One of Uganda's leading dailies, the New Vision, Saturday published an editorial titled; 'Opposition should have Uganda at heart'. You can read the whole text here.
In short, the editorial is about the Mabira Forest protests, the up-coming Common Wealth Meeting (CHOGM) and the opposition. In particular I paid attention to the last three paragraphs.
It is unthinkable that any opposition party in the UK would try to boycott an international event benefiting the entire country the way FDC has been doing. Already in Malta, the opposition tried to block Uganda from hosting CHOGM.
You can disagree with Museveni and his Government on many issues. But you should do so in a constructive way, using the appropriate channels, and always having the interests of the country at heart. One only has to look at Somalia to see what anarchy and the pursuit of selfish interests by certain politicians and groups can lead to in Africa.
Certainly, the Government could do more to listen to the people and engage the opposition in dialogue. But attempts of the opposition to sabotage CHOGM and turn Uganda into a pariah- state cannot be justified.
Somehow this editorial piece manages to blend it all together in order to conclude that 1) the opposition (FDC?) uses the 2) Mabira Forest protests to create insecurity in general, in the streets in Kampala in particular, 3) but for the higher purpose of destroying Uganda's opportunities to show off at its best when the CHOGM visitors arrive. If they will arrive,
because rumours will that anonymous sources in the British government have stated that the situation might be too insecure regarding the safety of the Queen. In fact there is a strong tendency at the moment to stirr up rumours of uncertainty concerning the CHOGM, not a very factual discussion, I'm afraid. But it makes you think.
It seems as if the editorial is using the old trick to play on dubious loyalty to the nation's interests. But why would the New Vision do so? Wouldn't a serious editorial also question the Ugandan government's evident attempts to cover up that they are failing on time management for the CHOGM regarding road construction, hotels, power, diesel, Juba Peace Talks, well - with or without the CHOGM - the Ugandan government is failing regarding the IDP camps in northern Uganda, the instability of the Juba Peace Talks and the growing problem in Karamoja in north eastern Uganda. If the CHOGM secretariat are looking for reasons to boycot the next meeting in Uganda, there are better ones.
And why doesn't the editorial question that the people behind the Mabira protests and the FDC might have different motives, maybe they are not even the same? I don't know, I don't have any preferences, I am just looking for some journalistic coverage on a higher level. I would actually like to know what is what, but the papers doesn't dig into it. For me this editorial is quite an interesting example of giving space to governmental rethorics. (Actually, go back and give it a try while imagining that the progress-friendly president wrote the editorial).
The images are from the Jinja Road/Yussuf Lule roundabout, where the Electoral Commission, the institutional body charged with administering elections in Uganda, has recently painted impressive slogans motivating Ugandans to practise their democratic right.
Confused?!
Recent Comments