Kintu Nyago, Ex.Director, Forum for Promoting Democratic Constitutionalism, Kampala, Uganda, writes that there is need to tame the Kenyan executive, whereby some of its powers are diffused into the other pillars of state, notably the legislature and judiciary. There is also need to reformulate the Kenyan electoral system to allow for more inclusivity, based on proportional representation, rather than its current clearly ill suited ‘The First-Past the Post’, “Winner-Takes All” model. Constitutional provisions for power sharing require to be adopted, he argues.

Ethiopia’s current unilateral intervention into Somalia is a timely poignant reminder of the need to create a functional Eastern African political federation that would serve as an obstacle to the continuation of our now perennial conflicts in the Great Lakes and the Horn of Africa regions.

This invasion was triggered off by parochial national Ethiopian, Somali and Eritrean rivalries. Rivalries that would have been effectively checked by a broader regional political union, which unfortunately, in its absence, are bound to spillover this entire region with disastrous consequences.

Somalia’s condition of statelessness resulting from the misrule of the Said Barre junta has created an arena that fosters regional instability. Unfortunately Ethiopia, under the Meles Zanawi regime, has a vested interest in having either a weak puppet regime in Mogadishu or a stateless Somalia, to the extent that with the blessing of Washington, they supported the emergence of criminal Somali warlords, who held the Somali people at ransom and wreaked havoc on them.

However, the chickens did come home to roost for the Zenawi regime, with the emergence of the Somali Islamic Court Movement. Similar to the Taliban in Afganistan, and indeed drawing experiences from them, they defeated the warlords and established order and sanity in the areas they took over control of. The Islamic Courts created stability that benefited economic activity, one informed by a predictable political regime based on the Islamic Sharia code. This in turn led to their gaining widespread popular support.

And that’s the dilemma that Ethiopia is going to be faced with. For the hand-picked puppet regime that they are currently installing in Mogadishu, headed by Abdullahi Yusuf, lacks the required political support in Somalia. Indeed it would not even last a day, albeit all the support it has from the African Union and Washington, should Addis withdraw its troops.

Though disunited, the Somalis are a highly nationalistic lot when it comes to protecting their identity and country from foreign intrusion. And unless some creative political arrangement is devised, one which accommodates the Islamic Courts and other legitimate Somali political actors, the Zenawi administration is most likely going to be faced with its Waterloo - a protracted Somali guerrilla insurgency that it can ill afford. It will inevitably lose over time, especially since Meles Zenawi embarked on the Somali invasion to divert domestic attention from internal questions of his regime’s legitimacy, and given the high level of opposition the regime faces from large sways of the Amhara and Oromo elite.

The said Somali guerrilla resistance is likely to adopt a jihadist radical Islamic orientation which will unfortunately be internationalist in nature and affect the broader Eastern African region. Already the Al-Qaida leadership was reported to be inciting an insurgency along narrow religious sectarian and nationalist lines.

Uganda’s intervention into Somalia should only be based on a multilateral approach seeking a political stalemate that would create a Somali government of national unity. The current African Union and Ethiopian-backed Abdullai Yusuf administration is too discredited amongst the Somali, and should not be allowed to govern on its own. Time is of the essence and creative diplomacy is called for. Short of this, Ethiopia’s current deceptive victory is mostly likely to cause further instability in Somalia that would directly spill over into Djibouti, Kenya and Ethiopia itself. It may also trigger off another hot war between Asmara and Addis Ababa.

The medium to long-term solution to these destructive wars lies in the creation of a broad and viable Eastern African political federation. Indeed as events illustrate, this is a necessity, and not luxury, in our region.

The Right Honorable Prime Minister, as you should appreciate, it’s not usual for an ordinary Ugandan to write to you an open letter. But these are not ordinary times, in light of the arbitrarily manner with which your government is meddling in Uganda’s governance through its withdrawing of budgetary support in a manner reminiscent of the days of the empire.

Certainly I do thank you for the development support you offered Uganda in the last 15 or so years. It changed lives for the better including of the most vulnerable. While your vision of a just world as articulated in your third term is also most commendable.

However, many find dubious the reasons Britain provided for its aid cut. The more surprising in light of Britain’s long inteference in Uganda’s governance, dating back more that 100 years and starting with the colonial experience. And as you should recall, for more than 80 of these years Britain undermined rather than promoted Uganda’s good political governance.

For British colonialism, which we experienced for 60 years, was the exact antithesis of democratic governance. No elections, no accountable structures, no responsiveness or meaningful social programmes. Actually colonialism left us a legacy of underdevelopment and an autocratic culture and institutions. One which we have been attempting to undo, for the most part successfully, in the last 20 years!

Allow me to remind you that Britain was also instrumental in propping up both the Milton Obote (I and II) and Idi Amin regimes. For when Obote abrogated Uganda’s 1962 Lancaster House constitution, the Labour government under Harrold Wilson conveniently adopted a business as usual approach! Later Heath’s regime encouraged, to put it mildly, the Amin coup. Indeed Britain was the first to recognize and internationally legitimized Amin junta.

The pattern was much similar to Obote’s fraudulent return to power in 1980. Indeed Britain trained the murderous Uganda National Liberation Army and most conspicuously never criticized that regime’s attempted genocide. Hence the question, Rt.Hon. Prime Minister, where do you get the moral authority to now lecture us on our democratization process, in light of the above most dismal history?

Britain claims that Uganda does not have the commitment towards maintaining an independent judiciary. Please further substantiate on this serious allegation. We cherish the independence of our judiciary, which for your information is currently and ably arbitrating major disputes in the land.

In sum sir, Ugandans primarily through their own devices re-established the rule of law and we do not need patronizing foreigners to claim to be the guarantors of our freedoms, when in actual essence they were the source of the very governance problems we are grappling with now.

Sir, Britain also thinks that our freedom of the press is under threat! This impression requires correction. For actually, and for your information, Ugandans enjoy more press freedom than the British.

Then there is the claim that Ugandans have no freedom of association. This we find incredulous! Parties are now legally recognised and many recently held unprecedented vibrant and democratic delegates conferences which renewed their leadership.

Concerning the case of Kizza Besigye and the Ituri 22, we could probably seek guidance from Britain’s long history. How do you treat treason suspects? Are they feted? Let off the hook, outside due process, because, for instance, they are noblemen and politically well connected? In our case of the above the accused have been rigorously subjected to an expeditious due process of the law. It is this process that will provide the final verdict.

Ironically the effects of your glaring blunders could be the opposite of what you intended. Many Ugandans now question the donor’s biased meddling and patronizing attitudes. This is consolidating a strong nationalist ideology that questions the wisdom of our exposing ourselves to your arrogance and arbitrary methods of work.

Thanks for this news (Pambazuka News 130: Northern Uganda's Brutal War). Do however note the following: The response of the Teso political leadership when the LRA attacked this northeastern area was of actively mobilising the population to oppose these rebels, hence the formation of the Arrow militia. They also publicly denounced this incursion. Such a response has never occurred, to date, in Acholiland, leading many to believe that the LRA has a given level of support in the later area. Secondly, though a tenacious and vicious group, the LRA seems to have over extended itself when it attacked Teso, about 400 kilometres from the Sudanese border, where they get their supplies and are moreover amidst a hostile population. And the rebels causality rate, including some of their top commanders, has been high. A main motive to invade Teso was to replenish their food stocks, medicines and recruits through abductions.