Museveni with son Muhoozi Kainerugaba

Since January 1986, when Yoweri Museveni and the National Resistance Movement (NRM) assumed power, Uganda has experienced nearly four decades under the same leadership.

Over this prolonged period, entire generations have come and gone, many of them feeling excluded, silenced, or gradually pushed to the margins of national decision-making. It began with the generation slightly older than Museveni, leaders who might have offered alternative visions for the country.

As time passed, many of them were politically neutralized, sidelined, or removed from the center of power. This pattern continued with the next generation, followed by our parents’ generation, including some who fought alongside him during the bush war.

Even those who once stood shoulder to shoulder in the struggle have, in many cases, found themselves distanced from meaningful influence. The pattern did not stop there. It extended to the children of those bush war heroes, the very families who sacrificed for the liberation struggle.

Today, it has reached those of us born after 1986. Many in this generation are now in their 30s, approaching their 40s, but still feel locked out of meaningful participation in shaping the country’s future. There is a growing sense of frustration, fatigue, and even resignation among young Ugandans who feel that opportunities have been systematically limited.

Now, without pause or mercy, the focus appears to be shifting to the next phase: the children of our generation. With Muhoozi Kainerugaba increasingly visible in political and military spaces, many of us see the signs of a carefully managed succession plan.

For many Ugandans, this signals not just continuity of leadership, but the risk of deepening a system of family rule where power transitions within a narrow circle rather than through open, competitive, and democratic processes.

The recent NRM caucus retreat in Kyankwanzi is evidently part of a broader, long-term strategy that has been unfolding quietly over the years. What we witnessed last week is merely a buildup to what may come next, particularly in the anticipated cabinet selections in May.

The stage has already been set; the structures have been carefully aligned. At this point, it feels less like the beginning of a race and more like the final stretch of a marathon, where the finishing line is now only a few meters away.

As I previously predicted, Uganda may be heading toward significant constitutional and political changes. One possible scenario is a return to a parliamentary system for electing the president.

Such a move could fundamentally reshape how leadership transitions occur. Another possibility is the emergence of a strategically positioned Speaker of Parliament, someone capable of facilitating and implementing these changes.

Alternatively, a carefully selected Vice President may be appointed within the cabinet, one who can be more easily replaced in the event of unforeseen circumstances, including the death of a sitting president, primarily to ensure continuity until a preferred successor is formally installed.

There is also the possibility of constitutional amendments that redefine eligibility for the presidency in such scenarios. These developments form part of a broader, interconnected strategy that reflects a deliberate and carefully coordinated succession plan.

As this succession struggle intensifies, we stand largely on our own and responsibility for shaping the future of our country does not rest with external actors or unseen forces but lies squarely with us, the citizens.

We must confront the truth that accepting a continuation of the same system under a different face only prolongs the status quo, while demanding genuine change requires courage, unity, and deliberate action.

Looking at Uganda’s landscape, leadership is rarely handed over willingly. No one is going to simply give Ugandans the leadership they deserve. It is something that must be pursued deliberately, responsibly, and courageously.

This is not just about the present moment; it is about the future of our children. If we remain passive, we risk allowing them to inherit the same entrenched system, one that has systematically deprived the nation of peace, undermined genuine democracy, perpetuated poor governance, and held its citizens hostage for decades.

The writer is a member of People’s Reform Uganda

Join the Conversation

2 Comments

  1. Uganda Politics has been intertwined with Military section and any President coming to power will only succeed with the backing of the Military and if not such a leader cannot even last for a week in power or may not even be allowed to take office.

    And the Civilian population almost have no voice to make any change in their Country even though they vote for what they want, because the Election results doesn’t reflect the pattern they voted.

  2. In other words Kazibwe, Ugandans have been on a well calculated, calibrated and orchestrated 40-year and counting long march to the North Korean type Family Dynasty and Gerontocracy (an Autocracy) where the Octogenarians, retire/get rid of the potential and younger and ambitious subordinates in their 50s and 60s.

    In your narrative, who in his/her right state of mind can deny that our 86-years-old Gerontocrat PROBLEM OF AFRICA, Gen Tibuhaburwa, got rid of Hon Eriya Kategaya (RIP); Dr. Kiiza Besigye (Behind Bars); Gen Tumukunde; Gen Tinyejusa, Gen Kale Kayihura; Hon Amama Mbabazi; etc.

    As you stated all these folks you would think are already resting in peace (RIP).

    While UPDF representative in parliament: after being imprisoned for spreading Harmful Propaganda, Gen Tumukunde decided to drag back his trademark permanent Luweero-injury leg into the 12th Parliament.

    Think of it: why don’t other UPDF Generals (soldiers) also stage their Birthday Celebration Run or soccer matches; just like Gen MK does with absolute impunity?

    A birthday is a PRIVATE FUNCTION! if it is not the absolute ABUSE of office and POWER, why should Gen Muhoozi Kainerugaba use and abuse with impunity the UPDF (SFC) personnel and other resources as if they are personal army assets and liability (properties)?

    The abuses go as far as the deployment of SFC as Security Guards for private and/or foreigners business premises.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *