I forwarded Ebrima's piece on poverty eradication to a friend who is
a Ugandan and below is his response.
Tom
***********************
Hi all,
This is my response to Ebima. I don't know how well he
understands Ugandan history. But if he does then he
misrepresented the facts. There is no double standards on this
issue by the west. In Uganda today, we enjoy the best African type
of democracy. To say that Uganda is a one party state shows how
little he understands our system of government. We don't have
parties. All party activities are banned. We all belong to a
movement system whereby anyone is allowed to stand for office on
his/her own merit rather than voting so and so because he/she is
from labour party rather than Alliance despite his/her short-
comings. We vote according to capability. Is the individual
capable? If by any chance he/she is incapable for one reason or
the other, the electorate has the right to recall by a vote of no
confidence. Other than the government, where else in the world
does this type of democracy exist. Not even at the cradle of it in
UK where you can change parties and still represent the people
who did not vote for you.
>
> And talking about Western double standards, let me inform you that
> while your Foreign Minister, Robin Cook, is calling on President
> Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe to hold multi-party elections in Zimbabwe in
> May 2000, as scheduled, there is in fact a country in Africa, Uganda,
> which is still a one-party state, and yet, as far as I know, Mr Cook
> is not saying anything about it.
>
> In Uganda, opposition parties are banned, but the West has never
> complained about it. In fact, didn't President Bill Clinton visit
> Uganda in 1999, during his Africa tour? Well, let me now tell you why
> the West refuses to take President Museveni of Uganda to task: The
> Western Governments like President Museveni because he is a strong
> defender/proponent of IMF and World policies in Africa, period.
To say that President Clinton also visited Uganda in 1999 is
another sign that Ebima does not understand what takes place in
Uganda. I think there few African leaders who can take a stance
and stick to it. In uganda there have been some IMF policies which
the government has refused to implement and some which have
been reenegotiated. So it is a matter of leaders standing up and
explaining in unequivocal terms to the west what they want. The
west will listen.
Another reason is that since 1971 Uganda has been in turmoil until
1986 when Museveni came to power. It is the same parties which
were involved so with their participation in violence how can
someone be sympathetic.
In 1996, there was presidential elections whereby anyone was
allowed to stand, Museveni won.
Freedom of speech is very important and anyone can say what
she/he likes so some opposition politicians have won seats and
sad bad things about Museveni, but they still live in Uganda, not in
prison as it used to be, so how can someone who understands our
history advocate for political parties?
>
> Anyway, let me conclude on a brighter observation; by saying that in
> any case, those of us who are here, should, all the same, thank God,
> because despite all these minuses in Western Societies that I have
> cited, ranging from abject poverty, multiple crimes to homelessness,
> the Western World, in my honest view, still offers more opportunities
> for man than other places in the world.
Doesn't the above paragraph really say much about his inclination?
>
> Yes, the system here doesn't favour minorities, especially blacks, but
> one can still find consolation in the fact that a man/woman can push
> some of these prejudices and discrimination behind him/her and do well
> for himself and his family.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
