I love Sserunkuma’s writing but I find him wanting and indeed reckless as regards recommendations on political strategy. To begin with, Sserunkuma neglects the fact that politics as well as governance are not a paradigm of straight lines but, rather, a maze of crisscrossing lines that one must maneuver through to their final destination.
Secondly, he deliberately refuses to recognize the role of the office of the Leader of Opposition and thus confuses the roles that the NUP wing at Parliamentary avenue should be playing with those that are at Kamwokya.
I also fail to recognize whether Yusuf ’s piece was in good faith as a constructive reflection on what trajectory particular political players should be taking, or whether it is one bent on malice and blackmail. A writing intended to propose a roadmap worth serious consideration should have avoided the below-the-belt depiction of MPs as simply sex-hunting objects.
What does the office of the Leader of Opposition play in a setting like ours? This office helps the opposition who are the government in waiting (whatever the circumstances might be) to acclimatize themselves with how to run the state.
We as a society ought to reflect upon all the possible scenarios from the most promising to the worst case scenarios. One danger we face today is having people like Sserunkuma, who should be guiding the dormant section of society, but are instead some of those that have lost hope.
One day, Uganda will definitely wake up when Museveni is not the president. What we, however, aren’t giving time to in that regard is what kind of leadership will be taking over.
There are many examples in history where change was sought only for society to wish they had remained with the former leadership. After the French Revolution, France underwent a reign of terror during which most of the major political players were killed as different political camps eliminated each other.
The guillotine became a daily part of French life. There is Pol Pot who turned Cambodia upside down by ordering all those who were in urban centres to head to the villages. Libya is a classic example of how to move from bad to worst, with no hope in sight.
Therefore, society ought to reflect seriously on what kind of change it really wants and as well be mindful of which kind of change that has to be avoided at all costs. Sserunkuma also seems to be an admirer of cosmetics.
Sserunkuma might perhaps not know it, but I love Zaake’s comics more than Sserunkuma perhaps does. I was a journalist in the press gallery the day when MPs were rounded up and mugged out of the House during the Age Limit stand-off. And I vividly remember Zaake’s actions.
In fact, whenever I seek to have a laugh, I revisit the videos of that day and never tire seeing Zaake throw the Bible, the Constitution, chairs and whatever he could land his eyes on towards the SFC soldiers, who were standing where the speaker should have been sitting.
I also recall Zaake taking off his belt and swinging it towards the security guys who had come in to throw them out of the house. I remember asking my colleagues how all that drama had ceased suddenly until much later the next day when we got to know that Gen Katumba Wamala threw a punch at Zaake that neutralized him.
However, my admiration for Zaake stops at that. Ugandans have these street sayings that crop up and become the popular jargon of the day. One such goes “Stay in your lane.”
It is important that people are best deployed where they are meant to be. I do understand that Serunkuma is reasoning under the context of, it has to get dark before morning sets in and would perhaps like seeing parliament in disarray, the judiciary wholly losing trust amongst Ugandans, security agencies becoming the very opposite of what they should be and at that a Uganda with its head down and feet up in the air. That would mean anarchy.
But has Sserunkuma or anyone who reasons like him experienced anarchy? Let us be careful what we ask for.
The writer is a concerned citizen.
inarticle} inarticle}