By Oweyegha Afunaduula
CONTINUATION….
This article is a Treatise ( i.e., a long and serious piece of writing) by a person grounded in science but with a good understanding of social and political issues. It will require people who are open-minded and ready to change their minds to accommodate new insights. It is a comparative analysis of two militarily developed minds: one of a modern European ruler and one of a modernizing Ugandan ruler of the late 20th Century and early 21st Century.
It is written as if the long-ruling leader of Uganda is no longer in power. It is, therefore, in the past tense. It will help history writers interested in comparative history of rulers and their countries. I will not be there when they are writing, but I will have contributed to the written history beforehand.
Napoleon was no longer ordinary. He won wars in Austria, crushed an uprising in Toulin, against royalists and Parisians, against Austria again, against Muslim Turks and Egyptian rulers. His military exploits were sub served by being skillful in organization, foresighted, courageous brilliant, tactical and deceitful.
Indeed one of his school teachers once said that Napoleon was ” made of granite with a volcano inside him”. The was meant to mean that he was a man of extraordinary force of brain and character who would be anything in any circumstances in any country.
He was populist as well. In return from Egypt in 1798, he remarked before a huge crowd that had assembled to welcome him, “It looks as if everyone has been waiting for me… Tomorrow would have seemed too late. I have come at the right time. I have come at the right time”. The revolutionary propaganda of “war to the Kings and peace to all people, complemented with liberty, equality and fraternity, enhanced his fame and rise to power.
Tibuhaburwa Museveni’s rise to power in Uganda also reflected his courage, foresightedness, tactic, calculatedness and deceitfulness, although he was short of being brilliant. He subordinated himself to Paulo Muwanga who led the pro-Obote political and military forces during the days of the Uganda National Liberation Front/Army (UNLF/A) in 1979-80, by accepting to be Vice-Chairman of the Military Commission of the UNLA, although he had a big army of mainly refugees from Rwanda and Mulenge in the name of Front for National Salvation (FRONASA).
It became clear later on, when he insurrected against the political and military regime he was part of, that FRONASA was a two-pronged strategy against the weak regimes in Uganda and Rwanda. He was greatly helped when 4 neo traditionalists, led by former President of Uganda, Prof.Yusuf Lule, decided to form the National Resistance Movement (NRM) in 1981, while in Kenya as refugees, and later formed the National Resistance Army (NRA)., and invited Tibuhaburwa Museveni (then known as Yoweri Museveni) to Nairobi to appoint him as Commander of NRA.
That was a master political and military gain for Museveni. He amalgamated his failed Uganda Patriotic Movement (UPM) and FRONASA army with the UPM/A, and that marked his rise in power in Buganda and Uganda. It was a timely tactical move that finally saw his military outfit as the most organized and effective resistance to the rule of Obote II (1981)and Tito Okello (1985-86).
He finally assumed power on 25th January 1986, although deceptively his regime cites and marks 26th January every year since then as that of ascent to power at great expense to the taxpayers. His remark that “The change of power in Kampala was not a mere change of guards but a fundamental change” was well received by the people who had been waiting for the change.
Napoleon Bonaparte later became so influential that it was easy for him to use his ineffective French 1000-strong Parliament to achieve every wish of his in politics and military ventures, thereby becoming very famous at the expense of the Directory Government. He molded discontent in the army, among government workers and the citizenry to overthrow the political order. He centralized the administration, away from what had become a chaotic decentralized government.
Tibuhaburwa Museveni briefly consorted with decentralization but eventually undermined it by transferring power and authority, especially regarding the budgets of the local governments, back to the Centre; to himself, since Central Government was absolutely under his control.
He was Central Government and Central Government was him. That is why he was able to disorient the National Budget from social development to military ventures, State House and State House-oriented administration. Administratively, Napoleon Bonaparte created subdivisions he called arrondissements to replace districts, and those were further subdivided into communities (municipalities) in the true spirit of divide and rule.
As the sole appointing authority he chose excellent, talented officials, and because of his own efficiency he made brilliant achievements at home and abroad, and the French people were happy and gave him support. However, through over-centralisation of power in himself he destroyed the aspirations of the French.
He gave himself a Constitution that only benefited his power, by placing the control of Central government and the national budget under his direct personal control. He set up an army of spies for himself and also giant prisons and arbitrary arrests and detentions became integral to his rule.
The Press became heavily censored, and an army of spies and secret agents kept him we informed of any opposition which he proceeded to crush ruthlessly. Accordingly, he destroyed the original aspirations of freedom and liberty, which constituted his powerful propaganda in the early days of his rise to power, and political democracy became but a dream for the French. In one short sentence: he turned himself into an absolute ruler.
Tbubuhaburwa Museveni more or less implemented the programme of action of Napoleon Bonaparte in Uganda. He relied heavily on Propaganda. His emphasis of democracy, human rights, no corruption, no extrajudicial killings or detention without trial, and an integrated and self-sustaining economy, endeared him the long suffering masses of Ugandans. However, all this emerged as no more than a bate to approve of him.
He went to make a Constitution that centralized all power and authority in himself , and immunized him from court proceedings against him in cases of excesses. There was nothing he could not do under the Constitution or even shelve certain articles of the Constitution in case they blocked his wishes for personal and absolute power.
For example, when he wanted to exceed the 10 years limit to the Presidency that clearly barred him to rule beyond two terms of 5 years each, he simply initiated legislation in Parliament, using men and women of his personal party, NRM, to shelve the term limit at monetary cost to the taxpayers; and when he wanted to rule like a monarch without age limits, he initiated changes in the Constitution in the same fashion.
As he approached 36 years in power, he started the talk of hereditary politics with daughters and sons replacing their parents who held political positions in Government and the Legislature. He even plotted to have Parliament elect the President.
The same way the French Parliament proclaimed Napoleon Bonaparte Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte Administratively he split the 15 Nation-States, into well over 135 districts, and created numerous municipalities and cities, but denied them money to run efficiently. He talked of devolution of power and authority through decentralization, but ended up re-concentrating power at the centre, with everything starting and ending with him.
Like Napoleon Bonaparte, he turned himself into an absolute ruler. Like Napoleon Bonaparte, he was allergic to competitive politics and did not treat his opponents humanely. The word “crush” and the phrase ” I will crush them” were common in his public political communications. In his early Presidency he never hesitated to tell his political opponents that “I will send you six feet deep”.
Napoleon Bonaparte made many legal reforms to endear himself to the people. He introduced five basic Codes: the civil Code, the Code of Civil Procedure, the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Penal Law and the Penal Code and finally the Commercial Law.
France achieved Law order and Peace. The civil Code consisted of laws such as for family, marriage and divorce, status of women, ownership of property etc., and equality was paramount He ensured justice and protection of the citizens. But under the code of criminal procedure, many French people, especially in the Opposition, were persecuted.
The panel code maintained confiscation of private property and restricted the right to public meetings and associations. Otherwise he restored the Roman Catholic Church to its original status, which angered many French people. He undermined himself as a true son of the revolution which was strongly anti-catholi ism, although he subjected the Church to the State.
The State appointed Bishops and consecrated them. His decision that the peasants were the rightful owners’ of the lands on e held by the church earned him much support from the peasantry. He created 3000 new hereditary nobles, including 4 Princes, 30 Dukes, and nearly 400 courts.
He made his brothers Kings in various conquered territories in Holland, Naples and later Spain. He wanted this to consolidate his power, but cast him as a nepotistic person who was destroying the aspirations of the French people by reintroducing nobles, just like the ancient regimes in the country did.
To Be Continued…….
For God and My Country.
The Writer Is a Ugandan Scientist And Environmentalist
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in this article are solely for and belong to the author/writer. They don’t portray, reflect or represent Accord Communications Ltd, it’s affiliates, owners or employees. If you have a story in your community or an opinion article, let’s publish it. Send us an email via editorial@accordconsults.com or WhatsApp +254797048150