On January 2, 2007 the Red Pepper reported that intelligence personnel were stuck with a report that showed that President Yoweri Museveni's wife, Janet Kataha Museveni intends to contest in the 2011 presidential elections.
Although that story appeared extra-ordinarily remarkable - for better or worse - it was never picked up by pundits in Kampala's energetic debate circuit and it soon slipped under the media radar and then off to the pages of history.
Noteworthy though was that, that report was never refuted by State House.
A few attuned commentators noted it and, in a review of the major news of the year, Daily Monitor writer Mr Timothy Kalyegira cited it as one of the key political news of 2007.
For the first time, a small window was opened for the public into the scale of the political ambitions of the second most powerful member of State House.
And even beyond that it also helped signal to Ugandans the sort of political fault-lines and the jockeying that could form in Uganda's innermost sanctum of power in case President Museveni ever becomes incapacitated in office or resigns.
Insiders in State House told Daily Monitor that President Museveni does not espouse Janet's involvement in politics.
When she announced, late in 2005, that she would compete for the Ruhama County MP seat, Mr Museveni was later quoted by the media as saying that he had tried to discourage his wife from engaging in elective politics.
When someone chooses to set aside the revered status of 'Mother of the Nation' and enter the muddy fields of elective and characteristically partisan politics, it cannot be for a small reason.
Then she explained that in standing, she was obeying a command from God. After gaining the experience of competitive constituency politics for five years, what is to stop God from commanding her to seek the bigger constituency called Uganda?
But since Museveni did not want her in politics, it can be deduced that he has other ideas in his head regarding which members of his circle should succeed him in case his health were to fail him.
In June 2006, while speaking at the launch of Vumilia, an association of soldiers' widows and orphans at Sheraton Hotel, Museveni dropped an eye-popping hint - First Son, Maj. Muhoozi Keinerugaba, he suggested, should start from where he finishes.
Mr Museveni was quoted by Daily Monitor as saying in Luganda, "Omwana yagenda okutwala mu maso omulimo gwa kitawe. Mutabani wange namuyita Muhoozi. Enkya, Muhoozi yagenda okuwolera eggwanga," meaning he desired Maj.Muhoozi to carry on his job.
According to the story Mr Museveni clearly signalled he had high expectations for his son and also described Gen. Salim Saleh as one of those NRM cadres that are graduating into "more challenging roles." Which job does Museveni want Maj. Muhoozi to carry on? Cattle ranching at Kisozi and Rwakitura?
If this is what he is being prepared for, veterinary studies do not feature prominently on the various curricular he has been pursuing at different academies abroad over the past decade. And the only employment he has held in between was not in the Ministries of Agriculture, but that of Defence?
Maj. Muhoozi attended the world-famous military academy, Sandhurst of UK where he graduated in May 2001 and was later curiously promoted by Libyan leader Col. Muammar Ghadaffi from Lieutenant to Major.
The UPDF sucked the air out of the controversy by describing the new rank as a "loan" for which Muhoozi had to train and work to earn.
In the likelihood that Mr Museveni becomes incapacitated while in office, a scenario whose possibility we've explained in earlier parts of this series, many observes think some system insiders would pick on Maj. Muhoozi, who will in any case have climbed higher in army leadership to take over the presidency.
But if Mr Museveni shares such "presidential plans" for his son, then he might face a wrenching quandary in reconciling them with a scenario if the First Lady Janet equally got orders from above (God) to pursue higher political ambitions as were reported by the Red Pepper.
Patriotism
And that's before Gen. Saleh, a man whom President Museveni has historically praised as a brave and patriotic fighter and "a clean man" despite many controversial issues where he has been cited as a central figure, like the botched underground sale of Uganda Commercial Bank and the junk chopper deal.
Gen. Saleh, according to one State House source, was ats one time ranking high on President Museveni's list of possible successors, alongside Brig. Henry Tumukunde. Then, according to this source, Gen. Saleh ruined his record with "alcohol and an obsession with money" while Brig. Tumukunde later allied himself with the 'wrong forces'.
Still, Gen. Saleh could be persuaded by many due to his strong following within the army and appeal to the ordinary people across the country, in the incident of a power vacuum, to 'hold the fort' and keep the country stable, adding a third dimension to the potential power contenders at State House.
But would the feelings of Ugandans over a member of the first family "inheriting" power from Museveni matter and can they prevent it if they don't like the idea?
There are some basic facts that point us to what is possible and what is less possible. Sources indicate for instance that Maj. Muhoozi has considerable control of PGB, which is widely understood to be the paramount centre of power within the army.
It would be possible for him, if he wanted, to parlay this strategic control and rally the army behind him. However, that is not a guarantee that such a transition would be that smooth.
Some members in senior army leadership might balk at the father-son, husband-wife or brother-brother succession and possibly attempt to foil it, sparking a fight within the military.
"There will likely be a lot of infighting within the palace," remarked Prof. Fredrick Sepebwa. "A coup is still possible."
While Ugandans have largely shown a timid reluctance to engage usurpers of power, they have lately cultivated a stomach for determined confrontation with police, a trend visible since November 2005 when Dr Kiiza Besigye was arrested.
This toughening militancy within the population could be easily exploited by opposition politicians to successfully thwart any extra-constitutional father-son or husband-wife succession.
Of course Mr Museveni's relatives are free to pursue constitutional means to succeed him.
Across the spectrum of Ugandan's political views, there's a general consensus that there's basically nothing wrong with Janet Museveni, Keinerugaba Muhoozi or any of Mr Museveni's close relatives succeeding him as long he/she does so in conformity with the laws of the land.
"Members of the first family, like any other Ugandan, are at liberty to play their rightful role in society," senior politician and Internal Affairs Minister Ruhakana Rugunda said about a possible succession from within the president's household.
However should any of these close relatives fall short on charisma and experience in the skilful and patient maneuvers of statecraft, it's unlikely that they would resist the temptation of using coercive force (the military) to pursue their ambitions.
And if Mr Museveni ever gets incapacitated in office, all forces with access to the military may try to usurp power against resistance from the population, and this could spark one of the most explosive political developments whose consequences are hard to ponder.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Friday, December 21, 2007
Museveni Succession: Can army allow VP to take over?
ELIAS BIRYABAREMA
KAMPALA
On a September 5th 2007 visit to Dwaniro, Kiboga District in central Uganda which hosted one of the rearguard bases for his vicious National Resistance Army, NRA insurgency against the UPC government (1981-85), President Yoweri Museveni let slip past his mouth a chilling revelation.
"If you had not elected us in 1996 and had not given us the mandate, we would have gone back to the bush to fight," Mr Museveni was quoted by national media on September 7 as telling the gathered peasants.
Perhaps it was tactical that Mr Museveni had chosen a rural setting, and an audience that could hardly perceive the extraordinary import of his statements to deliver what might be the most telling clue to the mindset and character of the NRA and its offspring, the UDPF.
Even if they had lost the election, Mr Museveni declared, they (him and his soldiers, the NRA) could never have allowed the "killers" who he said had backed DP's Paul Kawanga Ssemogerere, to come to power.
The inference from Mr Museveni's revelation was that the army and its Commander-in-Chief were unwilling to cede power regardless of Ugandans' choice. That was only a year after Uganda had gotten a new Constitution with free and fair elections as one of its sacrosanct principles.
"In simple English: Mr Museveni would have overthrown the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda," Dr Muniini Mulera a regular commentator on Uganda's politics said.
And this is the possibility we seek to explore in the second part of our series which delves into whether the UPDF would ever allow a civilian to assume power in case the incumbent slipped into incapacitation.
In the formal and automated process of national governance, succession in such a scenario is pretty straightforward and clear: the Vice President (currently Prof. Gilbert Bukenya) would assume office. But in the cold and brutal realities of Ugandan politics, succession never seems to follow a standard path, as is much of Sub-Saharan Africa.
And so, it's never a given as our Constitution suggests that power would automatically flow where it's supposed to if the presidency suddenly falls vacant. It all really hinges on how the army, the single force that has historically directed the course of power in independent Uganda, will act or not act.
"Ours is to respect the rule of law," insisted UPDF spokesperson, Maj. Felix Kulayigye in an interview on December 11. "Subject to the Constitution, we'll submit to whoever is in power as long as he's there legally."
The genteel and thoughtful Internal Affairs Minister, Dr Ruhakana Rugunda, too sees any suggestion of a possible UPDF interference in the succession process as mere conjecture.
But his optimism derives from a basic assumption. "The question of succession is a small point," he told Daily Monitor on December 12. "Because it has been well sorted out by the Constitution."
Still, beyond the assertions of Maj. Kulayigye and Dr Rugunda, there is a lot for Ugandans to fret about. The history of UPDF is not a history of virtue and patriotism.
Threats
In the heat of the 2001 presidential election campaigns, the current Coordinator of Intelligence Agencies in Uganda, Gen. David Tinyefuza, infamously declared that he would not submit to Dr Kiiza Besigye if the latter won the presidency.
And the former Director General of the Internal Security Organisation, Brig. Henry Tumukunde, reminded voters that whatever they did, Mr Museveni would still rule because they still had their guns.
Although such statements from serving (and senior) army officers would appear to carry a treasonable intent, there was never so much as a verbal reprimand from the army leadership then: corroborating what Mr Museveni implied later in Dwaniro - only the will of the army would really determine who rules Uganda.
Obviously, Gen. Tinyefuza's and Brig. Tumukunde's utterances are starkly incongruous with Maj. Kulayigye and Dr Rugunda's assertions of UPDF being a professional army, ready to submit to whichever Commander-in-Chief Ugandans (the people) may chose. Another incident, too, does undermine the glowing portrayals of UPDF.
On February 15, 2006, Lt. Ramathan Magara shot into a crowd of Dr Kiiza Besigye supporters at Bulange, Mengo, killing two people and permanently maiming a third. That tragedy, by a soldier during multiparty election campaigns, drew nationwide outrage and became a timeless stain on the UPDF.
But to the consternation of many, Lt. Magara was never court-martialled. The army instead disowned him and he was later charged in a civilian court and promptly granted bail, virtually leaving him a free man.
Lt. Magala killings
That a soldier could orchestrate such gruesome violence against an opponent of Mr Museveni, and he's even defended by elements in government (an RDC, Mr Fred Bamwine did) again underlines that faceless but decisive role of the army in determining Uganda's president.
True, Maj. Kulaigye's explanation initially sounds firm. "He's a civilian. He was retired from the army and so we couldn't try him."
But then it is Mr Museveni who invented a solution for civilians that use instruments that are a preserve of the army: court-martial. Lt. Magara used an AK 47 to murder the civilians, a weapon never licensed for civilian defence and only used by the security forces.
That is the government's justification to subject whoever handles an AK47 in Uganda to military law. How stupefying then that a 'retired' soldier could take up an AK 47, unleash a bloodbath and be spared a court-martial? Instead, since his release, Lt. Magara has claimed to be a representative of the President at one function.
Also telling is the army's feeling of entitlement to a major political role in Uganda. Even after constitutional amendments to suit the multiparty system, the army, about 50,000 strong, still maintains 10 seats in Parliament, even though all 10 are supposed to have only one view.
Clearly, the army sees itself as far more important than the rest of the population for at their ratio of parliamentary representation of 1:5000, Uganda's Parliament would have 6,000 MPs for a population of 30 million, if the civilian citizens were deemed to be equal to the soldiers in importance.
But to the leader of the Opposition, Prof Morris Ogenga Latigo, fears of UPDF hijacking power in case their current Commander-in-Chief got incapacitated in office are naïve. Coup d'états, he said on December 12, are anachronistic. "Time when soldiers used to do stupid things is over," he said.
In a Uganda where eccentric political actions are never in scarcity, many might find that assessment inaccurate.
Besides, that the leader of opposition can edit his own opinion to say what he does not believe shows how cowed politicians on both sides of the divide have become.
For the same Prof Latigo, on December 7, barely five days before, had indicated to a gathering of Uganda British Alumni Association that conditions prevailing in Uganda today are quite similar to those during the Chogm of 1971 when Idi Amin overthrew Milton Obote.
Addressing the UBAA dinner as guest of honour Prof Latigo said like the construction boom in Kampala today, Uganda's economy in 1971 was booming, the infrastructure excellent and the social services the envy of all Africa but that did not stop multitudes to pour into the streets to celebrate the toppling of the government by a soldier.
What is clearly hard to argue against therefore is that, for a typical Ugandan soldier power does not necessarily belong to the people, as the Constitution otherwise states in article 1.
KAMPALA
On a September 5th 2007 visit to Dwaniro, Kiboga District in central Uganda which hosted one of the rearguard bases for his vicious National Resistance Army, NRA insurgency against the UPC government (1981-85), President Yoweri Museveni let slip past his mouth a chilling revelation.
"If you had not elected us in 1996 and had not given us the mandate, we would have gone back to the bush to fight," Mr Museveni was quoted by national media on September 7 as telling the gathered peasants.
Perhaps it was tactical that Mr Museveni had chosen a rural setting, and an audience that could hardly perceive the extraordinary import of his statements to deliver what might be the most telling clue to the mindset and character of the NRA and its offspring, the UDPF.
Even if they had lost the election, Mr Museveni declared, they (him and his soldiers, the NRA) could never have allowed the "killers" who he said had backed DP's Paul Kawanga Ssemogerere, to come to power.
The inference from Mr Museveni's revelation was that the army and its Commander-in-Chief were unwilling to cede power regardless of Ugandans' choice. That was only a year after Uganda had gotten a new Constitution with free and fair elections as one of its sacrosanct principles.
"In simple English: Mr Museveni would have overthrown the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda," Dr Muniini Mulera a regular commentator on Uganda's politics said.
And this is the possibility we seek to explore in the second part of our series which delves into whether the UPDF would ever allow a civilian to assume power in case the incumbent slipped into incapacitation.
In the formal and automated process of national governance, succession in such a scenario is pretty straightforward and clear: the Vice President (currently Prof. Gilbert Bukenya) would assume office. But in the cold and brutal realities of Ugandan politics, succession never seems to follow a standard path, as is much of Sub-Saharan Africa.
And so, it's never a given as our Constitution suggests that power would automatically flow where it's supposed to if the presidency suddenly falls vacant. It all really hinges on how the army, the single force that has historically directed the course of power in independent Uganda, will act or not act.
"Ours is to respect the rule of law," insisted UPDF spokesperson, Maj. Felix Kulayigye in an interview on December 11. "Subject to the Constitution, we'll submit to whoever is in power as long as he's there legally."
The genteel and thoughtful Internal Affairs Minister, Dr Ruhakana Rugunda, too sees any suggestion of a possible UPDF interference in the succession process as mere conjecture.
But his optimism derives from a basic assumption. "The question of succession is a small point," he told Daily Monitor on December 12. "Because it has been well sorted out by the Constitution."
Still, beyond the assertions of Maj. Kulayigye and Dr Rugunda, there is a lot for Ugandans to fret about. The history of UPDF is not a history of virtue and patriotism.
Threats
In the heat of the 2001 presidential election campaigns, the current Coordinator of Intelligence Agencies in Uganda, Gen. David Tinyefuza, infamously declared that he would not submit to Dr Kiiza Besigye if the latter won the presidency.
And the former Director General of the Internal Security Organisation, Brig. Henry Tumukunde, reminded voters that whatever they did, Mr Museveni would still rule because they still had their guns.
Although such statements from serving (and senior) army officers would appear to carry a treasonable intent, there was never so much as a verbal reprimand from the army leadership then: corroborating what Mr Museveni implied later in Dwaniro - only the will of the army would really determine who rules Uganda.
Obviously, Gen. Tinyefuza's and Brig. Tumukunde's utterances are starkly incongruous with Maj. Kulayigye and Dr Rugunda's assertions of UPDF being a professional army, ready to submit to whichever Commander-in-Chief Ugandans (the people) may chose. Another incident, too, does undermine the glowing portrayals of UPDF.
On February 15, 2006, Lt. Ramathan Magara shot into a crowd of Dr Kiiza Besigye supporters at Bulange, Mengo, killing two people and permanently maiming a third. That tragedy, by a soldier during multiparty election campaigns, drew nationwide outrage and became a timeless stain on the UPDF.
But to the consternation of many, Lt. Magara was never court-martialled. The army instead disowned him and he was later charged in a civilian court and promptly granted bail, virtually leaving him a free man.
Lt. Magala killings
That a soldier could orchestrate such gruesome violence against an opponent of Mr Museveni, and he's even defended by elements in government (an RDC, Mr Fred Bamwine did) again underlines that faceless but decisive role of the army in determining Uganda's president.
True, Maj. Kulaigye's explanation initially sounds firm. "He's a civilian. He was retired from the army and so we couldn't try him."
But then it is Mr Museveni who invented a solution for civilians that use instruments that are a preserve of the army: court-martial. Lt. Magara used an AK 47 to murder the civilians, a weapon never licensed for civilian defence and only used by the security forces.
That is the government's justification to subject whoever handles an AK47 in Uganda to military law. How stupefying then that a 'retired' soldier could take up an AK 47, unleash a bloodbath and be spared a court-martial? Instead, since his release, Lt. Magara has claimed to be a representative of the President at one function.
Also telling is the army's feeling of entitlement to a major political role in Uganda. Even after constitutional amendments to suit the multiparty system, the army, about 50,000 strong, still maintains 10 seats in Parliament, even though all 10 are supposed to have only one view.
Clearly, the army sees itself as far more important than the rest of the population for at their ratio of parliamentary representation of 1:5000, Uganda's Parliament would have 6,000 MPs for a population of 30 million, if the civilian citizens were deemed to be equal to the soldiers in importance.
But to the leader of the Opposition, Prof Morris Ogenga Latigo, fears of UPDF hijacking power in case their current Commander-in-Chief got incapacitated in office are naïve. Coup d'états, he said on December 12, are anachronistic. "Time when soldiers used to do stupid things is over," he said.
In a Uganda where eccentric political actions are never in scarcity, many might find that assessment inaccurate.
Besides, that the leader of opposition can edit his own opinion to say what he does not believe shows how cowed politicians on both sides of the divide have become.
For the same Prof Latigo, on December 7, barely five days before, had indicated to a gathering of Uganda British Alumni Association that conditions prevailing in Uganda today are quite similar to those during the Chogm of 1971 when Idi Amin overthrew Milton Obote.
Addressing the UBAA dinner as guest of honour Prof Latigo said like the construction boom in Kampala today, Uganda's economy in 1971 was booming, the infrastructure excellent and the social services the envy of all Africa but that did not stop multitudes to pour into the streets to celebrate the toppling of the government by a soldier.
What is clearly hard to argue against therefore is that, for a typical Ugandan soldier power does not necessarily belong to the people, as the Constitution otherwise states in article 1.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Commonwealth Business Forum: Lofty Goals, Little Impact.
ELIAS BIRYABAREMA
Kampala--Often when accomplished business leaders converge, as in the just concluded Commonwealth Business Forum, CBF at Sheraton Hotel the ideas and issues under discussion tend to be of the highbrow sort. And why not, after all it's business that makes the world grind on. It’s business that makes societies and nations more powerful than others.
Just as a clue to the grandiosity of this business gathering (November 20th-22nd); the marquee to accommodate the over 700 delegates was hired at $400,000 from Dubai.
But don't be deceived by that and feel a great loss in case you've been unable to attend. In fact if you have ever attended any or participated in the CBF, the sense of déjà vu that you feel as you sit in the sessions can be overwhelming.
The Forum opened at 10 AM on Tuesday, November 20th with a speech by President Museveni. Any Ugandan delegate in there could as well have slept through the president's speech, and then woken up and still accurately recounted what he had told the Forum.
Reuters's correspondent, Tim Cocks quoted Museveni as saying, "We have confined ourselves to the export of raw materials such as coffee, where we have been getting $1 per kg while Nestle in London is getting $20 per kg."
But Mr. Cocks could easily have been accused of plagiarism because that's the same exact line that has run in thousands of stories on Museveni and his economic views.
As is well known of what happens when Museveni meets business executives, somehow the talk has to invariably feature his standard themes: value addition; donation of value to Western nations; Western investors’ failure to recognise Africa’s potential; his wisdom in attracting processors of our commodities; Uganda having the best bananas in the world and suchlike.
That would not necessarily be a problem since, as a head of state, his glib musings will always have an audience. The problem is the precious time lost in such trite talk which would otherwise have been better devoted to exploration of more thoughtful and intellectually stimulating ideas.
But may be we're being harsh on Museveni.
The droves of CEOs and economic policy directors at the CBF didn’t fair any better in terms of the freshness of debate and talking points. Almost all the subjects discussed at the CBF are the types on which you have probably attended half a dozen workshops or so. One such one was, "Leveraging ICT for Business Development." An even more stale one was, "enhancing intra-African trade," that was discussed by a seemingly powerful posse of business executives: Dr Yvonne Muthien, Director Special Projects, Coca-Cola, Africa; Jeremy Pike, Area Director, Sub Saharan Africa, BAT and Sir John Kaputin, ACP Secretary General. But the feeling one got after the debate session suggested that power was actually in titles not in their ideas.
In fact the only new element in the deliberations at the CBF was the personalities that tackled these subjects. But that didn’t necessarily make for a higher quality of debate. A Ugandan Journalist, Mr. Daniel Kalinaki of Kalinaki.blogspot.com derided the sessions as “boring,” and suggested that it was a great deal of pain to seat through any of them.
Nevertheless, some subjects that are new to global business discourses did generate a health and educative debate. The unfolding impact of climate change was such a one. A three-member panel—Mr. James Smith, Chairman of Shell, UK, Bobby Godsell, Director Anglo American, South Africa and Mr Reto Schwarwiler, Head of Global Government Relations, Swiss Re, Switzerland—delivered stimulating insights into this emerging threat to the economic prosperity of nations.
The recent floods that pummelled Uganda’s north, north-eastern and central regions in August and September displaced hundreds of thousands and destroyed infrastructure worth billions of shillings. Although debate about the link between global warming and extreme weather incidents is still continuing, there’s already a broad consensus among scientists that rising temperatures might be behind the increasingly frequent flooding ravaging tropical countries.
Hopefully Ugandan government officials at the CBF took this panel’s lessons to heart and will also possibly review some of the policies like allocating of forests to sugar cane and palm oil investors.
Kampala--Often when accomplished business leaders converge, as in the just concluded Commonwealth Business Forum, CBF at Sheraton Hotel the ideas and issues under discussion tend to be of the highbrow sort. And why not, after all it's business that makes the world grind on. It’s business that makes societies and nations more powerful than others.
Just as a clue to the grandiosity of this business gathering (November 20th-22nd); the marquee to accommodate the over 700 delegates was hired at $400,000 from Dubai.
But don't be deceived by that and feel a great loss in case you've been unable to attend. In fact if you have ever attended any or participated in the CBF, the sense of déjà vu that you feel as you sit in the sessions can be overwhelming.
The Forum opened at 10 AM on Tuesday, November 20th with a speech by President Museveni. Any Ugandan delegate in there could as well have slept through the president's speech, and then woken up and still accurately recounted what he had told the Forum.
Reuters's correspondent, Tim Cocks quoted Museveni as saying, "We have confined ourselves to the export of raw materials such as coffee, where we have been getting $1 per kg while Nestle in London is getting $20 per kg."
But Mr. Cocks could easily have been accused of plagiarism because that's the same exact line that has run in thousands of stories on Museveni and his economic views.
As is well known of what happens when Museveni meets business executives, somehow the talk has to invariably feature his standard themes: value addition; donation of value to Western nations; Western investors’ failure to recognise Africa’s potential; his wisdom in attracting processors of our commodities; Uganda having the best bananas in the world and suchlike.
That would not necessarily be a problem since, as a head of state, his glib musings will always have an audience. The problem is the precious time lost in such trite talk which would otherwise have been better devoted to exploration of more thoughtful and intellectually stimulating ideas.
But may be we're being harsh on Museveni.
The droves of CEOs and economic policy directors at the CBF didn’t fair any better in terms of the freshness of debate and talking points. Almost all the subjects discussed at the CBF are the types on which you have probably attended half a dozen workshops or so. One such one was, "Leveraging ICT for Business Development." An even more stale one was, "enhancing intra-African trade," that was discussed by a seemingly powerful posse of business executives: Dr Yvonne Muthien, Director Special Projects, Coca-Cola, Africa; Jeremy Pike, Area Director, Sub Saharan Africa, BAT and Sir John Kaputin, ACP Secretary General. But the feeling one got after the debate session suggested that power was actually in titles not in their ideas.
In fact the only new element in the deliberations at the CBF was the personalities that tackled these subjects. But that didn’t necessarily make for a higher quality of debate. A Ugandan Journalist, Mr. Daniel Kalinaki of Kalinaki.blogspot.com derided the sessions as “boring,” and suggested that it was a great deal of pain to seat through any of them.
Nevertheless, some subjects that are new to global business discourses did generate a health and educative debate. The unfolding impact of climate change was such a one. A three-member panel—Mr. James Smith, Chairman of Shell, UK, Bobby Godsell, Director Anglo American, South Africa and Mr Reto Schwarwiler, Head of Global Government Relations, Swiss Re, Switzerland—delivered stimulating insights into this emerging threat to the economic prosperity of nations.
The recent floods that pummelled Uganda’s north, north-eastern and central regions in August and September displaced hundreds of thousands and destroyed infrastructure worth billions of shillings. Although debate about the link between global warming and extreme weather incidents is still continuing, there’s already a broad consensus among scientists that rising temperatures might be behind the increasingly frequent flooding ravaging tropical countries.
Hopefully Ugandan government officials at the CBF took this panel’s lessons to heart and will also possibly review some of the policies like allocating of forests to sugar cane and palm oil investors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)