Why doesn’t NUP’s manifesto include National Security?

Simply put, NUP has no position on Uganda’s national security. I find this ironic, especially because their manifesto opens by decrying Uganda’s turbulent political and constitutional history, yet ignores national security throughout.

COMMENT | NNANDA KIZITO SSERUWAGI | If you read the NUP Manifesto, you’ll find that it omits national security as a primary concern in any of the eleven policy priorities it marks out. This could mean either of two things: that NUP admits satisfaction with the way Museveni’s NRM has managed national security, or that NUP does not consider national security to be of serious concern. If the earlier is the case, it is a profound concession to Museveni in this presidential contest. If it is the latter, i.e., that NUP doesn’t consider national security important, it is a fundamental indictment of Robert Kyagulanyi’s grasp of statecraft and governance fundamentals.

Why is national security important?

The foundational responsibility of the state is to ensure its own national security and survival. In fact, citizens often surrender their rights to the sovereignty of the state in exchange for guarantees of security and stability. While states across history and geography have sometimes abused citizens’ rights, it does not change the fact that the state’s primary responsibility is ensuring national security. Without security, we cannot exercise any other right, liberty or responsibility. The exercise of democracy and observation of human rights can only be contingent on the existence of a secure and stable state.

It is not surprising that strong countries invest immensely in their national security, with the US’s defence expenditure, for example, exceeding the combined military spending of the next 10 largest spenders globally. It speaks to the fact that national security is the first priority of any state.

For us to evaluate the better candidate between Kyagulanyi and Museveni, we must assess each of them on the mastery of statecraft. Unfortunately for Kyagulanyi, Museveni has been president for almost 40 years, giving him a longer track record of credibility and competence. This makes the burden of proof higher for Kyagulanyi: he must demonstrate that Museveni has not only failed, but that he would be significantly better than him.

Since we have established that one of the litmus tests for measuring a leader’s grasp of statecraft is their understanding of the fundamental duty of the state they are to govern, let us audit Kyagulanyi and Museveni’s ideas on national security in their 2026-2031 manifestos.

As earlier mentioned, none of the eleven policy priorities of NUP captures national security. They list their priorities to include: restoration of freedom, constitutionalism, and human, rights; ending corruption and wasteful government expenditure; consolidating national unity, rebuilding war-torn communities, and eliminating sectarianism; guaranteeing equal access to quality public services; creating 10 million new jobs by 2032; establishing a public-school feeding program to transform agriculture, ensure food security, enhance education outcomes and support a heathy population; stopping land grabbing and guaranteeing secure land rights for all; empowering regional and local governance through real devolution; positioning the diaspora as a strategic asset and strengthen foreign policy for Uganda’s development and global competitiveness; ensuring sustainable management of natural resources and climate resilience; and finally transforming Uganda into a tech-driven economy through leveraging technology resources and innovation.

The NUP manifesto briefly mentions national security and digital rights as the very last item on page 93 (subsection 11.7), but offers no actual policy on national security. Simply put, NUP has no position on Uganda’s national security. I find this ironic, especially because their manifesto opens by decrying Uganda’s turbulent political and constitutional history, yet ignores national security throughout. Its manifesto is also largely an AI-generated document, rendering it heavy on rhetoric but light on substance.

Let us turn to the NRM manifesto and assess how it compares with NUP on national security.

From his personal message in the manifesto, it is clear that Museveni’s mind is framed in broader terms beyond Uganda’s national security. As a true Pan-Africanist, he ponders Africa’s strategic security. He asks, “How can Africa be secure from all threats?”

He proceeds, exhibiting the deep analytical mind of an old sage, to observe that with economic integration, markets can be united to create prosperity. However, prosperity alone does not guarantee strategic security. Developed countries like Japan and South Korea still depend on others (the USA) for strategic security. He observes that in World War II, the developed countries of Holland, Denmark, Belgium, France, etc., were overrun by Germany, only to be rescued by the Soviet Union and, later on, the USA. With all this thorough analysis, Museveni is explaining the significance of investing in strategic continental security to create Africa’s centre of gravity.

He proceeds to share thoughts on the phenomenon of 4-dimensional superiority, which some countries have achieved or are aiming for, by developing capabilities to be superior on land (Land Forces), in the air (Air Force), at sea (the Navy) and in space. Museveni argues that for Africa to compete in the four dimensions, it should integrate economically and politically to secure the continent against all threats.

Page 155 of the NRM manifesto includes a section on the security of life and property, identifying this as one of the party’s core strengths.  This reinforces the point I made at the start – that the primary responsibility of any state is to ensure security and stability, because without them, no other rights can stand.

The NRM manifesto notes that before capturing power in 1986, insecurity was widespread throughout Uganda, with Ugandans living in constant fear of extra-judicial killings and looting.  By creating a professional army, demystifying the gun, democratising the country, and fostering positive interactions between security forces and citizens, NRM reversed all this.

It has now built the capacity of security forces in terms of numbers, quality, and improved equipment. The number of the Uganda Police Force has grown from 3,000 in 1986 to 46,000 officers in 2025. The UPDF has also continued to secure Uganda’s national borders, with no threat of invasion or war threatening the country. It has built sufficient counter-terrorism capability in terms of personnel and equipment. The manifesto also notes that the government established the National Forensic Science University in Jinja, which offers courses in cyber security studies, forensic investigations, and information science to manage the emerging challenge of cyber security caused by advancements in technology. The UPDF has also, over the years, undertaken various regional security obligations. Beyond providing national security, the UPDF is also participating in production and value addition, with organs like the National Enterprises Cooperation involved in manufacturing and commerce.

The challenges that Uganda’s security and security forces face are also not ignored or excused. It is noted that given Uganda’s population of 45.9 million people and the recommended UN policing ratio of 1:500, Uganda police should have a force with a strength of 91,306 personnel. The manifesto makes commitments to fill this gap by recruiting more personnel to achieve the recommended ratio.

Another area requiring significant improvement is the welfare of security forces, especially in terms of salaries and housing. The manifesto takes note of this, promising that the government is working on a housing project under the Private, Public Partnership (PPP) arrangement to construct 69,000 housing units across the country for the Police.

Uganda is still a developing country, with significant resource challenges limiting the capacity of the state to provide public goods and services, including providing sufficient welfare for women and men in uniform. Therefore, there are certainly many vivid weaknesses observable in our country’s security. The NRM manifesto highlights this too. However, what is also vivid is the competence or sheer lack of any form of competence between the two leading presidential aspirants. One candidate has a greater understanding of security, both on a national and continental strategic level, while the other doesn’t even broach national security, not even in a single sentence in his entire manifesto.

*****

The writer is a Ugandan thinking about Uganda.