America’s human rights imperialism 2

While Museveni remains an important instrument in the security orchestra of this region, things have changed significantly in Washington DC. President Donald Trump is not interested in Africa. He has not even appointed an Assistant Secretary of State for African affairs. Africa policy has been left to low-level diplomats at the State Department, with little or no input from the Pentagon and the National Security Council. The diplomats at State are naïve and idealistic liberal imperialists of the human rights variety. They are schemers who lack the realism of people at the Pentagon and NSC who understand the complexity of geopolitics.

Back to elections and what I think are America’s calculations: Museveni performs better when there is low voter turnout. Voter turnout would be low if people feel their votes do not count because Museveni will steal them. For many years, Museveni had the most credible person for this message of hopelessness – Kizza Besigye. He actively told Ugandans that he won all the last four presidential elections but Museveni cheated him. This actually sucked energy, motivation and enthusiasm out of the electoral process. Thus while subjectively a strong critique of the president, Besigye has objectively been Museveni’s strategic ally.

Bobi Wine is different. He calls on Ugandans to register and vote and gives them hope of success. His youthful idealism gives him strong appeal, his emptiness in ideas and policies notwithstanding. His populist rhetoric endears him to masses of frustrated youths who feel ignored by Museveni. He is therefore likely to increase voter turnout. Having adopted him as their Trojan horse, America’s liberal imperialists fear that in the face of a strong wave in Bobi Wine’s favour, Museveni might keep him off the ballot or unleash such violence on a scale that can make people opt out of voting.

I suspect Americans calculate that they can pressure Museveni to accept Bobi Wine on the ballot. This leaves the President with the second option – violence. The sanctions against Kayihura are meant to send a signal to other officers in security about the evil that would be visited upon those who use their positions to crack down violently. They calculate, and I think naively and wrongly, that in the high stakes game of power politics such threats can work. They forget that there are many officials who prefer power and the privileges that come with it, to visiting America.

The tragedy is the response of Ugandan elites in the opposition, “civil society”, the mass media and academia. They celebrate this as a victory, unable to see that foreign intrusions into our politics are unlikely to resolve our internal political problems but rather accentuate them. I personally have many frustrations with Museveni’s government: its corruption and incompetence, its lack of a vision for the country, its prostitution to the interests of multinational capital, its fatigue and inertia and the pettiness of its politics.

Yet in spite of these frustrations, I am not willing to support any local or foreign force seeking change. Whoever wants to remove Museveni must demonstrate that they share my values, understand our national interest, and can balance all this against local, regional and global interests to secure the best for our people. Yet for some Ugandans any change from Museveni is welcome. This addresses an emotion, not policy. The Americans don’t care about the consequence of their adventures. They supported the Misrata Brigade to remove Muammar Gadaffi and see where Libya is today!

****

amwenda@independent.co.ug