November 24, 2005
Letter To The Editor
The New York Times
229 West 43rd Street
New York, N.Y., 10036-3959
letters@nytimes.com

Museveni Doesn’t Need Times To Make His Case For Tyranny

In “By Fits and Starts, Africa’s Brand of Democracy Emerges,” (NY Times, Nov. 24, 2005: A4), your correspondent describes a Uganda which is at odds with recent events in Kampala and reports by prominent institutions, including the United Nations and Human Rights Watch.
President Museveni’s repressive measures to cling to power as his popularity has waned have undone much of his achievements. When his challenger, Dr. Kizza Besigye was greeted by tens of thousands of supporters at political rallies, which your correspondent conveniently omits, Mr. Museveni panicked and had him arrested. Dr. Besigye could have been arrested the minute he returned from four years exile three weeks earlier had there been a credible case against him. His arrest on trumped up charges led to street demonstrations in Kampala and the death of one protestor – which incident your correspondent again neglects.
Your correspondent writes that Mr. Museveni “disappointed those who were hoping for Western-style democracy to emerge in full flower in 21st-century Africa.” This is an irrelevant statement. Those most disappointed, and who are more important in the context of the story, are the millions of Ugandans who once believed in Mr. Museveni’s promises that he was not power hungry; that he would stamp out corruption and nepotism; and, that he would send soldiers back to the barracks and allow civil institutions to be enshrined in a new constitution.
President Museveni has done the exact opposite. Despite your writers assertion that the corruption “is less blatant than it was” compared to his predecessors and “the jailing of opponents far less prevalent,” the facts show otherwise. President Museveni’s own brother, Gen. Salim Saleh and his wife, Jovia Akandwanaho, were named in a United Nations report on corruption prepared by a panel of experts for the Security Council. As a result Gen. Saleh’s wife is now barred from entering the U.S.
Moreover, former US ambassador to Uganda, Johnnie Carson, stated at a recent forum at the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars that Museveni’s attempt to remain in office might be an attempt to “protect those around him from charges of corruption” fearing that once out of office immunity would be stripped. Current ambassador, Jimmy Kolker, said Uganda did not qualify for assistance through the Millenium Challenge due to endemic corruption. How can your correspondent not mention such statements?
In addition to the brutal suppression of Dr. Besigye’s supporters, the government banned all rallies by his supporters. Human Rights Watch in its 2004 report discussed the routine torture of opposition party activists in government “safe houses” throughout the country. I doubt if these victims will be comforted by your correspondent’s assertion that their arrests are now infrequent.
Regarding building of democratic institutions, Mr. Museveni’s own actions speak louder than words. Your correspondent writes that he “pushed to have constitutional limits on his term lifted,” when in fact Mr. Museveni openly bribed members of Parliament
$2,800 each to vote in favor. This outrage was reported in the local Uganda and international media, although not by your correspondent.
The army has not been sent back to barracks. It plays a very prominent role in political repression and intimidation. Just last week, when several men charged as co-conspirators with Dr. Besigye were granted bail, commandos barged into the courts. Fearing for their lives, the men elected to return to prison rather than be spirited away. This action was compared by Uganda’s judges to the days of Idi Amin and the country’s chief judge condemned the government.
Your correspondent writes that leaders such as Mr. Museveni, even with shortcomings, have “succeeded in holding together troubled countries with undeveloped democratic institutions and tradition.” Ironically, this is the exact same argument that colonial rulers employed and the enforcers of Apartheid in South Africa used to deny democracy for decades to Africans.
It is depressing when African tyrants are allowed to make an argument that two version of democracy are permissible; one, for the West, presumably with full human rights and the rule of law. And another version, for Africa, presumably with proscribed human rights and where the leader amends the law as he sees fit.
The overall paternalistic tone of the article is unacceptable. Why should Ugandans use Idi Amin and Milton Obote as barometer by which to judge their Presidents? Do Americans ask themselves whether a President or candidate is better than Richard Nixon or Gerald Ford before deciding on whom to vote for?
Mr. Museveni does not need The New York Times to make his case. He has shown that he is no different than Uganda’s previous leaders when it comes to clinging to power.