Entry fifteen - Courting trouble…
(This was written about a month ago, but laziness prevented me from posting it.)
I'm guilty. This blog hasn't been updated in over two months, despite numerous events that could have provoked some extensive commentary. I've been to Sipi Falls in the east of the country, and Kabale to the west (I’ll have pictures soon, I hope). I've talked with Idi Amin conspiracy theorists, CHOGM (Commonwealth Summit) organisers, and drunken security guards - the former is a more frequent occurrence.
But there are two parts to today's entry, the first of which is informative commentary, the second of which is pure commentary. Given the West's apparent belief that Africans are incapable of practicing "politics", it is difficult to tell from here what snippets of Ugandan news actually reach the North American airwaves. So other than being congratulated by Forrest Whitaker for "their spirit", Ugandans are on edge over a controversial court case that is threatening to shut down the country's entire judicial system.
First, some background. Kizza Besigye, leader of the opposition Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), was arrested during the 2005-6 presidential campaign for treason and rape. After Besigye was released on bail, military police (dubbed the "Black Mamba Urban Hit Squad" due to their black t-shirts) showed up in front of the High Court to arrest him under military charges. (Besigye used to be a General and personal doctor to President Museveni.) MPs in Museveni's party had eliminated term limits allowing Museveni to run in the election, which he won by about a 60-40 split, a much thinner margin than the previous two elections. (A Canadian journalist was expelled for suggesting that the margin was slightly slimmer.) Besigye, who is not exactly the most articulate man in Uganda, has been acquitted of all charges by the High Court, but continues to fight military charges.
The current court drama involves suspected members of the People's Redemption Army (PRA), which was/is supposedly Besigye's military wing. Some have admitted guilt in order to take advantage of an amnesty law. However, the remaining ones were recently granted bail by the High Court. But... deja vu. The Black Mambas showed up to rearrest the released PRA suspects, scuffling with lawyers and judges as they did so. The Chief Justice of Uganda announced that the judges will be suspending all judicial activities in Uganda until the government complies with the Court's order to release the suspects and apologises for "insulting the judiciary". Some Makerere University students refused to attend lectures, but others apparently beat up the Student Guild President when he tried to organise a demonstration downtown (which the police had promised to disperse using teargas - they have delivered on such assurances at at least three demonstrations since November). From what I understand, the case against the PRA suspects is suspect at best - even the existence of the PRA is in doubt despite government assurances that they are still active in the Congo.
However, I would like to expand on my previous (provocative?) statement that Westerners see Africa as an apolitical black hole, out of which come soul-touching human-interest pieces and depressing horror stories, but no real news. It is hard to argue with those who argue that Africa needs development - especially when they define development as higher life expectancy, higher levels of education, lower infant mortality, etc. On the other hand, it is even more difficult to argue in any self-critical fashion for development, especially when it is defined as some inevitable desirable endpoint, or cluster of desirable endpoints. What about the political struggles, social contests, and divergent ideological views that are inconsistent with this noble but arbitrary concept? Yet "development" remains the primary relationship between Africa and the West and the raison d'etre of most African governments.
Take the example of Lesotho and the Transkei (which I am stealing from a book by James Ferguson). The Transkei was a South African native reserve or "Homeland" - a symbol of apartheid oppression. The South African government tried to promote the idea of the Transkei as an independent African government and funded several journals regarding development issues in the "Homelands". Scholars, activists, and your average run-of-the-mill North American news presenter recognized this as a sham. They argued, quite rightfully, that one could not talk about development in the Transkei without confronting the oppressive labour policies of South Africa and the apartheid regime's economic and social dominance over the barely independent state. In other words, nobody bought the idea of the Transkei as "really" an independent state.
On the other hand, Lesotho had been internationally recognized as a sovereign independent nation-state since the 1960s. Like the Transkei, it was/is completely surrounded by South Africa and dependent on South African employment for its work force. Like the Transkei, Lesotho was dependent on South Africa as well as a handful of Western states for its basic sustainability. However, unlike their politicized rejection of development discourse regarding the Transkei, academics and activists all uncritically referred to the challenges of "development" in Lesotho - good governance, eliminating corruption, etc. In other words, the Transkei's lack of development was blamed on South Africa, while in Lesotho it was thought of as Lesotho's problem. In the Transkei, politics were put front and centre. In Lesotho, they were eliminated.
Today, (most) Western journalists and diplomats - and even a significant number of scholars (and Ugandans) - portray the current government of Uganda as an unambiguously good captain of development. Therefore, they argue, any opposition to that government is unjustifiable because it opposes this goal of development. Grievances (justified or not) over government-appropriated land, regional manipulation, disrespect of the judiciary and increasing authoritarianism are simply rejected as unimportant and irrelevant so long as progress has been made in the categories of "development". People, however, are not apolitical automatons who need only food, water and a roof over their heads. Unfortunately, most of the world is flattened and depoliticised by the good intentions of a few social engineers. Put the social back in the social sciences.
(note: after short strikes and an assurance from the president to "look into things", the judges and lawyers are back at work and there have been no big events since then.)
I'm guilty. This blog hasn't been updated in over two months, despite numerous events that could have provoked some extensive commentary. I've been to Sipi Falls in the east of the country, and Kabale to the west (I’ll have pictures soon, I hope). I've talked with Idi Amin conspiracy theorists, CHOGM (Commonwealth Summit) organisers, and drunken security guards - the former is a more frequent occurrence.
But there are two parts to today's entry, the first of which is informative commentary, the second of which is pure commentary. Given the West's apparent belief that Africans are incapable of practicing "politics", it is difficult to tell from here what snippets of Ugandan news actually reach the North American airwaves. So other than being congratulated by Forrest Whitaker for "their spirit", Ugandans are on edge over a controversial court case that is threatening to shut down the country's entire judicial system.
First, some background. Kizza Besigye, leader of the opposition Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), was arrested during the 2005-6 presidential campaign for treason and rape. After Besigye was released on bail, military police (dubbed the "Black Mamba Urban Hit Squad" due to their black t-shirts) showed up in front of the High Court to arrest him under military charges. (Besigye used to be a General and personal doctor to President Museveni.) MPs in Museveni's party had eliminated term limits allowing Museveni to run in the election, which he won by about a 60-40 split, a much thinner margin than the previous two elections. (A Canadian journalist was expelled for suggesting that the margin was slightly slimmer.) Besigye, who is not exactly the most articulate man in Uganda, has been acquitted of all charges by the High Court, but continues to fight military charges.
The current court drama involves suspected members of the People's Redemption Army (PRA), which was/is supposedly Besigye's military wing. Some have admitted guilt in order to take advantage of an amnesty law. However, the remaining ones were recently granted bail by the High Court. But... deja vu. The Black Mambas showed up to rearrest the released PRA suspects, scuffling with lawyers and judges as they did so. The Chief Justice of Uganda announced that the judges will be suspending all judicial activities in Uganda until the government complies with the Court's order to release the suspects and apologises for "insulting the judiciary". Some Makerere University students refused to attend lectures, but others apparently beat up the Student Guild President when he tried to organise a demonstration downtown (which the police had promised to disperse using teargas - they have delivered on such assurances at at least three demonstrations since November). From what I understand, the case against the PRA suspects is suspect at best - even the existence of the PRA is in doubt despite government assurances that they are still active in the Congo.
However, I would like to expand on my previous (provocative?) statement that Westerners see Africa as an apolitical black hole, out of which come soul-touching human-interest pieces and depressing horror stories, but no real news. It is hard to argue with those who argue that Africa needs development - especially when they define development as higher life expectancy, higher levels of education, lower infant mortality, etc. On the other hand, it is even more difficult to argue in any self-critical fashion for development, especially when it is defined as some inevitable desirable endpoint, or cluster of desirable endpoints. What about the political struggles, social contests, and divergent ideological views that are inconsistent with this noble but arbitrary concept? Yet "development" remains the primary relationship between Africa and the West and the raison d'etre of most African governments.
Take the example of Lesotho and the Transkei (which I am stealing from a book by James Ferguson). The Transkei was a South African native reserve or "Homeland" - a symbol of apartheid oppression. The South African government tried to promote the idea of the Transkei as an independent African government and funded several journals regarding development issues in the "Homelands". Scholars, activists, and your average run-of-the-mill North American news presenter recognized this as a sham. They argued, quite rightfully, that one could not talk about development in the Transkei without confronting the oppressive labour policies of South Africa and the apartheid regime's economic and social dominance over the barely independent state. In other words, nobody bought the idea of the Transkei as "really" an independent state.
On the other hand, Lesotho had been internationally recognized as a sovereign independent nation-state since the 1960s. Like the Transkei, it was/is completely surrounded by South Africa and dependent on South African employment for its work force. Like the Transkei, Lesotho was dependent on South Africa as well as a handful of Western states for its basic sustainability. However, unlike their politicized rejection of development discourse regarding the Transkei, academics and activists all uncritically referred to the challenges of "development" in Lesotho - good governance, eliminating corruption, etc. In other words, the Transkei's lack of development was blamed on South Africa, while in Lesotho it was thought of as Lesotho's problem. In the Transkei, politics were put front and centre. In Lesotho, they were eliminated.
Today, (most) Western journalists and diplomats - and even a significant number of scholars (and Ugandans) - portray the current government of Uganda as an unambiguously good captain of development. Therefore, they argue, any opposition to that government is unjustifiable because it opposes this goal of development. Grievances (justified or not) over government-appropriated land, regional manipulation, disrespect of the judiciary and increasing authoritarianism are simply rejected as unimportant and irrelevant so long as progress has been made in the categories of "development". People, however, are not apolitical automatons who need only food, water and a roof over their heads. Unfortunately, most of the world is flattened and depoliticised by the good intentions of a few social engineers. Put the social back in the social sciences.
(note: after short strikes and an assurance from the president to "look into things", the judges and lawyers are back at work and there have been no big events since then.)
posted by Jack/Edgar at 4/09/2007 08:56:00 p.m.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home