. You might complain that this offers little hope of resolution, but no outside agent will apply unilateral punishment unless it can show that all legitimate options inside Uganda have been exhausted. If the US Secretary of State were to deliver a very unfavourable report to the Congress, and this triggered some adjustment to official development assistance, the effects would only come after the fact, too late to change the results of the election. This is not the fault of the US or of Uganda, but rather a side effect of diplomacy. The consequences of this played out to stark effect in Zimbabwe in 2008, where international pressure there did not put the supposed winner of the election into the Presidency, and it left the balance of power in Zimbabwe's government mostly unchanged.

Creating equal opportunities for all candidates in the coming elections is a task for ordinary voters and non-governmental groups, not for donors or interested parties outside the country. If you disagree, ask yourself what you want done to ensure a fair election. International pressure will not dry up corruption in a year. Targeted sanctions against politicians are ineffective. Direct intervention by monitors or even troops over the objections of the government could start a diplomatic row or a war which would short-circuit any election. Resolutions passed in foreign legislatures usually excite opposition here but cause their targets to dig in their heels. Read about overseas views on the Bahati bill to understand this. Nothing any foreign government does is likely to change the political climate here significantly in favour of equal opportunity before the elections take place. It's true that resources and chances are skewed heavily in favour of the government and in favour of incumbents in Parliament, but it is also true that with a year to go such things are still chances and that the agents of change must rise from Ugandan society itself, not outside.

People often point to Kenya as a case where outside influence finally caused a turnabout in a disputed election. Recall, though that Kofi Annan's commission only engaged after violence in the countryside was sufficient to threaten the stability of the government regardless of who was in charge. The Kenyan government had also showed itself receptive to international influence from donors and financial institutions on corruption, and in 2002 it overcame decades of stagnant and oppressive rule in an election hailed as a model of pluralism in action. Kenya was ripe for international resolution to its electoral problems in 2008, though the political effects of the violence haven't been repaired, and this is causing Kenya to slide back towards endemic corruption and arbitrary government.

Uganda isn't Kenya. There's no widespread, anarchical political violence '" the recent riots over Kayunga are a small exception. There is large scale corruption but it doesn't yet threaten the solvency of the government '" though the NSSF scandal keeps growing. And there has been no genuine, popular overturning of an entrenched oppressive government since the end of the civil war in 1986. The implication is of course that although Uganda isn't Kenya it could become like Kenya. On these three measures at least, Uganda would appear ripe for a crisis, and such an upheaval could force an international solution. The best for everyone would be a peaceful fair election in which the results accurately account for the genuine democratic will of all who participated.

The upshot of that wish is that you are the only ones who can ensure this comes to pass. Politicians can be made accountable, usually through non-violent means, but it takes time and votes and a lot of money. This is doubly true if the politicians are entrenched incumbents with most of the country's resources and all of its tools of law and order under its boot. Still, there are almost twenty million people who could vote, and there are centres of economic power incubating outside direct government influence and outside Kampala. If there is to be any lasting peaceful political change, then these voters and this economic power must be brought to bear on election day, and only you can do this. If it is done, then there will already be significant organisation and mobilisation happening, even if such things escape the notice of government and media. The political forces that will compel a fair election and possibly bring a change of government will be Ugandan forces. Hillary Clinton cannot choose your next President.

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Comments (11)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Add Comment Preview