30 June 2005

Bush Announces "Marshall Plan" for Africa

The largest aid increase over the shortest period of time since Harry Truman and the Marshall Plan

U.S. President George W. Bush and Hudson Institute Chairman Walter Stern are upbeat at Africa aid announcement ceremony.
White House photo by Paul Morse

Bush Pledges to Double Aid to Africa Over Next Five Years
By Warren Vieth and Benjamin Weyl, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers

WASHINGTON -- President Bush, responding to international pressure to do more for Africa, proposed today a $1.2-billion program to combat malaria, and promised to double U.S. aid to the continent over the next five years. Administration officials said Bush's Africa initiatives, which include smaller programs to increase education and reduce sexual violence, represented a significant new commitment of U.S. resources to assist many of the world's poorest nations.

But the proposals fell somewhat short of the challenge issued by British Prime Minister Tony Blair in advance of next week's summit in Scotland of the Group of Eight industrialized nations. Blair has put Africa aid at the top of the G8 agenda.In remarks previewing America's response to Blair's campaign, which has been joined by religious leaders, relief organizations and rock stars on both sides of the Atlantic, Bush said U.S. aid to Africa had already tripled since he took office, and would double again by 2010. "

After years of colonization and Marxism and racism, Africa is on the threshold of great advances," Bush told an audience assembled by the conservative Hudson Institute at the Smithsonian's Freer Gallery of Art."All who live in Africa can be certain, as you seize this moment of opportunity, America will be your partner and your friend," Bush said.

Stephen J. Hadley, the president's national security advisor, said the president's aid pledge would increase overall U.S. assistance to Africa from $4.3 billion in 2004 to at least $8.6 billion by 2010. Hadley characterized it as the largest aid increase over the shortest period of time "since Harry Truman and the Marshall Plan." Bush's biggest specific commitment was his pledge to increase funding of malaria prevention and treatment programs by $1.2 billion over five years.

The United States now allocates about $200 million a year to fighting the insect-borne disease that kills more than 1 million Africans every year."In the overwhelming majority of cases, the victims are less than 5 years old, their lives suddenly ended by nothing more than a mosquito bite," Bush said. "The toll of malaria is even more tragic because the disease itself is highly treatable and preventable." The government-funded effort is designed to dovetail with a similar program announced recently by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Bush said he would press other G8 leaders at next week's summit to join in the effort, with a goal of reducing malaria deaths by half in targeted countries.

The two other Africa initiatives announced by Bush would allocate $400 million over four years to extend an existing program that trains teachers, awards scholarships and builds schools, and $55 million to help four nations with their efforts to combat sexual violence and abuse against women.

Health and education advocates said they welcomed Bush's promises of additional U.S. aid, but several criticized the administration for not digging a little deeper.

"It is a small amount of money compared to what is required," said Louis Da Gama, malaria director for the Massive Effort Campaign, a private relief group. "The challenge right now is not to set up a new mechanism, but to support the initiatives that have been set up previously."

Gene Sperling, chairman of the U.S. branch of the Global Campaign for Education, characterized Bush's education initiative as "a very small baby step" for African schoolchildren."We are talking about an additional contribution of about a dollar per person, a drop in the bucket, to keep our commitment to global education," said Sperling, who participated with Da Gama in a conference call with reporters.

Urbane Analysis: If Bill Clinton had done anything like this when he was in office, he would have been lionized by the international news media and trumpeted as the greatest "next" recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize who ever was. In reality Clinton spent his time ignoring the festering Al Qaeda crisis when not lobbing cruise missiles by the dozens around the Horn of Africa - or sending U.S. troops to invade "failed states" without even so much as the benefit of an armored personnel carrier for back up. His administration fumbled terribly on the response to horrific embassy bombings and mass genocide - yet he is a "best friend" to Africa.

By contrast, George W. Bush raises targeted development aid to Africa by 600% (!), and does not launch a single weapon in anger against Africa. Bush puts African dictators on the hotseat, and begins the process of isolating them in a surgical way (as not to imperil the delicate web of aid services necessary to stave off famine): thus raising the potential for conditions undergirding development of democracy. And the response is disinterest and/or disappointment from the media and more outspoken NGOs.

Yet even that cannot stifle my enthusiasm. But here's the caveat: money alone will not solve Africa's problems. Trade, cultural ties, scientific and educational (such as development of legal systems) institution programs, and much more - will all be required to doubled and tripled as well. North America and Europe simply must "engage" on Africa like never before in order to make this initiative bear any fruit. And there must be an enormous amount of pruning as well: of corruption, graft and outright theft by "kleptocratic" regimes. Of all the leaders on the planet, only George W. Bush has the resolve to see to it that these countries "take their medicine" in this way.

Just like with the 9/11 response, Bush is the man for the job.

29 June 2005

IMF: Museveni Regime Forcing More Aid Cuts

"Uganda's current rating is no better than eight years ago and it remains in the category characterised as rampant corruption." International Monetary Fund (2005)


Uganda Faces Aid Cuts Over Graft

The East African (Nairobi)

by A. Mutumba-Lule

The World Bank and IMF say that corruption in Uganda is the sixth most serious constraint to business. Insufficient progress in addressing corruption in Uganda could lead to further cuts in donor support, the International Monetary Fund has warned.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and Britain say insufficient progress in tackling corruption is likely to cause reduced external support for the country's Ush3,799 billion ($2.1 billion) budget, 40 per cent of which was to be funded by development partners.

IMF says that, though the 2005 survey by Transparency International showed that there was improvement in the country's score, the rating was no better than eight years ago.

"Uganda's current rating is no better than eight years ago and it remains in the category characterised as rampant corruption," says the IMF in its most recent report on Uganda, obtained by The EastAfrican last week.

Saying that corruption poses risks to the budget as procurement irregularities raise expenditure costs at both the national and local government level, the IMF - which has just completed yet another assessment of Uganda - notes that corruption in the country would impede private-sector growth and investment.
The World Bank holds the same view. The World Bank's 2003 Investment Climate Assessment reported corruption in Uganda to be the sixth most serious constraint to business.

According to the World Bank report, corruption in Uganda is "very serious" for foreign companies and exporters, which rank corruption as the second and third most serious obstacles respectively.
Auditors Deloitte and Touche say in their 2005 East Africa Budget Insight that as the 2005/06 fiscal year commences, "There is an undeniable focus on the relation between the government and the donors.
"There are expectations in some quarters that such a relationship may come under strain owing to contentious issues such as high levels of government spending and the uncertainty associated with the political anxiety over the forthcoming elections," said the firm.

And the IMF report says, "Although the TI survey of global corruption perceptions shows an improvement in Uganda's corruption score for the third successive year in 2005, this is relative to a particularly 2001 poor rating."

Large compensation payments and court awards to companies that supplied government recently charged against the national budget are suspected to have involved corruption, the IMF said. Many creditor countries and companies that had written off debts owed by Uganda were recently given court awards and their claims settled. Libya, another creditor, has been allowed to take over 49 per cent shares of the multibillion shilling National Housing and Construction Company.

Meanwhile a number of anti-corruption measures have experienced setbacks. For example, inquiries into military exploitation of the Congo and helicopter procurement abuses appear stalled.

The powers of the Inspector General of Government (IGG) to enforce the leadership code, including compulsory asset declarations by top officials, have been weakened by adverse court decisions. Funding of anti-corruption agencies by the government has also been inadequate, the IMF said.

Donors are also unhappy that the report on the inquiry into corruption in the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) was struck down by the courts following disagreements among members of the Commission of Inquiry headed by High Court judge Julia Sebutinde.

URA, which is being supported by donors to improve revenue collections, and reduce the country's heavy dependence on foreign aid, has sacked over 230 staff after recommendations by IMF. The administration has also been streamlined, but more reforms are still needed.

Though there has been concern over corruption from donors in the past, the IMF's concern this time is worrying, especially after Britain withheld $5 million over failure by the government to meet certain set conditions.

At present, it is only high ranking government officials who have to declare their wealth. But even these declarations have not helped in curbing corruption because they are still secretive and the IGG only does random cross-checking of the declarations.
For example, asset declarations by URA staff are never cross-checked, which casts doubt on the whole process.

The IMF's position on corruption in Uganda comes at a time when the country is awaiting the outcome of a crucial assessment of its performance under the Fifth Review. The IMF is also currently preparing an ex-post-assessment of its dealings with the country.

The ex-post-assessment is the first of its kind in Uganda and it has only been carried out in three other countries. IMF resident representative Peter Allum said in an interview that the assessment has already been completed and it will be coming out in July, after a board meeting.

22 June 2005

Museveni Regime Rejects U.S.-Supplied AIDS Drugs

The Monitor (Kampala) via AllAfrica.com
June 21, 2005
by Kakaire A. Kirunda and Peter Nyanzi

Uganda is among four African countries that are rejecting US Food and Drug Administration approval of generic AIDS drugs.

The move is apparently delaying the delivery of the low cost medicine to patients, according to the USA, United Nations, African and drug company officials.

A row has erupted between the US government and four African countries over the refusal to accept the FDA approval of generic Aids drugs manufactured in South Africa.

But Ugandan health officials and their counterparts in Tanzania, Nigeria and Ethiopia, insist the World Health Organisation (WHO) and their national drug authorities must first clear the drugs before their citizens register to use them.

Uganda's Director General of Health Services, Professor Francis Omaswa, described Uganda's position "as normal" and that "there was no other way around it."


Ugandan Health Director: Giving-in to cynicism, or pressure from the regime?

"It is necessary that we follow the normal procedures we have in place for the management and administration of drugs. Every drug coming into the country must have the approval of WHO and the National Drug Authority (NDA)," he said by telephone yesterday.

However, The Boston Globe reported on June 20 that the move was frustrating USA officials, who say their own approval was sufficient and the WHO system was "not stringent enough." But the four countries have told South African generic drug maker Aspen Pharmacare that its FDA approval for ARV drugs had no standing in their regulatory reviews of medicine.

"After we got FDA approval, we thought all the red tape would be waived, and there would be a flurry of orders. It's baffling. You go to these countries, and say, 'Here's FDA approval,' and they say, 'Sorry, we want WHO pre-qualification first,'" The Boston Globe reported. "What is Nigeria, Ethiopia, Uganda, and Tanzania, or the WHO going to do that is better than the FDA?" the paper quoted Aspen's senior executive in charge of strategic trade development Stavros Nicolaou.

"I think our asking for WHO approval is partly historical and because of our membership in the organisation," Dr James Makumbi, chairman of the National Drug Authority in Uganda, told The Boston Globe in an interview. "This is how we've been doing things for time immemorial. We don't ask for FDA approval. I think this is basically a problem with the FDA interacting with the WHO, because the WHO can always endorse the US regulator's review."

According to the newspaper, the snag which was unanticipated by the US, has set off a flurry of discussions in recent weeks among USA, UN and African officials, including a phone call from US Global Aids coordinator Randall L. Tobias to WHO Director General, Dr Lee Jong-wook, requesting immediate approval of any FDA-tested drugs.

The WHO standards, the Americans argued, would not ensure the same quality and refused to send US scientists to Geneva to bolster the WHO staff.

Uganda is the leading beneficiary of President George Bush's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Statistics from the US Global Aids Coordinator's office at March 30, show Ugandans receiving US-supported treatment were 50,900.

Urbane Analysis: An inartfully written piece of news, to be sure, but telling on the issue of the Ugandan regime's smarting over increased instances of U.S. asserted hegemony on geo-political issues. And the cynical inability of Ugandan health authorities to rush - in placing one more finger in the dike of a leaky-and-broken AIDS policy. This is a "just over the horizon" issue: getting Pharma into the affected populations - and allowing Africans to actually become patients for the first time (rather than recipients of hospice care at best), is the challenge. Not only in affecting survival rates, but also in impacting the hardened, cynical mindset regarding AIDS in Africa.



George W. Bush (shown here meeting with HIV-positive Ugandans during his visit to Uganda in 2003) has done more than any human to qualitatively improve the care for (and provision of medicine to) those affected by AIDS in the world's poorest countries. The effort being thwarted now by the Ugandan government is part of Bush's five year, $15 billion outreach effort announced during his 2004 State of the Union Address. Mainstream media ignores this accomplishment - and the motivation behind it. Kudos to the Bush Administration for not kowtowing to the inept WHO, by the way. When will the Gates Foundation wake up to their enabling behavior toward the WHO - and find more efficient channels for delivering health care to the poorest of the poor? I'm sure World Vision would not mind chatting on that topic...

20 June 2005

Democracy and Human Rights Under Siege In Uganda

Uganda: Opposition party leader on arrest

by Emma Mutaizibwa entitled "Tumukunde: Besigye attacks Museveni" Ugandan newspaper Daily Monitor website on 20 June

Exiled Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) leader Kizza Besigye has said the arrest and forced resignation of Brig Henry Tumukunde depicts double standards in the application of the army policy and regulations.

"The fiasco we are witnessing in the treatment of UPDF [Uganda People's Defence Forces] MPs is typical of the general mismanagement of the UPDF," Dr Besigye, a retired colonel, said in an opinion article sent to Daily Monitor by e-mail.

Besigye said army "policies and regulations apply only as long as they favour the president/C-in-C and his henchmen."

He said, "That is why, during the Constituent Assembly, then Lt [Noble] Mayombo was able to move very controversial motions; yet, when some of us expressed ourselves opposing them, the Army Council was summoned to condemn us."

Besigye was an army delegate in the assembly that debated and enacted the 1995 Constitution. He got into trouble together with army delegates such as David Tinyefuza and Sserwanga Lwanga for taking positions contrary to those of the NRM majority in the Assembly.

In the article, he suggests that all would have been well if the maverick officers had supported Museveni's positions.

Besigye said: "That is why Brig Tumukunde and most of the top UPDF officers were able to go on the campaign trail addressing rallies and intimidating the population to re-elect President Museveni; yet, the same Tumukunde faces the fire when he says that he opposes Museveni's life presidency project."

Before falling out with the establishment, Tumukunde, former director-general of the Internal Security Organization (ISO), had been involved in an underground campaign to intimidate and harass Besigye's supporters during the 2001 presidential campaigns. He once said at a campaign rally that he would never serve in an army where Besigye was commander-in-chief.

Tumukunde was arrested last month and later charged with "spreading harmful propaganda" following his appearance on two Kampala radio talk shows on which he criticised President Museveni.

He was remanded by the Military Court chaired by Lt-Gen. Elly Tumwine for two months.

The UPDF Forces Council last week elected Brig. Andrew Gutti to replace Tumukunde as army MP.

Besigye said even as Tumukunde is "condemned and jailed, Maj. Kakooza Mutale is free to make even more controversial public statements that contradict 'Government' official policy."

Mutale, the presidential adviser on political affairs, has said he will continue to campaign for the retention of the Movement system, contrary to the government's position to open up the political space.

President Museveni said at the NEC conference in Munyonyo that Mutale was making a mistake.

Besigye said although Museveni had gone "to great length to show why army personnel should not take public positions on controversial issues ...[ellipsis as published] UPDF MPs are already at the forefront of publicly voting on controversial issues, including his life presidency project."

He said "the UPDF is equal to President Museveni" and that the commander-in-chief "has persistently acted in complete disregard" of army policies and regulations in the management of the UPDF.

19 June 2005

Uganda Situation Now A Top Commonwealth Priority

Uganda: Queen Elizabeth's visit pegged to 2006 polls

by Frank Nyakairu and Hussein Bogere entitled "Queen's visit tied to 2006 elections" published by Ugandan newspaper Daily Monitor website on 19 June.


Commonwealth Ties Are Important Economically - and Vital To The Prestige Of Participating Nations

The visit of Queen Elizabeth II to Uganda in 2007 to attend the Commonwealth Summit will depend on what happens here between now and the 2006 elections, British officials have said."The UK and the Commonwealth are closely monitoring the events in Uganda," Mr Ian Pearson, the secretary of state for foreign and Commonwealth affairs, said on Thursday [16 June] in response to an MP's question, according to a transcript of proceedings obtained by this paper.

The queen's visit and Uganda's capacity to host the 2007 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) are exercising minds in London given what one MP described as the "increasingly uncertain political situation in that country."

"The Commonwealth Secretariat, not the United Kingdom, will assess whether Uganda has the capacity to host the 2007 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting. The Commonwealth Secretary General has recently visited Uganda for such an assessment...[ellipses as published] the UK will inform the Commonwealth and make a statement to this House, depending on what happens on the ground between now and the 2006 elections," Pearson said.

Britain "concerned"

The British government is concerned about what it has characterized as the slow pace of reforms to move the country from the Movement to a multiparty system; corruption; and President Museveni's perceived interest to cling on to power after his current and last term expires next year.The UK recently withheld 17bn shillings [about 10m dollars] in aid money particularly over concerns about the political transition.

Uganda responds

"They haven't communicated to us officially," said Mr Okello Oryem, the minister of state for international relations. "We shall get concerned when the secretary-general [of the Commonwealth] communicates to us. They have given us a clean bill of health. We can't go on looking behind."

Dr Nsaba Buturo, the Uganda government spokesman, said the Commonwealth Secretariat is happy with the progress made so far. "The Secretary General was here last year, met the president and made a number of suggestions, like in the area of broadcasting," Buturo said.

He said that is the reason the formation of Uganda Broadcasting Council, a body that will oversee the running of UTV and Radio Uganda, has been put on a fast track.

Added Buturo: "It has been decided by heads of state that the meeting will be held in Uganda. It's only Ugandans who can change that.

"No "done deal yet"

Things, however, seem not to be decided as such. In a telephone interview, an official in the UK's Foreign and Commonwealth Office could neither dismiss nor confirm his country's worries about Uganda and the meeting. "The matter of the venue," he said, "will be decided in Malta. No decision has been made yet."

Normally, the next venue for the CHOGM is decided upon at a preceding meeting. This means that the host of the summit in 2007 would be decided in Malta, host of this year's meeting. However, in 2003 at the meeting in Nigeria, Uganda, which had bid with Malta for this year's meeting, was promised it would automatically host the 2007 gathering.

Now, the British are saying that may not be a done deal after all.The Commonwealth Summit is usually attended by 53 heads of state and government - equivalent to one third of the world's leaders - including the British queen. With about 5,000 foreign guests in all, the biggest meeting Uganda will have hosted will stretch the country's ability in terms of security and infrastructure.

The queen is expected to stay at State House Entebbe, which is now under renovation.

Other issues on Britain's worries about the political situation in Uganda, Buturo said: "Of course, those are things we are addressing as a country. The situation will not get any worse.

"Minister Oryem also said there was no reason why the elections issue should be raised by Britain, Uganda's former colonial master and leading bilateral donor, because the transition will be transparent and there will be no disruption.

"More remains to be done" against graft

On corruption in Uganda, Pearson told UK MPs: "We welcome the publication of the government of Uganda's 2005 National Strategy to Fight Corruption, which acknowledges that corruption is a serious problem in Uganda. The UK has been providing practical support for these government led initiatives. But a lot more remains to be done. For example, there has been little follow through on any of the commissions of inquiry related to corruption issues, especially those relating to government ministers and other high-profile politicians and officials."

Public relations campaign

Given a growing international perception of Uganda as a corrupt and politically uncertain country, the Kampala government has launched a series of damage control measures.It recently hired a top British public relations firm to help burnish the country's image. It then dispatched senior ministers to debate the country's politics in London and Washington, DC.

Mr John Nagenda, Museveni's senior adviser on media and public relations, is the latest official trying to swing perceptions in the government of Uganda's favour. He has been touring European capitals such as London and Madrid for the last two weeks.

A source in London said that "Nagenda seems to have moved to London to counter the lies which [opposition Forum for Democratic Change] FDC UK are peddling about President Museveni."

"I am on a private trip, but it's true I have done a lot of interviews about Uganda with radios and television stations in England," said Nagenda, who added that he had not heard about the UK's concerns surrounding the 2007 Commonwealth Summit."I did one with BBC, which will be aired on Monday at 8 O'clock [local time] Ugandan time," he said on Friday from his hotel room in Madrid.

Buturo said it would be giving too much credit to FDC to say that Nagenda was in Britain to undo their lies. "Government did not send Nagenda. We hired a PR firm to improve Uganda's image. We are doing what every government does."

Urbane Analysis: It's official, Uganda's Museveni regime is running scared! Museveni should be concerned - given how his international image has crumbled in only a few months time - and that he is now referred to in the same way as the tyrant Robert Mugabe - when he was once edging toward the pantheon of greatness with Nelson Mandela. A shameful scandal for him personally, but an unmitigated tragedy for the nation of Uganda. And not unnoticed by Uganda's Commonwealth colleagues around the globe.

15 June 2005

Corruption At The Core Of Uganda's Shaky Finances

Donors to Meet 40 Percent of Uganda's Budget

The East African (Nairobi) via AllAfrica.com
by Abbey Mutumba-Lule and David Kaiza

The success of Ugandan Finance Minister Dr Ezra Suruma budget will largely depend on President Yoweri Museveni's relations with Western countries and international lending institutions.

The government expects donors to contribute Ush839 billion ($479.4 million) - about 40 per cent of the expenditure - in budget support, which usually flows in tandem with the pace of implementation of agreed reforms and conditions. Another Ush1, 016 billion ($580 million) of donor money will fund specific projects.

Unlike in Kenya, where the government did not factor donor pledges into its economic agenda, any major interruptions of aid flows will badly disrupt Uganda's spending plans and precipitate unpredictability in interest rates, the exchange rate and inflation.

Reality may in the coming months force the administration to tone down the anti-donor rhetoric that has been on the rise lately, especially in the wake of the raging and divisive debate about Museveni's plans for a third term.

While unveiling his Ush3,799 billion ($2.1 billion) budget, the minister said his priorities would be to deliver economic growth, so as to rapidly increase the average standard of living; to demonstrate macroeconomic management, by promoting economic order and stability, and controlling inflation; and to provide public goods, being services vital to the country.

Dr Suruma appeared in many ways to sacrifice fiscal discipline for what is politically popular, with the general election due next year and the third term issue looming on the horizon. The budget made huge concessions to influential groups and extended goodies to major constituencies and key voting blocks in the country.

Standing out in this regard is the allocation of Ush2.7 billion ($1.5 million) to the creation of new districts and another Ush4 billion ($2.3 million) to a completely new political structure known as "regional tier," clearly in response to the Buganda demands for a federal system.

Under this system, a cluster of districts may decide to become one administrative "state" rather than a semi-autonomous political entity, making it a handy political machine at the beck and call of the political elite, especially during disputes such as constitutional reform.

Dr Suruma said that the central government would also take over the responsibility of paying the salaries of district chairmen from the cashstrapped local authorities. Popularly elected, the district chairmen are important local pointmen in electioneering.

Dr Suruma increased the salaries of teachers and university lecturers, compounding problems for an administration already burdened by a crippling wage bill, which consumes a disproportionate share of tax revenues.

Although no major turbulence is expected on the economic front, a new shift in monetary policy announced by Dr Suruma is likely to introduce new uncertainties in the financial markets.

Inflation is projected to remain below 5 per cent and reserves to be kept at a level of six-and-a-half of imports, with stability in the exchange rate guaranteed through official interventions in the market.

It is a major point of departure because over the past few months, the Bank of Uganda has literally suspended foreign-exchange sales even when flows from donor receipts required it to intervene to sterilise the flow of hard currency into the market.

With the bank choosing to sterilise hard currency inflows by increasing Treasury-bill sales, the impact has been to exert upward pressures on domestic interest rates and dampen private-sector borrowing.

In his speech, Dr Suruma lamented that the previous policy had shifted the burden of sterilisation to interest rates, a view expressed by President Museveni on the eve of the budget in his address to the National Assembly.

It is not certain when the Bank of Uganda will resume aggressive sales of foreign exchange in the market given fears that the foreign exchange market cannot absorb more sales without causing an excessive appreciation of the shilling.

At 9.2 per cent of the gross domestic product, Dr Suruma's budget rates better than the previous budgets, which had two-digit deficits. But the level still represents a risk of inflation and reduction of credit to the the private sector.

Reactions to the budget were mixed, with Jack Sabiti, Member of Parliament on the economy committee, saying it would not work.

"The people are poor, you cannot increase taxes at this time, this will cripple businesses," he said.

With a narrow revenue base, and the level of taxation at 13 per cent of the GDP, compared with 22 per cent for Kenya and a sub-Saharan average of 18 per cent, the taxman in Uganda is lenient, appearing to favour increasing taxes that are easy to collect, such as indirect taxes, air time, fuel and sugar.

Dr Suruma raised taxes on air time, from 10 to 12 per cent, and on petrol and diesel by Ush70 and Ush50 respectively. Other increases were in the prices of sugar by Ush50, vehicle licences fees and in VAT from 17 to 18 per cent.

The increases in indirect tax are, however, likely to lead to reduced demand for products, and also pressure on profits," noted Russell Eastaugh, director of tax services at Price WaterhouseCoopers.

President Museveni's description of the budget as pro-poor was arguable, said tax experts, depending on the definition of the poor.

For instance, on a pro-poor side, there are increased allocations for access to water, healthcare, education, expansion of agriculture and availability of premises and equipment for artisans.

The fact that excise duty on kerosene was not increased is also pro-poor. The abolition of graduated tax will be welcomed, particularly by the poor. The proposed expansion of microfinance initiatives in rural areas, and of tax exemptions for interest on loans to the agricultural sector are certainly pro-farmer, which could include the rural poor.

12 June 2005

What Will Uganda Do With This Chance?


Uganda: In need of lasting solutions
The Scotsman Online
13 June 2005

THE so-called debt relief for third-world - mainly African - nations announced at the weekend will be paid for by Western taxpayers. African interest payments to the World Bank, which lends cash for infrastructural development, will be taken over essentially by British and American taxpayers. Another financial sleight of hand, involving profits on gold sales, will write off debts to the International Monetary Fund, which lends hard currency to allow African countries to finance imports. Gordon Brown and the G8 leaders are also planning a tax on airline tickets to pay for the Chancellor's planned increase in aid to Africa, which will mean dearer holidays and higher business costs in Britain.

Many in the West will consider this extra tax burden worthwhile if it helps Africa and the Third World. The question remains, however, whether or not this charity will be any more effective today than it was in the past. In 1998, Uganda received $650 million in debt relief from the World Bank and IMF (paid again by western taxpayers). Uganda was supposed to use the money saved to invest in education. Instead, it used the budget leeway to double its foreign borrowing, and to purchase arms to invade neighbouring Congo. Last year, Uganda scored less than three out of ten in Transparency International's 2004 Corruption Perceptions Index, a level that indicates rampant political corruption. Yet on Saturday, Uganda was forgiven another $1.9 billion in World Bank and IMF debt.

Charity is sometimes only too necessary to relieve suffering. More than 300 million people in Africa desperately need food aid. But charity is only ever a stopgap - it does not create sustainable prosperity. To create prosperity requires stability, the rule of law, good governance and an end to corruption. Western aid is useless unless the genocide stops in Darfur; unless the government of Zimbabwe ceases to drive hundreds of thousands of its citizens from their homes to starve in the countryside; and unless the government of Ethiopia stops machine-gunning democratic protestors as it did on Friday, the day before it received $1.5 billion in debt relief.

There is a serious danger that Africa's problems of governance will be ignored in the focus on debt relief or increased aid. Government-to-government financial aid in Africa has comprehensively failed over two generations. Such funding has merely underpinned corruption and established a debilitating dependency on the West. Nothing in the new aid package changes this relationship. Africa needs trade, not aid; business investment, not state charity; and free access to Western markets, not sops designed to hide the fact we tax African goods out of our markets.

Urbane Analysis: Nice to see that just as predicted here yesterday, the dictators' are already getting raked over the coals in response to the G8 accord on third world debt relief. It is time for us to unite in RAGE against these tyrants - only a concerted showing of sustained consternation - directed at them personally by us outside of Africa can make change happen there - absent violent civil conflict. Memo to Bob Geldof: get your talent fired up about this at Live8! As it pertains to the cause of freedom, good people in the United States and Europe need to scream about it, so that good people in Africa need not bleed because of it. The intimacy of communication created by the web (and, frankly, cheap long distance) implicates all of us personally in the ethics of struggle. FDR's "Four Freedoms" are your (and my) responsibility, the Anglo-American world view is all there is to protect it. The United Nations? As if!

11 June 2005

G8 Finance Chiefs Cancel Debt of 18 Poorest Nations

By ALAN COWELL
The New York Times
Published: June 12, 2005

LONDON, June 11 - The world's wealthiest nations formally agreed Saturday to cancel at least $40 billion of debt owed to international agencies by the world's poorest lands, most of them in Africa.

After late-night talks in London, the finance ministers of the Group of 8 industrialized nations announced that the deal, long in negotiation, had been intended to avoid damaging the ability of international lenders like the World Bank, the African Development Bank and the International Monetary Fund to continue helping other poor countries.


U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow with President George W. Bush

"This is a historic moment," said John W. Snow, the United States Treasury secretary, one of the participants. "A real milestone has been reached."

The deal on Saturday was expected to ease the 18 poorest countries' annual debt burden by $1.5 billion. They are Benin, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guyana, Honduras, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. All must take anticorruption measures.

Gordon Brown, the British chancellor of the Exchequer, asked at the news conference whether debt relief was also conditional on good government practices by the recipients, said part of the deal was for poor countries to use the money they saved on debt servicing for health, education or the relief of poverty.

The agreement came after months of negotiations in which the United States had been pressing the other Group of 8 countries - Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Canada, Japan and Russia - to agree that the solution to poor countries' indebtedness was to cancel their debt burden completely rather than seek simply to ease it by taking over interest repayments.

"It is my hope today that this reform will conclusively end the destabilizing lend-and-forgive approach to development assistance in low-income countries," Mr. Snow said. In the future, he said, "grants would be used to ensure that countries do not quickly reaccumulate unsustainable debts."

The agreement, which followed talks in Washington this week between President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain, was struck less than four weeks before the Group of 8 leaders hold a summit meeting at Gleneagles, Scotland. Mr. Blair is the current chairman of the Group of 8 and has placed the relief of African poverty along with global warming at the head of an ambitious agenda.

Advocacy groups and charities have pressed for a deal on debt relief for years and some welcomed the agreement on Saturday, saying it cleared the way for a broader announcement on combating African poverty at Gleneagles.

"We want a comprehensive breakthrough on more, better development assistance as well as trade reform at Gleneagles and with debt mostly taken care of we can keep up the pressure for a large package," said Seth Amgott, a spokesman for a coalition of American charities and advocacy groups called ONE.

Some other groups noted that 44 more countries were still burdened by debt to international lenders. Britain is also pressing for a doubling of international aid to Africa, but it is not clear whether that goal will be reached before the Gleneagles summit meeting.

Significantly, a statement by the Group of 8 finance ministers did not formally exclude other initiatives to fight poverty, including a tax on airline tickets proposed by France and Germany and a British proposal to raise money for poverty relief on international financial markets.

Both of those ideas are opposed by the United States, but their inclusion seemed to be part of a trade-off to secure agreement on the cancellation of debt. Asked about American opposition to an aviation tax on Saturday, Mr. Snow said, "Our position is the same."

Mr. Brown said Group of 8 countries had agreed to compensate the World Bank and the African Development Bank in particular for forfeiting interest payments on poor countries' debt, so those groups would have the income to make new loans to other countries. "We could not contemplate a situation," he said, where debt cancellation for some poor countries was made at the expense of other poor countries.

The United States agreed to pay up to $1.75 billion in compensation to international lenders over the next 10 years, while Britain agreed to pay up to $960 million. Other Group of 8 countries made their own, undisclosed pledges; more pledges are expected from other members of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund this year.

Mr. Brown said the agreement on Saturday would immediately affect some $40 billion in debt, including servicing costs. But the amount it will actually cost the Group of 8 to compensate the international lenders is $16.7 billion - a calculation based on the payments the international lenders would have expected to receive from 18 debt countries between now and 2015, the officials said.

Over all, international lenders are owed some $55.6 billion, Mr. Brown said. The finance ministers said Group of 8 members would compensate the World Bank and the African Development Bank for their losses. But the International Monetary Fund would be able to use "existing resources" of its own to cancel the $6 billion it is owed by poor countries. Mr. Snow said this would require "no use of gold" - rebutting proposals by Mr. Brown for the I.M.F. to sell or revalue gold reserves to finance debt cancellation.

Urbane Analysis: When there is an answer to chronic pain - when the fog of depression lifts - when we can see a clear way forward into the future. That is cause to celebrate. And with the suddeness of an intervention, that has happened here with the G8 - and it has happened so quickly the the corruption-addicted dictators of many of these countries may not yet comprehend the significance.

Suffice it to say this is a great day for democracy - with this announcement representing a seachange in how the recipient nations will be viewed - and, in turn, a similar shift in the expectations upon their governments. It is all about a higher standard of accountability. Or, to put it another way, in exchange for receiving this "scholarship" of debt relief, the recipients of this policy will now have to stand to "grading" and "take tests" of transparency and (to combat corruption) accountability. Life is only going to get more uncomfortable for the strongman dictators in these countries, the beacon of democracy is going to shine in because of this change.

Congratulations to The One Campaign, Make Poverty History (see banner at right top of this blog), DATA and Live8 for the clear-minded ways they have engaged on this - the coalition they have assembled to advocate (and continue to advocate) is impressive and without precedent. Sir Bob Geldof deserves extra praise for the way in which he has marshalled, once again, selfless care and concern for others toward a systemic change in thinking about poverty on this planet. Geldof is a humanitarian in the truest sense of the term.

Now, let us push for true democracy in all eighteen beneficiary countries. Bloggers, you have a role to play here. Pick one of those countries - follow the news digests coming out of there - and just start consistently covering the issues. You will quickly develop some level of expertise regarding that country you pick - and will help others here begin to care about what happens there. You will also do important work to encourage the "Founding Fathers" (and Mothers!) currently struggling on behalf of their people. Now that is important! Pick one of the eighteen, get started, and let me know about your important new initiative. And stick with it.

It is important to add that this is not my idea, by the way. Both the Discovery Institute and Brian Maloney "The Radio Equalizer" came up with these concepts first. Maloney's idea is what I am talking about: your voices in the blogosphere. Discovery's follows from that and is even more ambitious, to encourage blogging in regions of the world where democracy needs the "oxygen" of free speech - particularly in Africa, Asia and the former Soviet Bloc nations. This is what blogging is all about: picking up ideas and passing them along. And, as Brian might add, particularly the important ideas: like free speech, a competitive marketplace, accountability - ingredients in that recipe called democracy.

If both John Hinderaker of Power Line and Joe Trippi can get to the point of agreement regarding many of the challenges pertaining to these issues - then maybe we should say it was a no-brainer that the G8 could as well. Or maybe, after all the love Trippi and Hinderaker have been spreading around - through a series of mondo conference calls with the likes of Bob Geldof and others lately - we could figure that something was going to break loose leading up to Live8 and the G8 Summit. Personally, I think it was Bono and Michael W. Smith (a good buddy of the other W) signing the ONE Campaign petition together that kicked this whole thing off.

All I can say is: God bless you guys! Let's really start focusing on the dictators now!

But Bono - just have to say, I still hate everything about the iPod!

04 June 2005

Stumbling Onto The Truth About Museveni


Yoweri Museveni Leads Child Soldiers In The 1980's

A crumbling black and white photograph shows a young militia commander (and there are more photographs here) leading a revolution against a retrenched and brutal dictator. As a frontline leader, he is "hands on" in the indoctrination of troops. The problem is, these are soldiers that should instead be in middle school. I have heard the stories, many times, about how Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni ran childrens brigades in his uprising against the Obote regime.

Its embarassing, hearing from so many African voices - but not waking up to the truth - until seeing evidence firsthand. Shameful, more like it - not to have listened sooner. And emblematic of the equally shameful treatement by the West - of brave Africans working for democracy - and how they must cope with Western donor entropy and intransigence. Take the many times I have heard how the whole Joseph Kony LRA "crisis" is maintained by Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni to obscure external focus on the way he operates "Uganda Ltd." for his family/inner circle/tribal benefit.

The child soldier situation is something about which Uganda's president knows a great deal. He operated a guerilla army using child soldiers twenty five years ago. And now former child soldiers are telling about their treatment while under the control of Museveni's army.

To understand, you only need to read this story from the Harvard Friends of Amnesty International - the story of China Keitetsi, which I commend to you in full.

China's story is also told here by RaceMatters.org and Amnesty International - based on her memoir about serving as a child soldier under Museveni:

China Keitetsi's autobiography is currently (in 1992 - ed.) number two on Germany's best-seller list. Its title is "They Took Away My Mother and Gave Me a Gun," and that is literally what happened to her. At the age of 8, Keitetsi wandered away from her village in rural Uganda and became lost in the bush. She was found by two men who were soldiers in the rebel army of General Yoweri Museveni, then fighting against the government forces of President Milton Obote. The men recruited her as one of Museveni's child soldiers. Since that time, Keitetsi's life has been a harrowing odyssey, which, miraculously, she has managed to survive. Now 26, she lives in Denmark and has devoted her life to ending the use of children as soldiers, a practice that is alarmingly common worldwide.


It is not too much to ask - that there should be an international treaty, along the lines of work done against landmines, establishing a clear moral as well as international legal holding that use of children as soldiers is illegal, immoral and unacceptable in any context. Hopefully China Keitetsi will receive the thanks she deserves for moving this issue forward.


There are other stories as well, told here - and additionally that of Okwir Rabwoni - a former Member of Parliament in Uganda, he also worked as an aide to Rwandan President Paul Kagame. Today Rabwoni lives in exile in London - and as a human rights advocate with impeccable credibility, recounts a tale of life as a child soldier under the command of Museveni:

It was the mid-1980s, and we were attacking a fortified garrison in western Uganda. I was 15 years old and part of a movement that aimed to rid my country of the corrupt regime of Milton Obote, who had succeeded the murderous Idi Amin.

My leader was an inspiring, brave and talented man, Yoweri Museveni, now Uganda's President. Museveni believed that young fighters not only needed martial skills but also a political awareness of the cause for which they fought - an end to the greed and self-delusion of Africa's post-independence leadership. While still a teenager, I learned that the goal of war was social and political transformation. In battle, I came to pity enemy prisoners because I had a cause to fight for and they did not. Motivated by a political agenda - renovation of my battered country - I rose through the ranks to become a trusted aide in the circle around Museveni. In 1986, not long after my 16th birthday, Museveni ousted Obote. The war was over. But not for me. No longer a rebel but now a leader in the Ugandan army, I was sent for military training to Cuba, Libya and North Korea.

Museveni was trained in Tanzania, then a Marxist country - to this day his rhetoric belies that background. But to be fair, one can visit just about any public university in Africa and have a "flashback" to the old Soviet mindset.

Okwir Rabwoni's story is fascinating, and chilling - as he recounts:

Tired of war, the following year I turned politician,winning a seat in parliament as a member of Museveni’s “Movement” group,the only legal party in Uganda. Last year, I began to fear that Museveni had become yet another African dictator, more concerned with power than principle. Part of my quarrel with him concerned his failure to establish a genuine multi-party democracy; also, I objected to mounting corruption. The World Bank and other foreign donors supply half of the Ugandan government’s budget, but a third of the money is wasted on senseless military actions such as Uganda’s invasion of the Congo. Museveni holds ultimate responsibility for this corruption. I defected to a new opposition party and campaigned on behalf of Museveni’s opponent in last year’s presidential election. Even though Museveni faced no risk of losing, he took no chances, arresting his opponent’s aids and supporters. Though I had fought faithfully in Museveni’s army as a child, I was now an adult and a critic, so he arrested me too. Tortured by my own brother (Museveni’s chief of internal security), I was released after local and international pressure, and I left Uganda for Britain.

This is a situation crying for broad-based, multi-governmental investigation. It is horribly reminiscent of Iraq under Saddamm Hussein.


The situation in northern Uganda has been allowed to fester over many years. This post on the blog Discarded Lies provides a timeline of recent events in the north of Uganda:

"Why didn't the government use all its clout [to stop the killing] for all those years? To isolate the north," said Ronald Reagan Okumu, an outspoken opposition legislator from Gulu. (Born in 1969, he was named after an American screen idol whom his parents admired.)

Ugandan officials have insisted repeatedly that negotiations with the LRA are hampered by the group's inability to set a clear agenda, a view shared by Western donors.

"Until three years ago, there was a conspiracy of silence in the international community," a European diplomat in Kampala said. "The donors supported Museveni economically and politically, and this allowed the cancer of the north to develop."

Things began to change after the LRA was designated as a terrorist organization by the Bush administration in late 2001. Shortly afterward, Sudan allowed Ugandan troops to cross the border to attack LRA bases. Washington gave the Ugandans some nonlethal military assistance.

But the biggest Ugandan operation, Iron Fist, which took place in March 2002, backfired. It pushed the rebels back into northern Uganda, provoking a major humanitarian crisis as villagers fled to camps. "The situation changed from a low-level local conflict into an international embarrassment for Museveni," a Western diplomat said.

At that point, the donor community pressed Museveni to launch a genuine peace initiative. Betty Bigombe, a respected former minister then working at the World Bank, was brought in to mediate.



Urbane Analysis: Which leads us to where things stand today - a situation that for years could have been "turned around" quickly, if Museveni had the will to make it so. Now it is breaking out into one of the worst humanitarian crises on the planet - and the Joseph Kony-LRA cult child army is a major linchpin in explaining why the Sudan-Congo-Uganda border area situation is a morass of horrible conditions. Unfortunately, the Western donor community of governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are reluctant to even conference, much less present a unified manifesto (and plans) to force Museveni's hand regarding his regime's role in this crisis.

And that's why, come the first week of July, regular citizens will start a month's campaign to change that paradigm. Live8 is coming - and though it is all about the G8 summit - the timing is right to focus on Museveni as well. Museveni is a poster boy for how things have gone wrong in Africa.

Museveni Forces Showdown On July 28



Uganda to hold referendum on multiparty system on July 28

KAMPALA, Jun 3, 2005 (Xinhua via COMTEX) -- Ugandans will go to the polls on July 28 to choose a political system under which the country will be governed after the 2006 general elections, Uganda Electoral Commission (EC) has announced.

EC Chairman Badru Kiggundu was quoted by local media on Friday as saying that he had signed the gazette confirming the polling day.

Uganda Parliament voted overwhelmingly in May in favor of a motion to allow the east African country to hold a referendum in July on multiparty system.

Kiggundu said there were only two sides in the referendum, the ruling Movement and multiparty, because all groups that applied to canvass for votes fall under those sides.

He said referendum campaigns end on July 26 and the referendum question would be ready before the end of next week.

Kiggundu also said the recent update of the voters' register had captured 8.86 million people, 600,000 more than the voters who registered in the last elections in 2001.

The referendum needs about 17.5 million US dollars, according to an earlier announcement.

Copyright (c) 2005 Comtex News Network
Received by NewsEdge Insight: 06/03/2005

01 June 2005

School District Changes Removes Magnolia’s Fabled “Comfort Zone”

School District Changes Removes Magnolia’s Fabled “Comfort Zone”
P. Scott Cummins © 2005 The Urbane R

The stream of announcements describing ever-evolving proposals from the financially shaky Seattle School District can be (charitably) described as utter retrenchment. The district line goes: “While the discussion on school consolidation and student assignment began as a response to a projected $20 million budget gap in 2006-2007, it has transformed into a deep examination of how Seattle Public Schools can best serve its students and families so that every student succeeds.”

Now that is some major spin. But to his credit, Superintendent Raj Manhas admits that the issues are “controversial, complex, challenging, and emotional.”

What it gets down to is this: the vast majority of Queen Anne and Magnolia parents are getting their wish for neighborhood schools. See that school closest to where you live? That’s your school. You go there. Just like in the old days.

Mind you there is a little more flexibility in the plan than that - your “cluster” consists of the three schools closest to your home. But the effect is certain. The vast majority of those bright yellow school buses will be history. Getting your child to school will mean variations on the theme of “they walk or you drive.” I predict more bicycle racks at the community center.

But what does this mean in the larger analysis? Magnolia has 19,000 people, according to the Census Bureau. And 87% of us (including me) are white. 17% are under age eighteen – that’s over 3,000 children. But Magnolia is having a baby boom these days, and 1,000 of those kids are under age five.

The issue is about the 2,000 school-age kids who eat, study, hang out – and have a roof over their heads - in Magnolia. Around 300 attend Lawton K-5 Elementary; while 500 attend Catharine Blaine K-8. And about another 300 attend the private Our Lady of Fatima K-8. Given that almost half of the public school children enrolled in Magnolia schools live outside of Magnolia, those numbers jibe with the anecdote that over half of Magnolia’s school children attend private school.

This year marks the beginning of the sixth decade since the U.S. Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education ruling - declaring racial division in the classroom unconscionable, invidious and unconstitutional. Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote: "We come then to the question presented: Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? We believe that it does...We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”
Given that in Magnolia 87% - almost 17,000 of the 19,000 people living here are white – we are not a diverse community. Since Lawton and Blaine’s student populations are 71% and 67% white respectively, it is obvious that whatever racial diversity present in our school communities will largely disappear along with those yellow buses.

Our civil rights laws do not require the “intent” of prejudice in order trigger scrutiny, only its “effect” need be felt. So, what to do? First of all, let’s come up with new ideas that can begin to accomplish what busing was never able to do: bring diversity into our community. Some of those ideas can be done quickly – like establishing more than a “token” number of ability to pay incentive scholarships at private schools – institutions which need to make real commitment that their enrollments reflect the broader (in Seattle, that means 30% non-white) population. And both our private and public schools can develop marketing plans to do enrollment outreach via advertisements in media reaching ethnic, racial and gender-based minority groups.

Other ideas are long term in scope. But they can work on Queen Anne and Magnolia, because peoples’ hearts are in the right place. Many local church and service groups have done Habitat for Humanity projects over the years. A man I know in Magnolia has actually taken his involvement to a whole new level, serving as coordinator on projects year after year. But that work has taken place largely, if not exclusively, outside of our neighborhood. So why not combine the enthusiasm for that work - with innovative housing initiatives right here in our community – modeling our efforts on Kulshan Community Land Trust in Bellingham? Kulshan is a private, non profit community organization that buys land in residential areas at market prices. The program then holds the land in trust. The next “homeowner” actually buys the house only. The resale “profit” is based on an agreed-upon formula to provide a fair return to the seller – while insuring that the home will remain affordable to the next low-income buyer participating in the program.

Large urban areas like Seattle and San Francisco have too long relied upon the patience of (largely) minority families - sending their children on imponderably long bus rides in search of an unfulfilled promise of reconciliation and acceptance. The Seattle School District has clearly signaled that the era of panacea is over. Kids should be kids, not commuters. It is time for us adults to grow up - and take on the challenge of encouraging diversity in our community.