OPINION
There is nothing fundamentally wrong with having differences of opinion on a matter. Political organizations exist as platforms for political expression. It is therefore healthy to engage in robust debate on a wide range of issues affecting our people – contradictions not withstanding. NRM should therefore harness the current debate on many issues in the country for the good of our democracy and the betterment of the lives of our people. A democracy that works is one that facilitates debate. Political organizations that sustain power, reproduce that power by creating spaces for “difficult and inconvenient internal conversations” that inform policy decisions and actions of government. Internal party debates should inspire free expression without fear of trepidation. In any case, no friction no traction. This is the element of the DNA of NRM that has over the years faded away leaving the party with a very pale complexion. This is what defined the true character of the NRM as a liberation movement – the ability to engage in informed public debates and shaping the public discourse on matters of national importance. To completely lose this capability is to lose the true identity of NRM. I fear that if not reclaimed faster, we shall suffer an identity crisis.
Internal contradictions has been part of the growth trajectory of the NRM. The capacity to facilitate and manage internal contradictions is what makes a whole big difference. To understand this element of the NRM, one has to interest himself or herself in the history of the NRA struggle that birthed the NRM. At different stages, the struggle had to confront different contradictions – strategic (ideological) and operational. Drawing this distinction is very useful in understanding their nature and prescription of solutions. It is very easy to confuse the two and therefore making the wrong prescriptions. I will get back to this on another day.
Writing his account of the bush war struggle and to illuminate my point, bush war hero Ondoga Ari Amaza in his book “Museveni’s Long March: From Guerilla to Statesman” narrates how internal contradictions within the struggle had threatened to create fault lines between the rank and file of the fighting force. The Kayiira group that was predominantly Baganda had been incited to look at the composition of the rank and file with tribal lenses. Majority of Kayiira fighters were uneducated as opposed to the NRA. Therefore there was disproportionate representation in the top Command structure of the fighting forces. The weaponization of ethnic identities threatened to undermine the cohesion and spirit of the struggle. Instead of remaining indifferent or even muzzling the internal differences within the struggle, the NRA chose to facilitate It, engage with the dissenting voices and seek a solution. It took the intervention of the High Command under the leadership of President Museveni to neutralise the intensity of the toxic sentiment that was brewing. A decision was made to integrate the Kayiira group in the Command structure by identifying talent, training in skills and ideology and fast tracking the promotion of some who demonstrated exceptional performance. So what started as a potential internal revolt, was transformed into an opportunity for enhancing the capacity and capabilities of the fighting forces. That is leadership!
It takes enlightened leadership and organizational capability to manage internal contradictions in there various manifestations.
The failure to facilitate internal conversations, expression of divergent opinions and having a structured political process within the party to address these national issues is making us (NRM) look disjointed and shabby in the public domain. We have become more reactionary than proactive. In the process, we have left Government to occupy the space and dominate the setting of the policy agenda and implementation without any political oversight. And yet, political accountability rests in the shoulders of the party. It is a typical case of the “tail wagging the dog”. In the end when there is a gap it is the party that pays the price as collateral damage. NRM has to reclaim this space as a legitimate primary stakeholder. To reclaim that space, it must engage in deliberate effort to build a mutually reinforcing nexus with government.
The frustration with government on the fight against corruption and the dismal performance in the delivery of other promises in the manifesto has found expression in formations such as PLU, and many offshoots that express alternative opinions even though aligned to NRM. The young and restless are finding their voices in these formations. If not nipped in the bud by open engagement and deliberate actions these formations may present NRM with its greatest “opposition” with the potential of tilting the delicately poised political landscape. For NRM to find it’s true North, it has to engage, embrace the changing demographics and it’s implications on the political discourse, and pay much attention to the fight against corruption in all its guises. Nothing is out of scope – it just takes leadership to dare to imagine a shared future of prosperity.
Odongo George Stephen
Member of the East African Legislative Assembly (EALA)
