Bukenya was tested and found wanting

The Mouthpiece — 27 May 2011

Gilbert Bukenya is a Professor who fell into the trap of Machiavellian politics – yet genuinely at heart is not a believer in Machiavellianism. Bukenya is not part of the Mafia whom he at one point in time complained about that they were trying to PhD him – I mean pull him down. Most likely the mafia succeeded this time round to pull him down. I am convinced that Professor Bukenya went contrary to the principles and objectives of the NRM which some people call National Resource Mismanagement but interchangeably used with National Resource Misallocation.

This can be seen through his upland rice scheme and other poverty alleviation initiatives. Most probably Professor Bukenya was not properly oriented on the superficial and the inner – real interests of the party. Many pundits believe that Museveni and the NRM use poverty eradication programmes as mere catchy and populist slogans but in an actual sense they don’t believe in making people rich because it doesn’t serve their interests.

This argument is corroborated by the failure of all the poverty alleviation initiatives that the government has adopted since it captured power. The constant change of names is purely aimed at duping the gullible that the government is always focused on poverty eradication. For instance, we have seen and heard of anti-poverty initiatives with different names such as Poverty Eradication Action Programme (PEAP); Poverty Action Fund (PAF), Entandikwa Scheme, PMA, NAADS and now Prosperity for All.

All these are aimed at the same thing – while the stated or superficial objective is fighting poverty, the inner hidden objective is to keep many people poor so as to make them remain vulnerable and dependent on the politicians for handouts. Otherwise, how many poor people have been lifted out of poverty by these schemes? Bukenya’s mistake was being pragmatic on fighting poverty. This must have not gone down well with him before his boss not only because he meant genuine transformation but because Bukenya’s modus operandi endeared him to many people who looked at him as a suitable if not a better alternative to Museveni!

I have not done thorough research on these anti-poverty initiatives but I believe one doesn’t have to be an expert of Professor Nuwagaba’s stature to discern that these initiatives have abysmally failed. One also doesn’t have to be an expert to know that these initiatives have failed largely because of lack of political will. I, for instance, have incontrovertible evidence that money whose amount I cannot reveal from the Micro Finance Support centre was siphoned to fund NRM campaigns. Can you imagine donors’ and taxpayers’ money meant for supporting the SACCOs whose job is ostensibly to ensure Prosperity for All being used to finance a ruling party campaigns? Cry the beloved country!

One other reason why Bukenya had to be shown the exit door is that he is a John come lately in the establishment. He is not one of “the liberators”. While “the liberators” were fighting, he was enjoying the comfort in academia. One can rightly argue that he even spent too long at the helm. If you are a typical Machiavellian politician, you don’t keep people such as Bukenya closer to yourself for so long. I must state, Bukenya is so good at marketing himself. I am sure, had it not been issues bordering on moral turpitude which include philandering and having cited in a shrine, Professor Mahogany would be having too many admirers.

It must also be pointed out that Bukenya was shown the exit partly because he no longer commanded influence in the Catholic Church because of his moral standing. Maybe, his interest in position of the NRM secretary general might have been perceived as scheming for the bigger post – his boss’s job. Of course, Bukenya has not been as loyal as Mbabazi when it comes to the boss.

Finally, I am compelled to surmise that being a John Come Lately, Bukenya didn’t know what his boss wanted. Being a perfect student of Machiavelli, Museveni’s interest is to consolidate and retain power by all means at any cost. Museveni must have discerned that to effectively do that money has to be concentrated in the hands of a few trusted cadres who directly or indirectly depend on him courtesy of the spoils system.

Here comes Bukenya who believes that many people should be uplifted out of poverty failing to understand that when people become rich, they attain quality education which ultimately makes them understand and assert their rights thereby becoming ungovernable as they make independent decisions because they are largely self-reliant. To Machiavellian politicians we have here, if accidentally those who are not part of them attain education, they should be condemned to eternal poverty which will frustrate them from exerting influence on a large section of the people. Of course, there have been exceptions but they also toe a careful path for the sake of their businesses’ survival. In my view, Bukenya was tested and found wanting.

Vincent Nuwagaba