Olara Otunnu has a part to play for Democratic change in Uganda
In "Gambling on Otunnu", in The Uganda Independent, Ms. Melina Platas takes the political pulse of the country on the homecoming of Olara Otunnu. She sounded out a number of prominent Ugandans on what role if any, Olara Otunnu can play.
In their responses, Hon. Professor Ogenga Latigo, Hon. Abdu Katuntu, and Dr. Jean Barya, highlighted a number of issues concerning who Olara Otunnu is, what contribution he can make to the democratic struggle in Uganda, and how the struggle can be organised and led. Not only were some of their comments contentious, but also specious and contradictory.
First, that Olara Otunnu is out of touch with the country, the people, and issues. But Olara Otunnu has written and spoken extensively about the NRM dictatorship, corruption, poverty, national fragmentation on ethnic lines, land-grabbing, rights abuses and possible war crimes and crimes against humanity in Uganda generally and northern Uganda specifically. It is doubtful that there are esoteric socio-political issues only accessible through local residency in Uganda. Moreover, there are people who have lived in Uganda for the life of this regime, but are unaware of the extent to which our nationhood has been damaged, or the levels of impoverishment and social inequalities that have been imposed on our citizenry along social classes, region, ethnicity, party allegiances, and patterns of voting.
Olara Otunnu, like many Ugandans in the country and abroad who care about their country, is aware of these problems, and the extent to which their resolutions must be approached as a national project, rather than as a one-man derring-do. That is why, he is more attuned to consensus building, coalition making, and unifying Ugandans to work together to resolve these problems as shared national goals and citizen responsibility. Otunnu by no means presents himself as the man who knows all and has all the solutions; nor as the one who can and will bring change all by himself.
At a certain level, Professor Latigo's and Hon. Katuntu's sentiments are understandable. They come across as consummate tutelages of Museveni’s personal merits and no-party politics, with its entitlement claims. We fought, therefore we must rule. Or we endured the dictatorship; therefore, our scars give us prior rights at the head of the leadership queue.
As a national project, the current phase of the democratic struggle cannot be looked at from the interest of one individual or one party, but what specific, necessary resources and qualities are available to be deployed where and when, to progress the democratic objectives. It is Olara Otunnu, more than Prof. Latigo or Hon. Katuntu, who reads more correctly, the needs and national mood of our oppressed and impoverished citizens. It is clear that, Latigo and Katuntu believe that the democratic struggle in Uganda is limited to competition for the presidency, hence their emphases on a presidential candidate, and the narrow political spectrum they use to understand the political, moral, intellectual, and diplomatic impact of Olara Otunnu on the democratic struggles in the country.
Second, that Olara Otunnu lacks a constituency and political base. This is an area where Prof. Latigo, Dr. Jean Barya, and Hon. Katuntu, all contradict themselves. Drawing on their contention that Otunnu has been out too long and he is virtually an outsider, they rule him out as possible presidential candidate, whether for IPC or UPC. However, when asked what role Otunnu could play, whether in UPC or in IPC, they paint a picture of someone different from the Otunnu they earlier dismissed as insignificant in the politics of the country because he is an outsider, without a constituency and lacking political base.
Unless they have a different conception of " political base", how can someone without a political constituency, be expected to among other things: bring back UPC members who had defected; strengthen the UPC; resolve internal UPC feuds or reconcile warring factions; bring into play, former UPC strongholds of Bugisu, Busoga, Bushenyi and Kigezi; and unify UPC in northern Uganda to shore up the IPC in 2011? Or play influential role to mobilize for IPC and greatly improve the national fortunes of IPC presidential and parliamentary candidates?
Obviously, these roles, tasks and expectations would be for someone who has solid political base and clout in these constituencies. Are Prof. Latigo and Hon. Katuntu, merely playing politics, and therefore waging turf wars, or are they seriously committed to the democratic struggle as a national project, that will require collaboration and collective efforts?
Third, is Otunnu’s alleged political Baggage. The worry that Otunnu will be attacked by the NRM, linked to the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), and 1985 military coup, is curious. False claims and negative campaigns are part of competitive politics. In any case, the NRM should have no moral concerns about coup plotters and political usurpers. Questions about the 1985 coup are only relevant to internal UPC debate, but of no political benefit for the NRM as a national issue. Alleged links with the LRA, is a smear that Hon. Latigo himself, together with other opposition politicians and critics of the regime, should be familiar with, having been tarred with the LRA brush many times.
If Hon. Latigo's worries about what the NRM may or may not say about Otunnu is curious, Hon. Katuntu's claims that dOtunnu is an old guard, part and parcel of the problems and no better than Museveni, is pitiful. Katuntu has no basis to make these kinds of statements, because he knows they are patently false. Furthermore, he considers Otunnu an outsider, not part of "us"; perhaps "us" as in opposition members of parliament, or leaders of opposition steeped in the NRM political culture of exclusion, corruption, self-aggrandisement and insensitivities that make them benefit three or more times from car schemes for members of parliament, when schools in their constituencies are run under trees!
There may indeed be no void for political leadership for Otunnu to fill, as Hon. Latigo asserts, but there are certainly wide, gaping moral, intellectual and principled leadership gaps among the opposition forces that need to be filled. It is best for the opposition to approach the next elections by objectively assessing their strategic objectives, the forces that work for and against them, and the strengths and weaknesses of the possible people who must lead the organising for change. To look at the issues and what political advantages or disadvantages new comers like Olara Otunnu bring, from the narrow, self-interested vantage point of protecting respective individual or party political turfs, rather than advancing collective efforts and goals, would be counterproductive.
Going by media reports of speeches on the trails of his homecoming journey, highlighting the breadth of the policy crisis, national challenges, and the imperatives for opposition forces to come together and struggle for change as a national, rather than a one-man or one-party project, it is Olara Otunnu, rather than Prof. Latigo and Hon. Katuntu, who seems more in touch with the country and the yearnings of its citizens for urgent change; and it is Otunnu who seems to correctly capture and express the national urgency and imperatives for change.
In their responses, Hon. Professor Ogenga Latigo, Hon. Abdu Katuntu, and Dr. Jean Barya, highlighted a number of issues concerning who Olara Otunnu is, what contribution he can make to the democratic struggle in Uganda, and how the struggle can be organised and led. Not only were some of their comments contentious, but also specious and contradictory.
First, that Olara Otunnu is out of touch with the country, the people, and issues. But Olara Otunnu has written and spoken extensively about the NRM dictatorship, corruption, poverty, national fragmentation on ethnic lines, land-grabbing, rights abuses and possible war crimes and crimes against humanity in Uganda generally and northern Uganda specifically. It is doubtful that there are esoteric socio-political issues only accessible through local residency in Uganda. Moreover, there are people who have lived in Uganda for the life of this regime, but are unaware of the extent to which our nationhood has been damaged, or the levels of impoverishment and social inequalities that have been imposed on our citizenry along social classes, region, ethnicity, party allegiances, and patterns of voting.
Olara Otunnu, like many Ugandans in the country and abroad who care about their country, is aware of these problems, and the extent to which their resolutions must be approached as a national project, rather than as a one-man derring-do. That is why, he is more attuned to consensus building, coalition making, and unifying Ugandans to work together to resolve these problems as shared national goals and citizen responsibility. Otunnu by no means presents himself as the man who knows all and has all the solutions; nor as the one who can and will bring change all by himself.
At a certain level, Professor Latigo's and Hon. Katuntu's sentiments are understandable. They come across as consummate tutelages of Museveni’s personal merits and no-party politics, with its entitlement claims. We fought, therefore we must rule. Or we endured the dictatorship; therefore, our scars give us prior rights at the head of the leadership queue.
As a national project, the current phase of the democratic struggle cannot be looked at from the interest of one individual or one party, but what specific, necessary resources and qualities are available to be deployed where and when, to progress the democratic objectives. It is Olara Otunnu, more than Prof. Latigo or Hon. Katuntu, who reads more correctly, the needs and national mood of our oppressed and impoverished citizens. It is clear that, Latigo and Katuntu believe that the democratic struggle in Uganda is limited to competition for the presidency, hence their emphases on a presidential candidate, and the narrow political spectrum they use to understand the political, moral, intellectual, and diplomatic impact of Olara Otunnu on the democratic struggles in the country.
Second, that Olara Otunnu lacks a constituency and political base. This is an area where Prof. Latigo, Dr. Jean Barya, and Hon. Katuntu, all contradict themselves. Drawing on their contention that Otunnu has been out too long and he is virtually an outsider, they rule him out as possible presidential candidate, whether for IPC or UPC. However, when asked what role Otunnu could play, whether in UPC or in IPC, they paint a picture of someone different from the Otunnu they earlier dismissed as insignificant in the politics of the country because he is an outsider, without a constituency and lacking political base.
Unless they have a different conception of " political base", how can someone without a political constituency, be expected to among other things: bring back UPC members who had defected; strengthen the UPC; resolve internal UPC feuds or reconcile warring factions; bring into play, former UPC strongholds of Bugisu, Busoga, Bushenyi and Kigezi; and unify UPC in northern Uganda to shore up the IPC in 2011? Or play influential role to mobilize for IPC and greatly improve the national fortunes of IPC presidential and parliamentary candidates?
Obviously, these roles, tasks and expectations would be for someone who has solid political base and clout in these constituencies. Are Prof. Latigo and Hon. Katuntu, merely playing politics, and therefore waging turf wars, or are they seriously committed to the democratic struggle as a national project, that will require collaboration and collective efforts?
Third, is Otunnu’s alleged political Baggage. The worry that Otunnu will be attacked by the NRM, linked to the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), and 1985 military coup, is curious. False claims and negative campaigns are part of competitive politics. In any case, the NRM should have no moral concerns about coup plotters and political usurpers. Questions about the 1985 coup are only relevant to internal UPC debate, but of no political benefit for the NRM as a national issue. Alleged links with the LRA, is a smear that Hon. Latigo himself, together with other opposition politicians and critics of the regime, should be familiar with, having been tarred with the LRA brush many times.
If Hon. Latigo's worries about what the NRM may or may not say about Otunnu is curious, Hon. Katuntu's claims that dOtunnu is an old guard, part and parcel of the problems and no better than Museveni, is pitiful. Katuntu has no basis to make these kinds of statements, because he knows they are patently false. Furthermore, he considers Otunnu an outsider, not part of "us"; perhaps "us" as in opposition members of parliament, or leaders of opposition steeped in the NRM political culture of exclusion, corruption, self-aggrandisement and insensitivities that make them benefit three or more times from car schemes for members of parliament, when schools in their constituencies are run under trees!
There may indeed be no void for political leadership for Otunnu to fill, as Hon. Latigo asserts, but there are certainly wide, gaping moral, intellectual and principled leadership gaps among the opposition forces that need to be filled. It is best for the opposition to approach the next elections by objectively assessing their strategic objectives, the forces that work for and against them, and the strengths and weaknesses of the possible people who must lead the organising for change. To look at the issues and what political advantages or disadvantages new comers like Olara Otunnu bring, from the narrow, self-interested vantage point of protecting respective individual or party political turfs, rather than advancing collective efforts and goals, would be counterproductive.
Going by media reports of speeches on the trails of his homecoming journey, highlighting the breadth of the policy crisis, national challenges, and the imperatives for opposition forces to come together and struggle for change as a national, rather than a one-man or one-party project, it is Olara Otunnu, rather than Prof. Latigo and Hon. Katuntu, who seems more in touch with the country and the yearnings of its citizens for urgent change; and it is Otunnu who seems to correctly capture and express the national urgency and imperatives for change.
Comments