The difference between USA and Uganda’s elections and Why i think Obama May not get a 2nd Term

Dear Friends,

It is sometimes frustrating when some people start comparing the US elections to African elections. There isn’t a very big difference between these two countries. It is just that the Americans do things in a more sophisticated way that cannot be seen by a lay man.

Voters in both countries are not motivated to vote. In Uganda out of a population of 33 millions, not more than 9 million people voted in the 2006 presidential elections and less than 14 million voted in 2011 elections. Most of those who voted for Museveni were already placed in terms of structures operated under the NRM system. There are less people in both countries indentifying themselves with political parties and politicians.

A half of the United States does not feel motivated to vote till when Obama came to the scene which attracted the youth into elections. Before the animosity of the 2004 election prompted more Americans back to vote, there had been a steady trend of declining voter participation. The 2000 election highlighted a pervasive and widespread apathy and antipathy towards politics. Voter turnout in presidential elections sank to around 50% during the 1990s, and was even lower during mid-term elections.

Registration is not a big thing in both countries. In Uganda it is the government which does less to encourage people to register while in the USA, it is the people who aren’t bothered despite government exposure. Americans are highly mobile people, who move states frequently, requiring them to re-register as voters. The unprecedented closeness of the 2000 presidential election between Bush and Gore proved that every vote counts and encouraged the higher participation in 2004. However, the problem runs far deeper than this and will not be easily resolved.

In Uganda and USA, government failures and scandals usually don’t undermine faith in politicians. For instance, Americans still voted for Bill Clinton despite the raise of the Monica Lewinsky scandal. In Uganda, on the other hand, Museveni has been involved in a lot of scandals of that magnitude and Ugandans would know them but it has not stop them giving him their votes. Former VP, Gilbert Bukenya, was reported to have been 'digging'  the wife of one of his drivers to the extent of renting her a house in Fort-portal (Bunyoro) but still the people of Kakiiri voted for him. Basically, issues such as womanising among politicians cannot make anybody lose an election in Uganda.

That is why I sometimes wonder how a man who legitimately married an ex-girlfriend of President Museveni would be treated as a villain for this particular action by both the government and some opposition supporters. Some even go out of their way to use it as a basis of discrediting his candidature for presidency yet Besigye has never been accused of sleeping around with other women. Whenever he is “starving”, we read him in newspapers making trips to New York to see his lovely wife who works for UN offices there.

USA just like Uganda has got people whose intentions are to undermine democracy and create confusion where it is unnecessary. In Uganda, we have got people who intentionally use state money when campaigning especially the incumbent. Up to now, Museveni’s NRM have not declared to the Electoral Commission their sources of funds yet it is well known that they have been ‘buying’ the elections since 2001. There are also groups such as Kalangala Action Plan whose goals and objectives have been to undermine democracy in the country.

On the other hand, there are associations in the USA which are also there to frustrate things. For example, the National Rifle Association has successfully prevented any reform of the gun control laws, despite the fact that the majority of the population wants them to be more stringent. The issue of campaign and lobbying rumbles on. The 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) aimed to curb “soft money”, but candidates soon found loopholes and ways to circumvent the controls. However, more stringent lobbying reforms were passed by Congress in August 2007 and have tightened up this area of campaign finance significantly but still presidential candidates spend considerable amounts of money during their campaigns. Obama has already started fundraising for his campaigns and he is expected to look for money anywhere he can get it, but it may be hard for him this time compared to the previous elections.

USA just like Uganda, the guy with a lot of money tends to win the election. The 2004 election between Bush and Kerry did nothing to dispel the appearance that only individuals and groups able to raise huge sums of money stand a chance of victory. Reforms to campaign finance were nimbly side-stepped by the Democrats and Republicans alike. According to Global Insight, after accepting their parties’ nominations, Bush and Kerry were restricted to US$74.6 million each in government funding, but during the preceding primaries there were no such limits. Both decided to opt out of the programme that would see federal funds match those raised privately, which would have imposed a total cap on spending. In the end it is estimated that Bush managed to raise some US$367 million in total, ahead of John Kerry’s US$326 million (according to www.opensecrets.org). The total for all candidates was a staggering US$881 million, well ahead of the US$529 million raise in 2000 and the US$425.7 million in 1996.

That’s why the opposition in Uganda need to match Museveni’s state funding by starting to look for funds in advance before any presidential elections, if they are to stand any chance of winning any election. Politicians who are middle class with no big network behind them are not ideal presidential candidates in the present Uganda. Politicians whose faces have not been exposed to the voters in advance will increase the advertising costs yet the opposition has got no money.

The only major difference I see between Uganda and US elections is mainly the respect and value of manifestos. In Uganda politicians are voted for anything less than their policies. FDC’s Besigye had a better manifesto in 2001 and actually the government had to implement some of his policies after the election, like abolishing graduated tax. However, Ugandans in the rural areas went for a guy who was threatening them with a gun if they don’t vote for him. In the USA, parties that have got better approaches of tackling the country’s most important problems—the budget deficit, income inequality, racial tension, crime and the health and welfare systems, tend to be voted by majority. That’s why Obama may struggle to win his second term despite killing Osama Bin Laden and seeing off more terrorists and dictators around the world than any other American president. The US economy is in a bad shape and it may cost him the presidency.

 The USA has also got a better Electoral Commission (EC) and judicial system which can deliver what is expected in case of any disagreement between the opposition and the government. In Uganda, the EC is appointed by president Museveni and can get rid of them any time he wants. That is why elections have become more or less useless. There is a lot of violence in elections in Uganda and the political opponents are looked as enemies of the state by both the police and army.

--
Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba

UNITED KINGDOM

http://ugandansatheart.org/

http://twitter.com/#!/semuwemba

http://jjanguonkwekule.blogspot.com/
http://semuwemba.wordpress.com/

Why Buganda Kingdom Needs All Its Assets Back?

Kabaka of Buganda's lake

Dear Ugandans,

 After weakening almost the multiparty politics in Uganda, the main threat to NRMO ideology and Museveni’s life presidency project is the existence of Buganda kingdom and the ''free'' media. The president’s ‘big eyes’ keep rolling over to find various ways to tackle these two problems. When one analyzes Uganda politics critically, it looks like we have got no opposition anymore and I can see a trend of so many opposition leaders crossing to join NRMO in order to look for ‘bread and butter’ in the next few years. Both DP and UPC are in disarray. For instance, UPC leaders are throwing punches at each other as we recently witnessed in a press conference where Obote’s son, Jimmy Akena, attempted to punch at Olara Otunu. Former Obote security minister and UPC die hard, Chris Rwakasisi, has now formerly also joined the Museveni government. FDC, the only party with some little threat, has got a very brilliant leader in Dr.Besigye but his absence in parliament and announcement to retire from party leadership before 2015 has made him more of an office leader and weaker in the eyes of Ugandans.

With Besigye’s charisma and strength in character, if he was in parliament, he would have set fire in all parliamentary debates. How we miss his funny voice on radios like monitor online KFM where even the Ugandans in Diaspora used to tune in to listen to his voice before the 2006 elections. I still wonder why we in Diaspora can no longer get those clips the monitor team used to post on the their website after the Andrew Mwenda show. Andrew Mwenda, himself, seems like he has already moved on as he no longer sounds like the man we all admired on KFM shows. He has opened his own news magazine and calls hismelf the 'big dog'( whatever this means).

Nevertheless, Buganda has tried its level best to recreate itself as a 'federal' state despite the efforts from the central government to keep it a ‘beggar’ by constantly refusing to return all the Buganda properties though the constitution tells them to do so. The government has instead embarked on a policy to use ‘elites’ in Buganda to weaken the kingdom indirectly. For example Professor Appolo Nsibambi was once the chief negotiator for ‘’ebyaffe’’ and he used to work as a professor of political science at Makerere University and former director of the Makerere Institute of Social Research (MISR) before becoming prime minister of Uganda in 1998. Men like presidential advisor, Robert Ssebunya, used to be a minister at Mengo but he now puts more of their efforts in serving the Museveni presidency than their Kabaka. Current pressidential spokesperson, Tamare Mirundi, used to be a regular on CBS fm.

Buganda does not have enough money and that is why they need their properties back. Mengo has not done a lot for the Kabaka subjects residing in the kingdom because the treasury is almost empty. Most of the money collected is dedicated to the administrative expenses of Bulange and the ministries. The only major operations mengo has been able to finance outside this budget is that of the Buganda Cultural and Development Foundation (BUCADEF) as of year 2006, and construction of some building in Katwe which is not yet finished.

Nevertheless, Mengo needs to adjust to the current economic situation where even developed nations are struggling, and reduce on unnecessarly expenses if we are to convince Baganda and Ugandans to come on board and fight for kingdoms. There is less spending by the Kingdom that goes to planning and economic development. Mengo needs to use the little money collected from projects such as CBS radio for developmental projects. Expenditure on Kabaka's office should be reduced, for example, 43% of the expenditure in 1998/99 was allocated to the Kabaka’s office. The money collected from certificates,donations and other income generating projects should mostly be used to create more income generating projects. That is the only way the kingdom will ultimately empower its subjects economically.

To the kingdom's credit, however, most of its development activities are managed by BUCADEF and funded by external grants, which are not included in the budget. In 1998, for instance, BUCADEF received a USh518.9 m grant from the United States Agency for International Development for a two-year food security project which was renewed in 2000. The UN predicted then that there was going to be a worldwide food shortage but I’m surprised that we don’t have enough food in Buganda as well. What was used with that money? BUCADEF was also the lead NGO for Mpigi district for a USh663 m World Bank-financed Nutrition and Early Childhood Development Project. Additional programs sponsored by foreign donors include hygiene, water and sanitation project and a sustainable agriculture project, but we have got a problem of accountability in Mengo and I think this need to be rectified as soon as possible.

Despite all the above, the Kabaka of Buganda should be applauded for his efforts through the establishment of the Kabaka Foundation  which is another  ` parastatal ' development agency registered as an NGO and aims to ` institute, promote, encourage and support cultural, educational, literacy, economic, social and charitable projects for the benefits of the public in Buganda and Uganda'. This foundation was one of the customers that suffered from the closure of Greenland Bank where it held its accounts. The rich Baganda have not done a lot to help this foundation to push its work forward. For example, the foundation had ran only three projects as of end of 2000, the latter two of which were still at the planning stages : the Bukalango Model Village Program near Kakiri, some 20 kilometres outside Kampala; the Street Children Centre, an orphanage in Kampala's southern suburbs; and `Heritage Trails', a project for the development of community tourism begun in 1999 in association with a Ugandan NGO, Uganda Community Tourism Association (UCOTA), and a British NGO, Action for Conservation through Tourism (ACT). Although the model village's 3 acre farm successfully produced matoke (bananas), coffee, groundnuts and vegetables, it attracted only limited interest from local farmers who seem to have expected inflows of cash from the kabaka for their village and may have been disappointed to be taught instead methods of self-reliance. People attend in large numbers at the occasion of the Kabaka's visits but this has not translated into mobilization for farming.

 The purpose of the `Heritage Trails' project is to ` assist communities to develop and manage tourism themselves in order to generate income’, but its existence sheds another light upon Buganda's development policies. Indeed, its interest in this project may not lie so much in generating income for local communities as in bringing back to life important cultural sites of Ganda culture (restored under the project to serve as tourist attractions), thereby generating cultural awareness and promoting ideological unification among Baganda, while sending the signal to remote villages that the kingdom is back. No wonder the cultural program initiated by Nabagereka Sylivia Naggenda called ‘Ekisakate’ has generated more interest than anything else in the kingdom.

Through the Kabaka Foundation, Ssabasajja has been able to provide scholarships to a lot of students in Buganda. The kingdom has also got equipment to open up another radio and TV station to supplement CBSfm, but the central government is not ready to give those licenses. Actually, the license to open up the radio station in Bulemezi was reportedly cancelled after the 2009 Buganda riots that saw more than 30 people dead. CBSfm is also under constant security scrutiny since it was opened in 2010.

There are so many developmental ideas and rhetoric posted on the Buganda kingdom website(www.buganda.com) but the kingdom has achieved very little in this area basically because the central government is hell bent on keeping the kingdom’s assets to deny them a  very good income to implement these projects. If anyone wants to blame why Buganda has not done a lot in terms of economic development, they should mainly blame the Museveni government. The government keeps strategically coming up with ideas of weakening this kingdom basically for selfish reasons, like the creation of chiefdoms within the kingdom.

Now, those who are non-Baganda should know that when Mengo builds a college in any region in Buganda, it benefits them as well. So they should support Mengo’s efforts to get what it wants from the central government to get these services on the ground instead of supporting the central government in its endeavors to weaken Buganda. Development can start from Buganda and then spreads to other regions.Anyway, whatever tricks the central government has come up with so far, the good brains at Mengo have done a lot to counteract them, but this will be for another day.

Byebyo ebyange

Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba

United Kingdom

The Global Innovation Index 2011

This explores the transformative power of innovation. Significantly, it identifies the conditions and qualities that allow innovation to thrive, and highlights the role innovation can play in a nation’s economic and social development. A key goal of this index has been to find metrics and approaches to better capture the richness of innovation in society and go beyond the traditional measures of innovation such as the number of PhDs, research articles produced, research centers created, patents issued, and R&D expenditures.
http://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii/GII%20COMPLETE_PRINTWEB.pdf 

The flight from marriage

In 83 countries and territories around the world, according to the United Nations, women will not have enough daughters to replace themselves, unless fertility rates rise. In Hong Kong, for example, a cohort of 1,000 women would be expected to give birth to just 547 daughters, at today’s fertility rates. In some Western countries, a quarter of people in their 30s are cohabiting or have never been married, while half of new marriages end in divorce. Marriage continues to be the almost universal setting for child-bearing in Asia: only about 2% of births took place outside wedlock in Japan in 2007.

In 2010 a third of Japanese women entering their 30s were single. Perhaps half or more of those will never marry. In 2010 37% of all women in Taiwan aged 30-34 were single, as were 21% of 35-39-year-olds. This, too, is more than in Britain and America, where only 13-15% of those in their late 30s are single. If women are unmarried entering their 40s, they will almost certainly neither marry nor have a child.
http://www.economist.com/node/21526329 

Growth across Africa: Contributions from DFID-funded research

Africa may have some of the world’s fastest-growing economies, but investment and incomes still lag far behind other regions. New research conducted by Tim Kelsall, under the rubric of the DFID-funded African Power and Politics Programme (APPP), has sought to unpack the widely held view that 'irregular' African growth is strongly linked to the governance syndrome known as neo-patrimonialism. This refers to a system of personal rule held together by the distribution of economic resources to clients or cronies.

One of the major challenges identified for African countries to replicate the Asian model is that Africa does not have well established clusters of firms and knowledge in the new export sectors. This leaves two major issues that need to be resolved: (1) Until clusters are established, costs will be above those of Asian competitors, and (2) because costs are currently higher, individual firms have no incentive to relocate.
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/r4d/news.asp?ArticleID=50790&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+R4dGrowthResearchNewsNewsfeed+%28R4D+Growth+Research+News%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher&utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=owly&utm_campaign=tw 

A Model for Clean Energy Innovation in Africa

infoDev's Climate Technology Program published an article in The Africa Energy Yearbook 2011, co-written with  government and private partners in Kenya. The publication discusses the Climate Innovation Center (CIC) in Kenya and how it will support the government's objectives in the Greening Kenya Initiative.
http://www.infodev.org/en/Article.747.html 

Global Climate Risk Index 2011

Less developed countries are generally more affected by the impacts of weather-related events than industrialised countries, according to the 2011 Climate Risk Index (CRI). The Global Climate Risk Index 2011 analyses the extent to which countries have been affected by storms, floods, heat waves and other weather induced occurrences using data collected during the 1990-2009 period. The index uses the number of deaths, sum of losses in US$ in purchasing power parity and of GDP.
http://indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/cri2011.pdf 

International Day for the Remembrance of the Slave Trade and of its Abolition

At its 29th session, the UNESCO Executive Board adopted the Resolution 29 C/40, proclaiming 23 August, the International Day for the Remembrance of the Slave Trade and of its Abolition, in tribute to the night of 22 to 23 August 1791, when the uprising of slaves took place in Santo Domingo island (today Haiti and the Dominican Republic) and, led later on the abolition of the transatlantic slave trade and the creation of the first Black independent State, the Republic of Haiti.
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/africa-department/resources/africa-department/news/23_august_international_day_for_the_remembrance_of_the_slave_trade_and_of_its_abolition/ 

Branchless banking: Who is served? At what price? What is next?

Excitement around branchless banking is rapidly turning into action by the private sector. Of the 79 live mobile money deployments tracked by the GSM Association (GSMA), two-thirds have launched in 2009 and 2010. Nokia and Paypal are investing in mobile payment platforms available to any client regardless of his or her mobile network or bank, a development that could shake up markets. And early branchless banking leaders are launching out in new directions. Brazilian banks are increasingly eager to use agents equipped with point-of-sale (POS) devices to originate loans. In Kenya, Safaricom has teamed up with Equity Bank, the country’s largest bank, to offer M-Kesho, a service that uses M-PESA’s mobile payments platform to offer a full range of Equity’s bank products.

Will these sizeable investments pay off? Many in the private sector believe reaching large numbers of mass market clients is a precondition to large-scale profits, but at the same time, they are uncertain about how quickly branchless banking will gain traction with the unbanked, low-income clients who make up the mass market. In other words, the prospects of branchless banking are still unclear.
http://www.mobileactive.org/files/file_uploads/FN66_Rev1.pdf 

IFC releases full sustainability framework

The IFC's policy updates, approved by the board in May and coming into effect on the first of the upcoming year, have now been released to the public. BIC and partners will be writing an analysis of the gains and gaps in the new policies soon, but we congratulate the IFC on strengthening these vital policies.

Because the influence that it wields is disproportionate to the amount that it invests, IFC represents an important target for civil society advocacy to not only strengthen requirements in IFC's own projects, but also potentially to a host of private banks and across the industries in which it invests. In particular, IFC exerts an increasing influence on the standards applied by private banks involved in project finance. As of June 2009, 68 private financial institutions such as CitiGroup and ABN Amro, have adopted a set of social and environmental standards, called the Equator Principles, which are based on the IFC’s Performance Standards. This amounts to a commitment that the projects they finance abide by the same environmental and social requirements as IFC-sponsored projects.
http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/policyreview.nsf#SF 

Progress and the status quo of democratic ownership and meaningful civil society participation in the health sector

The aim of this report is to contribute to the debate in the lead-up to the Fourth High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness; to provide lessons learned and models for best practice, particularly in the health sector; and thus to influence donor and recipient governments, as well as civil society itself, to continue focusing on making democratic ownership of aid effectiveness a reality. After providing an overview of the concept and benefits of civil society participation, the report presents the principle of country ownership as stipulated in the Paris Declaration and refined in the Accra Agenda for Action.

In a second part, El Salvador, Mozambique and Nepal are presented as case studies and civil society participation in these countries is analyzed in light of achievements, challenges and lessons learned. This section also provides an overview of best practice examples from El Salvador, Mozambique, Nepal and a few other countries. A conclusive section compares the three case studies and draws parallels and conclusions of significance to developing countries more generally. Recommendations for the improvement of civil society participation and democratic ownership are made at the end. http://www.actionforglobalhealth.eu/fileadmin/AfGH_Intranet/AFGH/Publications/AfGH_CSOParticipationReport_F1_LoRes.pdf 

From violence to voting: War and political participation in Uganda

What is the political legacy of violent conflict? The evidence comes from northern Uganda, where rebel recruitment generated quasiexperimental variation in who was conscripted by abduction. Survey data suggest that abduction leads to substantial increases in voting and community leadership, largely due to elevated levels of violence witnessed. Meanwhile, abduction and violence do not appear to affect nonpolitical participation. These patterns are not easily explained by conventional theories of participation, including mobilization by elites, differential costs, and altruistic preferences.

Qualitative interviews suggest that violence may lead to personal growth and political activation, a possibility supported by psychological research on the positive effects of traumatic events. Although the generalizability of these results requires more evidence to judge, the findings challenge our understanding of political behavior and point to important new avenues of research.
http://www.chrisblattman.com/documents/research/2009.V2V.APSR.pdf 

Food price watch

Global prices of food in July 2011 remain significantly higher than their levels in July 2010 and close to the 2008 peak levels, with the World Bank Food Price Index increasing by 33 percent in the last year. Prices for the period April to July 2011 have declined slightly from their peak in February, although prices remain volatile for specific commodities such as rice, maize, and wheat. Prospects for the overall supply of food have improved since April 2011, but several sources of uncertainty remain.

The annual price changes in maize in the 12 months up to June 2011 ranged from increases of more than 100 percent in Kampala (Uganda) to reductions of 19 percent in Port-au- Prince (Haiti) and Mexico City. Domestic prices of some staples have increased sharply in Central and South America and East Africa.

The acute malnutrition rate in some areas of Somalia has exceeded 40 percent among children under five years of age. The disaster has hit the most vulnerable. In Somalia, out of 3.7 million people in crisis, 3.2 million are in urgent need, and 2.8 million of these people are in the south.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPOVERTY/Resources/335642-1210859591030/FPW_August2011.pdf 

International Criminal Court Cases in Africa: Status and Policy Issues

The International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutions have been praised by human rights advocates. At the same time, the ICC Prosecutor’s choice of cases and the perception that the Court has disproportionately focused on Africa have been controversial. Congressional interest in the work of the ICC in Africa has arisen in connection with concerns over gross human rights violations on the African continent and beyond, along with broader concerns over ICC jurisdiction and U.S. policy toward the Court. This report provides background on current ICC cases and examines issues raised by the ICC’s actions in Africa.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL34665.pdf 

Museveni Will Not Give Away Mabira. He is Simply using it to take the ”Economic Heat” off himself

Dear friends,
Mabira forest is back in the news and, this time around with a seemingly determined president who is ready to give away part of the forest for sugar cane growing. Speaking as someone who grew up on a farm in Bugerere, and who lived somewhere nearest to Mabira forest at Kangulumira, I would have to say president Museveni don’t have a clue about the environment. President museveni’s argument that giving away part of Mabira in 2007 would have prevented the current rise in sugar prices is so simplistic. His insistence that he will give away Mabira regardless of people’s cries is another confirmation that big people with big power do big evil and know they are doing it.

Yes, some people have argued that Mabira is just one forest in Uganda and in any case, it is very easy to replace a forest but Isn’t that like saying that because an individual locust doesn’t mean to wipe out the entire crop that we should try to stop the hoard of them. Cutting down trees or rain forests, bodes ill for the long-term survival of the human species. Some 25% of the world’s oxygen is generated in the rainforests. As a matter of our own survival it is imperative that every resource not be used up, but that instead sustainable methods be implemented.

What use is short-term success if it guarantees long-term failure? Isn’t it better to implement methods that are good for us now and later? The fact is that cutting down a forest affects the environment. If we lose forests, we lose the fight against climate change. Global warming and increased temperatures are causing higher winds as well. I read somewhere that Sahara Desert was once a rain forest before man started heating the earth with campfires to cook meat, and suddenly the Desert formed. In this 21st century, we are doing a lot of things to destroy these forests. For instance, we’re ruining the rainforest by using too much toilet paper. It may sound funny to a lot of people but it is true. The sky is just falling into pieces on a daily basis and we are doing very little to revert the process.

For Mabira Forest, there was an abrupt forest loss of about 24%  between 1976 and 1986 (27,421 to 20,977 ha) due to encroachers. I guess the rebels against Iddil Amin and Milton Obote 2 governments might have also cooked a lot of food in the bushes using firewood at the time. The encroachers originated from the neighbouring districts of mainly Kamuli and Iganga. The trend of encroachment was reversed between 1988 and 1989 when all the encroachers were evicted and an ambitious programme of rehabilitating the forest through re-afforestation was embarked on by the forest department in 1989. We are now surprised that the same government that saw the need to protect the forest is now gearing towards destroying it.

Fact is, the economy is entirely too large and complex for human minds to comprehend. Government policy does have noticeable and to some extent predictable effects on the economy. President Museveni ‘cleaned’ up the treasury during this year’s presidential campaigns and he has been dishing out a lot of money to save his  men , particularly, Basajjabalaba, whose businesses are always in trouble. May be the money has run out, and now it is time to dish out state land. Our Nation is being sold down the river to save Museveni’s legacy of mismanagement of resources.

Mabira is a tourist attraction and it cannot continue to generate us income with leaders who see it as a cancer to sugarcane production. Mabira is endowed with about 312 trees and shrub species. Approximately 47% of Uganda’s tree species grow in Mabira, including five rare species. There are more than 287 birds including the threatened Nahan’s francolin (Francolinus nahani); 23 small mammals, vervet monkeys and baboons as well as two arboreal primate species; 218 butterfly species and 97 large moth species. It is illegal to practice medicine without a license in Uganda. It is too bad that Museveni, simply because he is president, is given a license to manage forests he knows nothing about, and cares even less about.

It is suspected that government’s interest in Mabira is mainly Timber. The timber companies usually cut down the large, mature trees for their profit and what Museveni is attempting to do is let loose the timber companies to make the environmental decisions for us all. Both the timber and sugar companies are simply taking advantage of a poor nation with a corrupt system. Which stable country really gives out land like that as if we are a charity case? They also pay peanuts to the Basoga who are doing most of the sugarcane growing but because our people are poor, they still go along with it.

Profits by definition, are the difference between the market value of a product and the cost of its production.  Paying workers little and selling the fruits of their labor for a high price is one way enormous profits can be generated.  For instance, if Madhvani can sell a 20 kg sack of sugar in the South Sudan for $150, made in Uganda for about $7 in labor and materials, then the  labor was actually worth many times what the  laborer was actually compensated for the work. Nonetheles, SCOUL  is the least efficient of Uganda’s three main sugar producers – the others are Kakira and Kinyara. Their demand for ‘free’ land is abysimal and should be rejected by all free minded Ugandans.

What the government should do is to turn people already owning land around Mabira and sugar factories into fulltime and -state- supported sugarcane growers. There are a lot of people who own large pieces of land in these areas but it is idle. By transmogrifying a group of such people into market-oriented consumers and laborers in factories, they become sources of profit. In Mabira forest, many of the deforested portions were turned to smallholder agriculture (sharp increase of agriculture in 1986 and 1989 compared to the 1970s).

There is plenty we can do now to preserve human livelihood both now and later. Education, international cooperation,  debt forgiveness, technology transfer, introducing  sustainable farming methods, setting aside more protected  lands, passing and enforcing laws that both protect the  environment and encourage economic growth, providing job  training, follwoing the Cuban experiment, etc. All this would be much cheaper in the long run than sitting twiddling our thumbs and then having to pay the price later.

Personally, I still don’t believe that Museveni will risk giving away Mabira because what happened on April 12th 2007 will be made to look like a picnic if he goes ahead with this idea. He has tactically created a situation that takes the heat completly off him as the economy is in a totally bad shape. So people have simply forgotten other issues and everybody has jumped on Mabira. Anyway,the Mehta family should look for the 17,540 acres elsewhere, and they need to pay for it. It should not be free as it looks the case now with their current and past demands. In any case, it requires an act of parliament for Museveni to give away this gazette state land. I don’t believe that all the current NRM MPs will allow themselves to be used again and again just because the president serves them food and wine whenever they visit him at State House under these circumstances.
--

Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba
Ms Public Health Postgraduate Student in the UK

http://ugandansatheart.org/
http://twitter.com/#!/semuwemba
http://jjanguonkwekule.blogspot.com/ 
http://semuwemba.wordpress.com/

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT

17^th August, 2011

Mr. Yoweri .K. Museveni

President

State House

Entebbe

 

Dear Sir,

 

Re:   AN OPEN LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT

 

On July 28, 2011, you hosted members of the Uganda National Teachers Union (UNATU) at State House, Entebbe, to try and persuade them to call off their proposed strike.  You mentioned my name (Okello-Okello) as being partly responsible for the current shortage of sugar in the country, because according to you, I stopped you getting land in Amuru for growing sugarcane.

 

While talking on Bukedde T.V. on Friday August 5, 2011, you blamed Members of the Opposition from Acholi, in the 8^th Parliament, for denying you an opportunity to acquire land in Amuru for sugar production.  I was the leader of that group.

 

Again last Saturday, August 12, 2011, you repeated the same statement while addressing over 1,000 district officials and agriculturalists at the same venue, State House, Entebbe.  This statement was reported in The New Vision of Monday, August 15, 2011 on page 3, among others.

 

While I do not know your intention, agenda and mission in mentioning my name each time you  address the public on the current economic crisis in the country, I find myself compelled to respond, as I do here below, to protect my name and integrity.

 

It is unfortunate that you seem to have gone out of your way to hoodwink the people of Uganda and make them believe that the current economic crisis is only about sugar-shortage.  Far from it!  84% of Ugandans, who live in the country-side, wallowing in abject poverty, do not need sugar.  They cannot afford it.  The economic crisis is so serious and demands deep thinking by those who call themselves leaders of this country, to find lasting solutions.  Knee-jerk gimmicks, which seem to be common practice in your regime, do not help the people of Uganda in any way.  A serious government would have addressed the pump-price of fuel already.  For this is key to the cost of living.

 

You should know from your legion presidential advisors that Uganda has no comparative advantage in producing sugar.  The unit cost of production is just far too high, compared to others elsewhere.  The world retail price of sugar has jumped to an equivalent of about 2,000/-, per kilogram recently, due to the world economic crisis.  Uganda would, therefore, be much better off importing sugar instead of grabbing other people’s land to produce sugar they cannot afford to buy.

 

Back to your favorite topic – land for sugar production.  Both the Constitution and the Land Act,1998, are very clear on the ownership of land in this country. The Head of State  has no role to play in land transactions, because no title is vested in him.  You cannot, therefore, give away any parcel of land to an investor and pass good title to the recipient.  You have no good title vested in you by any law or instrument.  Those so-called investors acquiring land by having it given away to them by you are taking big risks.  Their title will remain valid only as long as you are still in power.

 

It is true, in the 8^th Parliament; I was the Chair of Acholi Parliamentary Group (APG).  In that capacity, I went to Amuru (and Nwoya now) many times with my colleagues to sensitize the people about their rights over their land.  The decision to take the Madhvani Group to court was taken by the people of Amuru themselves.  As leaders, we had to spearhead the struggle by our people to protect their rights.  We still do.  Mr. President, this case is still before court.  And for you to order that it must be resolved within three (3) months, as you did last Saturday, worries me a lot.  Is the Judiciary still independent?

 

What is this craze about Mabira and Amuru land?  Is there no land anywhere else?  The truth of the matter is that even if SCOUL had acquired part of Mabira Forest in 2007 and the Madhvani Group had also acquired land in Amuru in 2008, sugar from these two areas would not yet be on the market today.  The plan of the Madhvani Group was to start producing sugar in 5 to 8 years from 2008 or 2009.  So they would have nothing to do with the current sugar-shortage.  It, therefore, appears to me, Sir, that you are speaking from a very uninformed position.  In my view, it borders on crime to give away big chunks of land to the so-called investors.  Is it a give-away free of charge or a well disguised sale where the proceeds go where no one knows?  Your determination to give-away part of Mabira Forest is a catastrophic error of judgment, which must not be allowed to succeed.

 

My advice to you, Sir, is that you should frontally face the many problems we have in this country and make  attempts to solve them:  wicked corruption in government; profligate spending of public funds; dysfunctional road networks; hospitals without drugs or adequate staff; inadequate power supply; child sacrifice; road accidents; food insecurity; lack of fuel reserve; inflationary administration( government); tribalism and enthnicism; the falling value of the shilling etc, etc.   Your job is well cut out. Passing the buck, which has for a long time been your escape route, can no longer work. It must stop, because it ridicules you in the eyes of right thinking members of society. Everyone knows that the buck ends with you. Period.

 

Mr. President, let me illustrate to you how much the shilling has actually fallen in value under your mis-rule.  In 1987 when you imposed a currency reform on Ugandans, the exchange rate was Shs. 1,400/- to one United States Dollar.  You knocked of two zeros from the exchange rate and lumped a tax of 30% on the balance of everybody’s money.  No accountability for the proceeds of this illegal tax has been given up to now.  As I write the exchange rate is Shs. 2,680/- to one USD.  If you put back the two zeros removed in 1987, you get the actual current exchange rate of Shs. 268,000/- to one USD – i.e. a fall of 19,042.86% in the value of the shilling since 1987.

 

Lastly, Sir, let me state as follows:

 

·        I am a simple, law-abiding citizen (I am a citizen by decent) and I would not want to be intimidated by anybody.  I, therefore, kindly request you to get off my back and give me a break;

 

·        I wish to remind you that in the 1970’s we had a President called Idi Amin.  When he talked negatively and publicly with the name of a citizen, that citizen would disappear the same night.  Are those days coming back to Uganda?

 

·        Land is the most precious asset anybody can own.  How come you are determined to give away our most precious asset free of charge?

Yours sincerely,

 

 

J.L. Okello Okello

CONSULTANT VALUER

 

 

P.O.Box 1638

Kampala

Review of Women, Girls, and Gender Equality in National Strategic Plans on HIV/AIDS

From Talk to Action highlights that the majority (16 out of 20) of national strategic plans on HIV and AIDS across southern and eastern Africa fail to comprehensively address women, girls, and gender equality. Where national strategic plans on HIV and AIDS do address women and girls, it is in the context of the prevention of vertical transmission services and programs. The plans fail to identify and respond to the full needs of women and girls. This report identifies the current weaknesses in the plans in the hope that it will inform these discussions and national level policy responses.
http://www.heard.org.za/gender/nsp

Global Developmen​t Horizons 2011

Global Development Horizons 2011, focuses on three major international economic trends: the shift in the balance of global growth from developed to emerging economies, the rise of emerging-market firms as a force in global business, and the evolution of the international monetary system toward a multicurrency regime.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGDH/Resources/GDH_CompleteReport2011.pdf 

Why agricultur​e should receive top priority in Uganda's developmen​t agenda

The oil sector and service industry in urban areas especially in the
nation’s capital seem to be taking center stage in Uganda’s
development discourse. While a diversified economy is welcome,
agriculture (crop cultivation, livestock herding, fisheries and
forestry) will remain Uganda’s economic foundation for some time.
There is consensus among Ugandans and development partners that
agriculture will remain the engine of growth, poverty eradication and
economic transformation.

The overwhelming majority of Ugandans derive their livelihood from
agriculture. It produces most of the food, creates jobs, provides raw
materials for manufacturing enterprises, is the main foreign exchange
earner and contributes substantially to Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
Notwithstanding, agriculture has not received the practical attention
it deserves – excellent programs have been written but little
implemented by NRM. Besides, NRM government has not met the African
Unity Maputo decision that at least ten percent of national budget
should be allocated to agriculture.

Agricultural revolution paved the way for countries that are developed
today. Taking a short cut as NRM government seems to be doing might be
the wrong way to transform Uganda’s economy and society.
The European Union correctly stated that Uganda’s economy will depend
heavily on agriculture in the future. It will fuel economic growth and
provide a wider distribution of revenue. The processing of
agricultural produce will lay the foundation of Uganda’s
industrialization process. Also, through forward and backward linkages
agriculture will play a vital role in the transformation of the
country and her people. To this end we recommend that the following
actions be taken:

1.      Land being life and only asset for peasants, policies should be
designed to ensure security of tenure at communal, family or
individual level and to facilitate long term investment and land use
to increase productivity per unit of land thereby ending the current
extensive methods of agriculture that are unsustainable.
2.      The primary role of small holder farmers needs to be strengthened
and commensurate resources and services such as budget allocation,
credit, energy, transport and communications and extension services
provided.
3.      Small-scale farmer managed irrigation schemes should be provided to
mitigate adverse effects of hydrological changes manifested in
rainfall irregularities in timing, amount and duration. Frequent and
severe droughts have necessitated a shift from rain-fed to irrigated
agriculture. Unlike large dams, small-scale irrigation has a further
advantage that it does not flood upstream areas or divert water from
downstream users.
4.      Environmental and labor-friendly technology in farm implements,
high yielding seeds, fertilizers (a combination of organic and
inorganic), pesticides and processing needs to be developed or adapted
to local conditions to increase productivity. Imported technologies
should be scrutinized for suitability or adapted to local conditions.
5.      Infrastructure like roads and affordable energy and communications
should be developed and maintained connecting all rural areas to
markets for inputs and outputs.
6.      Agro-processing facilities should be promoted to add value, prolong
life of products and create jobs. The infant agro-processing
industries should be protected against unfair competition in line with
World Trade Organization (WTO) rules.
7.      Prevention of food losses at all levels of the production chain
such as storage including cold storage facilities should be provided.
Over fifty percent of crops especially high value horticultural
produce such as fruits and vegetables are lost every season.
Eliminating food losses will increase food availability without
increasing land under cultivation thereby making more land available
for non-farming activities.
8.       Agricultural research institutions should be established or
strengthened. Research outcomes should be disseminated to farmers
through extension services.
9.      Specific-programs for fisher-folk, herders, foresters, artisans and
traders should be developed as an integral part of rural development
agenda taking into consideration sustainability of resource use.
10.     An equitable relationship between large scale private
entrepreneurs and peasants should be stressed and monitored closely.
11.     Small holder farmers, fisher-folk, herders, foresters,
manufacturers, artisans and traders need to be organized in
cooperatives or other suitable modalities to benefit from economies of
scale.
12.     A balance should be re-established between urban and rural
sectors. To date, NRM government has disproportionately favored urban
areas especially the capital city of Kampala (which contributes some
70 percent of Gross National Income -- GNI) at the expense of rural
areas. The imbalance has resulted in massive rural-urban migration
through pull and push factors – draining rural areas of economically
active labor and congesting towns with people that cannot find work
and decent living conditions.
13.     Agriculture and rural development should be made attractive and
focus on creating jobs and giving pride of place to women who are the
main operators in many aspects of Uganda’s rural economy.
14.     A balance should be struck between production for domestic
consumption and for cash.  The principle of selling surplus over and
above domestic needs should be nonnegotiable. Ipso facto, the current
policy of production for cash and not for the stomach should be
abandoned. Hungry people can neither learn nor perform well.
15.     Development partners should adapt their financial and technical
support programs in favor of agriculture, rural development and small-
holder farmers.
16.     Appropriate education, training and re-training programs should be
developed and/or adapted to make them suitable for agriculture and
rural development.
17.     A healthy farmer is more productive than a sick one. Therefore
preventive and curative health facilities should be provided as an
integral part of agriculture and rural development.
18.     Policies should be designed to improve rural terms of trade to
make agriculture and rural development attractive and worth investing
in.
19.     Food reserves at household, regional and national levels should be
established to avoid shortages and the hardship they cause especially
to vulnerable consumers.

NRM government has not matched rhetoric with action in agriculture and
rural development. It is unlikely to adapt because of rigidities in
its midst. To implement these recommendations successfully will
require new leadership underpinned by peace and stability, political
will and good governance based on consensus, transparency,
participation and accountability.


ERIC KASHAMBUZI
UAH FORUMIST IN NEWYORK

Making Progress on Global Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Challenges

This report presents conclusions and recommendations offered at a World Water Day Learning Forum, “Making Progress on Global Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) Challenges,” held at CSIS on March 21, 2011. Sessions focused on the role of the private sector in water supply; achieving operational sustainability; the relevance of climate change adaptation programs for the WASH sector; and how to promote transparency and accountability within WASH programs. The report highlights the importance of community engagement, private sector involvement, and a commitment to the monitoring and evaluation of projects as critical factors in promoting WASH program sustainability. http://csis.org/files/publication/110810_Bliss_ProgressOnWASH_Web.pdf  

Meeting the Challenge of Drought and Famine in the Horn of Africa

The scale of the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in the Horn of Africa is becoming clearer by the day. The numbers of people affected by drought and famine are mind-boggling: at least 12.4 million people are in need of emergency assistance across five countries. Somalia is the worst affected, and the United Nations has declared famine conditions in five areas of the country, all of them under the control of Al Shabaab, an extremist group designated a terrorist entity by the United States. Its continued denial of full access to humanitarian organizations means that emergency assistance remains out of reach for more than 2 million people.
http://csis.org/publication/meeting-challenge-drought-and-famine-horn-africa 

Securing the Future Today : Synthesis of Strategic Information on HIV and Young People

This report shows that these global commitments will be achieved only if the unique needs of young women and men are acknowledged, and their human rights fulfilled, respected, and protected. In order to reduce new HIV infections among young people, achieve the broader equity goals set out in the MDGs, and begin to reverse the overall HIV epidemic, HIV prevention and treatment efforts must be tailored to the specific needs of young people. http://www.unaids.org/en/media/unaids/contentassets/documents/unaidspublication/2011/20110727_JC2112_Synthesis_report_en.pdf  

Museveni is another 'Abdul' on Mabira Forest

Recall the story of Abdul who sold ash as sugar? He told his customers that he was selling sugar cheaply, gave them to taste the "sugar" and cautioned that if any of anyone of them failed to get the taste of sugar, it was simply because they were sinners. Guess what, they all tasted the sweetness of the "sugar" and proceeded to buy it, an acceptance that enabled  Abdul to sell all his sacks of ashes and got good money.

President Museveni should spare himself more embarrassment by insisting on giving away forests to sugar production to solve the temporary high prices for all commodities including fuel. I am not sure how long it takes sugarcane to mature for processing, but from my little knowledge, I think sugarcane matures  and is ready for processing in about 22 months, i.e. nearly 2 years so our president wants to solve the current sugar shortage after 2 years from now. It would make sense if he advised Ugandans to postpone their sugar consumption till the sugarcane matures, so that they avoid the high costs as there will be more sugar. If that is what he did not mean as his secretaries will rush to say, then let him give a real temporary solution such as banning exports of sugar for six months as he had earlier on stated but which he unfortunately his minister of trade changed. The other option is for the government to import the badly needed commodities.

While addressing the youth in Arua recently, the president said that those that who see high prices must be sinners. We are brought to the story of Abdul the "Sugar" merchant who sold ash for sugar. I hope nobody will call our president "Mr. Abdul the Sugar Merchant."

I think our leaders have vowed to end in the same way that their colleagues have gone. I have always wondered as to what forms our leaders decisions, and even when they see their " African-God" Gaddafi of Libya at the verge of exiting from power as rebels close in around Tripoli, they continue to provoke the masses. Our Indian brothers (Mehtas') and others should "back- off" from these land  deals, as they put to risk their people and property. The Mehtas should realize that putting riches above and over their people's future is very risky, they should remember that even when there was no open animosity between the Indians and government and the majority of Ugandans, the peace that lasted over 80 years, such peace did not stop Idi Amin to dream about the "milking of the economy," and with God's guidance, he ordered Indians out of Uganda within 90 days in 1972.Now that Indians are seen as agents of corruption which risks our forests and thus livelihood, how will these Indians be treated if the protests against the giving away of Mabira Forest become serious? The Mehtas should be the last people to think of getting free land. 

If only the leaders could be dragged to court as Mubarak is enjoying now while the wanainchi are spared when they are violently removed, I wouldn't bother about their (mis)treatment since they are working hard to end likewise; my only worry is the innocent civilians. In our country, local people who hail from the regions where the president comes from are often targeted on the belief that they "ate" while their corrupt son and cronies were in power. Innocent people suffer for no mistake of theirs. This is a wrong belief which is often fanned by people who have not gone to those areas to see how the ordinary people are suffering. I saw how the local people there suffered, sometimes leading  worse life than ordinary people in other parts of the country, but such people can be erroneously targeted.

If Gaddafi can be challenged to such an extent, I don't know what makes other African leaders think that they are in a better position to withstand people's wrath once they start. I like the former Tunisian president, Ben Ali; he did not organize too much death during his last days, in fact he realized fast enough that he would not manage to stop the wave of resistance that had started and decided to flee for his dear life, which saved his family, the Tunisian people and the country unlike Gaddafi who wants to leave or die with the country.

Peter Simon Okurut

UAH FORUMIST

East African federation: old idea, slow progress

The East African economic integration and political federation are old and good ideas in principle which have experienced slow progress in realization. 

In neighboring central African region, the ten year old federation (Northern Rhodesia, Southern Rhodesia and Nyasaland) collapsed in large part because it favored Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) and undermined development prospects for black people.

In East Africa, the Community (EAP) which had been hailed as the most successful regional integration collapsed just before its tenth anniversary.  Many reasons have been given for the collapse, the most common being uneven distribution of benefits and political-ideological differences.

Although the community was restored ten years ago in part to warm up political relations, the main reasons for failure of the first EAP still remain and have possibly got worse. The imbalance in resource endowments especially land, differences in population dynamics, manufacturing industries and skills developments still remain. The inclusion of Burundi and Rwanda with a different colonial history, language and level of economic and demographic dynamics has possibly complicated matters.

As the East African countries moved towards independence, the idea of federation was given a boost. In fact Nyerere of then Tanganyika was prepared to delay independence until all the three countries got liberated and formed a federation right away. In preparation for this outcome pending Kenya’s Uhuru, politicians from each territory made great supportive speeches and committees were formed.

As soon as Kenya got independence, things began to change. There was no more talk of “federation this year”.  Dates were put back. Delegations did not show up for meetings. When speeches were made they were guarded.  People expressed fear of “jumping into the dark”.  Others felt the federation was an ‘Imperialist trick”. Tanganyika and Uganda were afraid of losing their identity to dominant Kenya. The benefits of national sovereignty began to work against federation.

Tanzania which was a staunch supporter of federation was the first to move away from it surprising everyone in East Africa and abroad. In 1965 Tanzania restricted imports from Kenya and Uganda and withdrew from the East African currency board. These actions dented the idea of federation. Tanzania felt it needed a chance to manufacture and export to the other two countries. It therefore had to restrict imports and raise tariffs to protect her infant industries against unfair competition. The ideological differences played their role too.

Wise leadership dictates that differences cannot be swept under the carpet in the hope that time will take care of them.  Suggestions that a referendum should decide the federation question is not a wise one especially in countries where democracy is being practiced at gun point as in Uganda and Rwanda.

To avoid a repeat of past failures in economic integration and political federation in East and Central Africa respectively, we need to move cautiously, incrementally, sequentially and equitably. Putting political federation ahead of economic integration is like putting a cart before the horse.

Above all, we need to take some time to understand the real motives for the East African economic integration and political federation. Once again, we should avoid “jumping into the dark”!    

ERIC KASHAMBUZI

Steps towards European Union: lessons for East Africa

Yesterday, August 1, 2011, I published in Ugandans at Heart Forum an article titled “EA Federation: old idea, slow progress”. It generated comments I received privately calling for further elaboration why I think East African economic integration and political federation need to proceed cautiously and slowly. And why economic integration should precede political federation. Lessons from Europe may help to understand the intricacies of integration and union.

The implementation of a united Europe idea governed by supranational institutions and laws is an old one. It goes as far back as Roman or Charlemagne Empire. Some have recalled the good old days when the whole of Christian Europe had been one nation. The benefits of a united Europe have been presented and the policy of “little steps” to achieve it recommended. Napoleon unsuccessfully attempted to achieve European Union by force. And even Hitler’s New Order sought to unite Europe.

The idea of European unity gathered momentum towards the end of WWII. In 1943 Jean Monnet, French economist called for the formation of European cooperation that would bring about prosperity and social progress. In 1946 Winston Churchill in a Zurich speech called for a new spirit of cooperation in Europe.

The USA Marshall Plan which was implemented after WWII under the Organization for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC) called for European states to work together. When the plan ended some Europeans (maximalists) wanted OEEC to be retained and even enlarged, others (minimalists) expressed reservations and opposed it. For example, British leaders, while welcoming European cooperation, argued that they had close ties with Commonwealth and wanted a revival of world trade. Consequently they preferred a flexible policy and did not entertain a European customs union. Other unsettling political issues including national sovereignty undermined the euphoria and the original impetus of European unity petered out.

However, some economic arrangements were entered into on a small scale. In 1947 the Benelux Union was formed, bringing together Belgium, Luxemburg and Netherlands into a customs union. In 1951 France, Germany, Italy and the three Benelux countries formed the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) to pool their coal and steel resources. The success of ECSC formed a basis for the creation of the Rome Treaty of 1958. The goals of the Rome Treaty which were primarily economic were:

1.       Elimination of internal barriers to trade.

2.       Common external tariff.

3.       Free movement of capital, services, goods and people among member states.

4.       Common integrative policies in key areas such as agriculture, energy, fisheries, monetary and regional policies.  

The idea of eliminating internal barriers to trade triggered past European thorny political problems including the position of agriculture and protection of small holder farmers and jobs. During the two World Wars, European agriculture was starved of funds resulting in reduced production and dependence on imports that required payment in scarce dollars. Protection of agriculture by member states particularly France with a large population in agriculture at that time could not be ignored. Farming was recognized in the Rome Treaty through the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). It was also feared by some member states that dismantling internal barriers would undermine domestic manufacturing industries.

The admission into the European community of less developed countries raised the fear that they would not compete in a free European market. The countries that could not compete were compensated through a generous program of community transfers and capital investments. These arrangements provided infrastructure and education facilities that made these recipient countries competitive.

The movement of people in the community countries began in the mid-1980s when Belgium, Germany, France, Luxemburg and the Netherlands signed the Schengen  Agreement. They committed themselves to gradual removal of checks at their common borders. Under the Amsterdam Treaty which came into force in 1999, the Schengen provisions governing free movement of people and common police and border controls were extended to other community members but special provisions were applied to some member countries. 

The points being made here are:

1.        The process of integration has been done in phases of “widening” through admitting more democratic member states (the European Union started with six members) and “deepening” through economic, institutional and political integration. The deepening process began with steps initiated towards inter alia a monetary system with fixed exchange rates, direct elections to the European Parliament and implementation of European foreign policy.

2.       The process which began in earnest after WWII – 68 years ago – is still far from complete. It remains to be seen whether or not a truly economically and politically integrated Europe will occur. In some states, concerns still remain about the incremental loss of national sovereignty with each new step toward integration.

3.       The future of Europe will also be influenced by ongoing debate between integrationists and decentralists. The latter group hopes that it will halt the advance of centralization and preserve national and regional rights.

Negotiations regarding economic integration and political federation in East Africa need to draw lessons from the cautious, incremental and sequenced approach towards European Union. Fast track political federation negotiations being pursued among the East African states need to be reviewed in view of serious concerns that are being expressed. There is not enough information to form a basis for taking an informed decision. Economic integration and political federation are good ideas but could backfire if not handled properly.

Eric Kashambuzi