Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies, No.2, 2004 【Article】 “Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in : Questions on Western Dominant States (Globalization) and the Need for African Renewal”

Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA*

1. Introduction 2. Foundations of Commercial Wars in Uganda during Direct Colonialism, 1900/1939-1962 3. Financing Border Conflicts and in the Congo, Uganda and Sudan to Capture Minerals by Dominant Western States 4. Conclusion 5. Recommendations

1. Introduction Western Dominant Thought and Practices: The Source of Violence and State Failure in Africa.

(a) Faulty Western Official Policy Recommendations This section explains the origins of state failure in Uganda, through legal, official, and regional governmental arrangements in which the country lost self-determination and territorial controls to western dominant states. It brings forward the style by which dominant western states use ‘regionalism’ as globalization process (empire building) against ‘statism.’ First, western dominant states conduct violence for state failure in Uganda through legal and administrative policy measures involving replacement of national sovereignty (‘statism’) by regionalization. This is normally justified as the package for alleviation of African state failure in the western sense. It provides the legal and or official arguments that confuse the processes by western which dominant states inflict violence in Uganda and the rest of Africa. Historically, the method of tricking states into false agreements as foundations for war to accessing national resources began with British colonial government in Uganda 1892 when kings signed away national sovereignty and territorial control of resources. The British government masked the violent objective under official arguments that there was need to sign a treaty of friendship with kings in order for Britain to afford assistance for the ‘development’ of ‘backward’ county. Subsequently, the Imperial British East African Company arrived in the country to under take professed development programmes. The provisions of the agreement meant that kings had lost their sovereignty and control of territorial resources to Britain. When the kings such as Mwanga resisted this move, the colonial government deposed them on the pretexts of blocking development process and violating the agreement. The British also financed ethnic wars between neighboring states and failed national * Department of social science & Research, Nkumba University, Entebbe-Uganda Collaborator of International Center for Regional Studies at Tenri Univerity 102 Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies defense. Because of this, the colonialist argued that in the interest of state security there was need to declare Uganda a protectorate of the British Government. Soon after, the British colonial government formed the East African Economic Community in which she administered all member states under one common policy. This colonial method of control was inherited by USA in 1944 when Britain lost the colony to the former. On 1-22 July 1944, USA and her allied European states converged an international conference at Bretton Woods. They invited about 44 states from Latin American nations who signed into law the IBRD/World Bank and IMF as instruments of international monetary and administrative authorities. The two institutions replaced colonial states in their former colonies and territories immediately after the signing of the agreements. These provided that in order to demonstrate freedom and independence of African Nations from colonial control, the Bank and the Fund had to start operating by financing development plans (budgets) for ‘New States’ in Asia, Africa and Latin America emerging out of colonialism within one year from 1944. In 1945, the USA invited about 170 nations another international conference at Francisco, New Jersey, and signed into international law the formation of the United Nations. It was initiated to empower USA with the force law in each individual member states as the balancer of power politics, and to promote peace, security, and development. The main objective for which USA initiated international governmental organizations was to create groupings of nations and administer them under one common policy. One such common policy was member states to agree upon permanent dependence on funds from the World Bank and IMF for their national budgets. Uganda, like any other member states of the UN had successfully signed away self-determination of national political economy. Another phase making failing states had come in under the hegemony of USA through international governmental organizations. In 1946, USA provided a sum of £120million of development assistance (loan) to the former colonies and territories of European colonial states. These funds created the so-called ‘New States,’ the identity of which was seen in the Ten- year Development Plan, 1946-56, through the financing of the IBRD/World Bank and IMF. In order to fulfill this objective so-called liberation wars to independence were conducted by USA in conjunction with the then resigning European Colonial governments. Africans (in Uganda) who knew nothing or less about the Bretton Woods Agreements were used to fight the wars. These events were followed by the Green Revolution, 1950s-70s, structural adjustments in the period 1980s-1990s, and these are still continuing. Never the less, the package for Alleviation of African Failing State System (renewal), within the western sense, has since continued to involve unworkable programemes such as decentralization, democratization, liberation, agricultural modernization, etc. The truth about these programmes, is to create state failure. This is seen in the recent International Conference that was organized by USA through the United Nations and African Union on 19-20 November, 2004 for African Heads of State and Government to agree on western arrangements for Peace, Security Democracy and Development in the Great Lakes Region. Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA：Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in Uganda 103

(b) The Dar Es Salaam 19-20 November, 2004, Declaration on Peace, Security, Democracy and Development in the Great Lakes USA, her allied European States, and through United Nations and African Union organized an international conference on Peace, Security, and Development in the Great Lakes Region. Provisions 1-82 of the Agreement (Dar Es Salaam, Declaration) indicate that the entire efforts of conference was a failure because they pointed at the real problems relating to state failure in Africa but fell too short of identifying the source of violence in the region. The agreement not only proves that African Heads of State signed away their sovereignty to the international community, but also were used by USA and her agencies to conduct commercial wars in the shadows of peace, security and development within their mother states: Chapter I, Provision 1 of the agreement indicates the conference was not convened under the initiative of African leaders but rather was a move of USA through her executing agencies, i.e., United Nations and African Union: “We, the Heads of State and Government … meeting in Dar Es Salaam on 19–20 November, under the United Nations and African Union;”

Chapter I, Provision 2 was a mere polemics of words: “Deeply concerned about endemic conflicts and persistent insecurity caused by economic stagnation, and poverty aggravation, mistrust, suspicion between governments, massive violation of human rights and other policies of exclusion and marginalisation, gender inequality, use of violence for conquering and conserving power, impunity of crimes against Humanity, war crimes, illicit trafficking of small arms and light weapons, proliferation of armed groups, organized crime and illegal exploitation of natural resources, recognizing the efforts undertaken at national, regional and international level to resolve these endemic problems;”

This provision propelled the conference to a visionless declaration of “Vision” and signing away national sovereignty and control of national territorial resources to the international community in Chapter II of the Agreement.

Chapter II, Provision 14: “Declare our collective determination to transform the Great Lakes Region into a space of sustainable peace and security for States and peoples, political and social stability, shared growth and development, space of cooperation based on the strategies and policies of convergence within the framework of common destiny which we are determined to build, in line with the aspirations of our peoples, in conformity also with the AU Vision and Mission, with full participation of all peoples, and in partnership with the United Nations, African Union, and the International Community as a whole.

In analysis, it was a helpless deliberation of the Heads of State to sign such agreement of 104 Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies aggression. While the provisions of the Agreement repeatedly emphasized that the UN and the rest of the international community were parties to it, but none of them witnessed it. Instead it was only 19 African Heads of State and one representative from the African Union Commission that signed (see Plates 1). This can only be described as well meditated plan of USA, her allies and through international agencies to conduct violence to member states in the region as method and tactic of accessing national resources.

PLATE 1: Witness to the Dar Es Salaam 19-20 November, 2004, Declaration on Peace, Security, Democracy and Development in the Great Lakes in which Member States Lost their Sovereignty and Territorial Control of National Resources with Recourse to War Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA：Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in Uganda 105 106 Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies

(c) The Faulty Western Scholarly Policy Recommendations On 7 November, 2004, Daphane Eviator, published an article in the New York Times Magazine on state failure in Africa. Daphane quoted the unfair prescriptions forwarded by Jeffrey Sachs1） to problem —Sachs is the leading strategist of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals, also Director of the Columbia University Earth Institute. He is the main advocate for the “Big Push-theory, which means that in order to resolve the problem of poverty, African should be granted more foreign aid. That USA through the World Bank and IMF should spend “Spend $150 Billion per Year [in loans in Africa] to Cure World Poverty by the year 2015.” The central argument of the proposal is that when such funds are allocated would earn every poor person $100 per year. However, the proposal is faulty because poverty cannot be transformed by allocating massive funds and shared equally by every individual poor person in Africa, in Sachs’s sense of imagination. If $150 Billion were to be allocated to the 5 billion poor people in Africa, of course in faulty perception of poverty from the western sense, each would receive about less than 10 cents of $1 USD per year. Such are communist/socialist proposals that western officials and scholars are advancing for further intended state failure in Africa. The truth about the Big Push theory is to widen the spectrum of interest lending in Africa so that USA and her allied European states take away even the least the so-called poor have.

2. Foundations of Commercial Wars in Uganda during Direct Colonialism, 1900/1939-1962

(a) Colonial Sponsored Ethnic Wars Commercial Wars with their devastating effects to economic performance in Uganda began in 1892 with the arrival of European colonialists in the country. British colonialists used war methods and tactics to access national resources in Uganda and the entire Africa at large. First, Carl Peters (British military agent) seized Tanzania; subsequently he proceeded to Buganda where he influenced the then King (Mwanga) to sign a treaty of friendship. This treaty paved the way for the coming of the Imperial British East African Company (IBEAC), which in turn forced Mwanga, the then King of Buganda to sign an agreement with the company accepting British Direct Colonial Administration (Seftel, pp. 3-6). Soon after, the British government deployed Captain Lugard to conduct war against any possible resistance of the British Administration. Lugard found Roman Catholics in Uganda supporting German and French colonialists; he joined the war and finally defeated them. Upon this defeat, Britain declared Uganda a Protectorate in 1894. This meant successful acquisition of the country as a resource area for Britain. In the period 1894-1919, British armed forces used violence to conquer and pacify the country. This type of violence resulted into enormous loss of Human Resources, Physical Resources and loss of

1） For more information about Jeffrey Sachs and his sponsorship to make plans of widening the spectrum non pro-poor interest lending as a violent of method to accessing resources in Africa in the benefit of USA and western allies through International Governmental Organizations (e.g., World Bank, United Nations, African Union), see Daphane Eviator, “Spend $150 Billion Per Year To Cure World Poverty:” The New York Times Magazine, November 7, 2004, Section 6, pp. 46-49.” Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA：Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in Uganda 107

African continuity in leadership and governance. The phase of “failing (state)” in the country had begun with European exercise of war: The British brought the under their direct exploitation and sabotage. They undermined African labor by employing Asians mainly from India to construct infrastructures such as rails to export copper, wood, etc., outside the country. The British licensed Asians to work on their behalf as middlemen in setting up commercial businesses and in the process- acquired land resources from African landowners. These colonialists also extended easy commercial loans; export licenses, and other credit facilities to British businessmen. Colonial Law on commercial trading strictly prohibited African traders from obtaining loans from British Banks and denied them import and export licenses. The Africans, whom the British found propertied from proceeds of their internal and external trade, made them impoverished under this form of political violence. Generally, Africans were reduced to the status of providing forced labor of peasant production of crops for British trade. For the entire period 1889-1930, British commercial wars had destroyed the nation’s enterprising fiber. In the mean time, World War II emerged in Europe in the period 1939-1945, and at the closing point of which opened up new gates for the coming in of the Cold War, which drastically redirected the course of commercial wars in Uganda into new hands of USA against USSR in the period 1947/1962-1989.

(b) Commercial Wars in Uganda in the Opening and Closing Period of the Cold War On 1st-22 July 1944, USA initiated a conference at Bretton Woods in which European colonial powers were made to sign into law agreements prohibiting colonial control of African, Asian and Latin American countries. Also, the conference agreed upon the establishment of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) under Bretton Woods Agreements. The terms of the agreements required Britain to lift all controls on both administrative and financial restrictions over the colonies. In 1945, the United States of America emerged the new superpower and Britain assumed second position international power politics. The Bank and Fund assumed international administrative and developmental roles of European colonial powers in Africa, Europe and Asia. Under the Bretton Woods Agreements, Britain accepted to assist USA through the World Bank and IMF to set and implement a Ten- year Development Plan, 1946- 1956, in all her former colonies as a symbol of the end of colonial control of territories in the Third World Nations (Butanaziba, 1997: pp. 30-51). To this end, USA granted a sum of £1200 million to all former British colonies through the World Bank, IMF, and Britain through her Colonial Development Corporation (CDC)2）to implement the ten-year Development Plan, 1946-56: “The United Kingdom and the Welfare Act provides a sum of £120 million for Schemes of Development in Dependent Territories [Africa] and set a ten-year period up to March 31st 1956, for assistance from the funds available under the act” (CO 1022/337, Progress

2） Colonial Development Corporation (CDC): Is now known as Commonwealth Development Corporation (CDC). The British government renamed it Commonwealth in the 1960s to hide its colonial orientation and the economic violence that goes with from the Third World Nations. (Compare, Butanaziba, pp. 55- 62). 108 Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies

Report, 1953, Para. 1).

Uganda received approximately £5,000,000 for the Plan. This programme created a new multilateral economic structure that paved the way for United States of America to take on the new role in Uganda as a new colonizer. A “New State” had been founded under this arrangement. The new colonial power (USA) cast Uganda again into new forms of commercial wars. One such form of violence was internally created through party politics under the guise of “democratization” process. The other, type of violence involved the fight between socialism/communism led by the former Soviet Socialist Republics (present-day Russia)—hence, opening the period of the cold war in the country.

(I) Party Politics: The Failure of social and political Unity It would have been otherwise difficult for the United States of America to come in as new colonizer and acquire resources, if traditional chiefs still controlled land and their people. It would have been equally difficult if Ugandans were found united. Hence, the first move that the USA made through Britain was to destroy traditional leadership and secondly national unity. Through Britain, USA moved forward to destroy and disunite Ugandans as a prerequisite for creating an independent Uganda. The details of this event are interesting: in 1952, a political party known as Uganda National Congress (UNC) was formed through a puppet leader in the names of Ignatius Musazi. In 1959, Muzasi and split the UNC into two enemy factions, each leading a part. In 1954, the Democratic Party (DP) was formed as a representative body of the Roman Catholic community in Uganda. Mean while, Obote’s faction party of UNC joined a Buganda Peoples’ Union to form a Uganda Peoples’ Congress (UPC). This was composed of Muslims and Protestants. Throughout the 1950s Ugandans had been socially and politically disunited along religious fault-lines in the benefit of USA. The attention of Ugandans was misdirected from returning to their social and economic settings to party politics as if they were to construct good state out of it. The results of the 1959 elections for which these political parties were founded immediately sent signals of future clashes among Ugandans along religious and tribal lines: “The Democratic Party (DP) suspected of being Catholic dominated, gained most votes, but not the highest number of representatives. Uganda National Congress claimed five seats out of ten. DP won one seat. The remainders of the representatives were independents …[Buganda was opposed to this arrangement … she wanted to receive independence from the rest of other parts of Uganda]. Abu Mayanaja said it all: The big question now is where does Uganda go from here? It still has no national wide political organizations, nor universally accepted leader. Also, people are not yet fully politically conscious, and are too divided on tribal and religious grounds. But Uganda’s biggest problem is undoubtedly the brake on progress applied by the traditionalists in Buganda. There is no easy solution” (Seftel, pp. 26-27). Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA：Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in Uganda 109

It follows that USA had initiated party politics as a prerequisite to independence as a paradigm shift to offset traditional political and socio-economic arrangements of the country. So, the American and British intelligence (led by Bob Astles) overtly and covertly begun weakening Buganda’s political and social/cultural strength by raising weak individuals from weak origins. In a style that turned out to be dangerous to the political and economic progress of the entire country, the Americans and British flattered Milton Obote (former ) when paving the way for violence against Buganda and other kingdoms: “ …Obote, he starts with none of the natural advantages of a Baganda leader. He has the formidable task of selling the [Baganda] democracy. He must persuade the ordinary Muganda to abandon tribalism, and realize that a man from another tribe has much right to a democratic vote as a person who lives on the Kanaka’s doorstep: Obote, lives in a simple house in Lira (Lango), he is happiest when relaxing in it, when dressed in an open shirt, and shrouded by a cloud of tobacco smoker”(Seftel, p. 27).

On October 9, 1962, the British expatriates (of course, as of the Bretton Woods Agreements, 1944) declared Uganda independent (sovereign) state. On this occasion, these British expatriates set a number of causes for future political violence for Uganda: (i) Milton Obote was made the Prime Minister and head of the Central Government, a thing which not only Buganda but certainly other kingdoms reluctantly accepted. For, Obote was to too junior with unacceptable leadership origins to assume the role a coach player among superiors. (ii) Secondly, the British misinformed Ugandans that had become a self-governing Protectorate. (iii) The so-called independent Uganda received no status on October 9, it was not a republic nor monarchy neither a unitary state.

As the result of these problems, in 1963 the King of Buganda was made the President of the whole country. But, this was done as an apologetic measure against the disunity that party politics created leading to the empowerment of the unacceptable Obote as head of government. In 1964, the Obote-led government under the patronage of the British intelligence resurrected the old conflicts between Bunyoro and Buganda on the lost counties (these were territories that the British colonial government passed on to Buganda from Bunyoro as rewards of the formers’ support against the latter. The idea behind this move was to create new enemies from old conflicts between giant kingdoms and eventually sweep away any possible unity between the two. Another reason attached to this, was to create conflict between Buganda and Obote. This was successful. For, Milton Obote proposed that the counties be watched by the central government. All these wrangles resulted into violence between Obote’s –led central government against the President and King of Buganda: On April 15 1966, Obote called members of the National Assembly and asked them to pass a new constitution which they had not even seen. In this constitution Obote assumed the position of executive president and suspended the federal status 110 Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies of Buganda. Sir Edward Mutesa as president of Uganda and king of Buganda opposed this position, and wrote to Obote this: “The rest of five ministers and the suspension of the constitution has caused much anxiety. The existing tensions in the world today demand that we do our most to reduce them instead of adding to them in any manner” (Seftel, p. 54)

Obote replied in a speech to the nation thus: “During my absence Sir Edward Mutesa, as president of Uganda, called on foreign diplomats and asked them for armed forces. The secretary to the Katikiro is out on the same mission” (Ibid, p. 54).

As such, Milton Obote stormed the king’s palace sending off the king to exile. This marked the end of continuity of traditional leadership; the 500 hundred-year-old kingdom of Buganda had come to an end. In 1967, Obote introduced a republican constitution, which abolished other kingdoms. He eventually, banned other political parties and turned Uganda into a One-Party- State. This is where the intelligence of the former USSR through the close friends of Milton Obote such as Julius Nyerere of Tanzania penetrated Uganda and changed the mood of political violence in Uganda that had been initiated through Obote. It set out capitalist wars against socialists/communists in the struggle to accessing resources in Uganda.

(II) Capitalist Versus Socialist/Communist Wars for Resources The coming in of the former Soviet Socialist Republics (now Russia) in competition against USA over resources in Uganda reversed the mood of political violence in the country. USA had initiated such violence using democratic- party-politics and the fight against traditional leadership. American and British Intelligence3）(led by Bob Astles) groomed Milton Obote to steer post- colonial political violence against traditional socio-economic and political settings in the late 1950s and early 1960s. But, the Americans and British underestimated Obote’s perception of what they wanted to use him in the “New State” that had emerged under the “New Capitalist World Order (1944).” First, Obote had weak educational orientation; Secondly, he was devoid of experience and leadership origins: This created the circumstance under which he failed to understand the deeper implications of Mutesa’s caution and the international political economy of the cold war. In 1966, Mutesa as the president of Uganda had asked Obote (the then Prime minister) not to involve him self in the communist/socialist-capitalist wrangles as they were dangerous for the country and Obote himself: “The existing tensions in the world today demand that we do our most to reduce them instead of adding to them in any manner” (Seftel, p. 54), wrote Mutesa. However, Obote failed to understand this because he knew less about these: (a) Bretton Woods

3）During the Obote Regime of the 1960s and 1970s, Bob Astles (a Briton) headed the Intelligence Service of Uganda, which later came to be known as “ State Research Bureau under Idi Amin’s regime in 1970s, and in the period 1987 –2002 was renamed Internal and External Security Organizations (ISO & ESO). Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA：Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in Uganda 111

Agreements 1st-22 July, 1944, Bretton Woods-International Bank For Reconstruction and Development, IBRD-1944 (tongue-twisted to World Bank, 1960s); Anglo-American Agreements (1944), International Monetary Fund (1944), Bandong Conference, 1955. In short, Obote like Kwame Nkrumah, Julius Nyerere, Kamuzu Banda, Lumumba, etc. They knew little that the New International Economic Order that had emerged in 1944 under the leadership of the USA had arrived to continue accessing national resources through violence. In May 1966, Obote ordered military forces to capture the King’s Palace. This marked the climax of political violence against traditional social, economic and political leadership in the name of democracy. The American and British trick to flatter Obote so that he introduce democratic-party politics to Uganda had come to succeed. The 500-year monarchy, which was feared by the Americans as a limitation to foreign capitalistic strategies of accessing national resources, had come to an end. This event, however, unexpectedly opened the gates wide for the coming in of socialism/ communism in Uganda through Obote. In the mean time, the intelligence of the former USSR exploited Obote’s ignorance of the new international economic order. They influenced Obote, and indeed accepted to adopt socialist/communist policies. This meant that United States of America stood to loose Uganda in the hands of USSR in the name of the struggle for the poor (socialism/communism). This happened when Obote Declared Uganda a socialist political economic system the “ One Man’s Common Charter” in 1968, and followed this move with subsequent action plans in1970: “…Move to the left…the Charter lays down a practical strategy for the fulfillment of the aspirations of socialism and enforces the view that the entire country must be involved in, and committed to, the cause of national building” (Seftel, p. 75). Photos: The two buildings were properties of the Buganda Federal Government.

To achieve socialist political economic order in Uganda, Obote planned thus: “We must resolve now, at the beginning of the decade [1970], to finance as much as possible of our development programmes [Ten-year Development Plan which had emerged under funding of USA-based World Bank and IMF] from local resources [not loans], and seek from our friends in other parts of the world [such as the USSR] any 112 Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies

necessary assistance which will increase our capacity to develop more of our human and material resources. Hence, Obote insisted: Listen to the People … if we listen to the people, we will sustain and maintain our political independence. If we listen to the people, we will win the war for economic independence. If we listen to the people, southern part of Africa will be free” (p. 75).

Within 7 years, Obote’s untried leadership had afforded him to trade off Uganda, an American created “New Sate,” into the other hands of USSR. The same American and British governments turned against Obote when he too, turned to join the socialist/communist camp. Interestingly, the American and British intelligence founded political violence for Uganda when they flattered and super-imposed the weak Obote over strong and experienced leadership of kings. This time, the American and British intelligence turned to the military for the removal of Obote and his socialist regime. The American and the British realized that it was only military dictators that could help them in maintaining capitalism in Uganda. So, they borrowed the experience of installing dictatorial leaders in German and Italy in the 1930/40s and 1920s respectively 4）. The Americans and British chose Idi Amin to perform dictatorial leadership role in defending capitalism against communism in Uganda. Similarly, when communism threatened American investments in Africa, the American government sponsored military coups in most parts of Africa to oust either active or possible communist/socialist regimes throughout the 1960s and 1970s (Compare, Cammack, p.137). The Americans with the help of Britain (following the Anglo- American Agreements, 1944) elevated to power military dictators to serve the following purposes: (i) To protect capitalism and protect private property from the conquest of communism (ii) To be anti-party politics, fight any elements that would have caused social disunity, and unify different people under the unquestionable leadership of a ruler Besides Idi Amin, African dictatorial leaders who emerged out this Americans and British plan included: Mubutu Sesseko (Zaire), Anar Sad at and Hassan Mubarak (Egypt), etc. Active struggle for resources and markets between Capitalist-USA and USSR had consolidated the construction of “failing states in Africa”5） in the period 1960s-1989.

(c) Installation of Dictatorial Regimes: Protecting Capitalism against Communism/ Socialism, 1971-1979 The American and British Governments responded to socialist/communist “move to the left” in Uganda by causing a military coup led by General Idi Amin against Obote’s led-Socialist

4）USSR had influenced the exportation of socialist/communist ideology in Italy and German. Communism had threatened the entire capitalist foundation of Italian and German economies. Germany and Italian Administrators quickly noticed that through Democratic Party politics, a communist political party would one day take over power and introduce communism against private property. Hence, the Italians and Germans commissioned military dictators to guard against communism from the capture of private property under a capitalist structure. This was the role that Adolf Hitler of German (1935-45) and Mussolini (1922-45) of Italy performed. 5）Compare, African Report No. 45, Somalia: Countering Terrorism in a Failed State, International Crisis Group, Nairobi, May 23, 2002. It is typical of western official reasoning that apportion blame Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA：Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in Uganda 113

Regime on January 25, 1971. In the same year, the then Prime Minister of Britain Edward Heath visited Uganda and made policy directions towards maintaining capitalist structures under a dictatorial military leadership of Idi Amin. He immediately, returned the visit to Britain and extended another visit to Israel. In the mean time, Obote exiled himself to the former Socialist Republic of Tanzania, while there he blamed American –British and Israel sponsorship of the coup against his socialist government. After the coup, Obote and his company of Soviet Socialist friends were beginning to realize that they had underestimated the strength of American-British Intelligence. In a statement Obote blamed the American-British involvement in the coup thus: “Whatever these rebels [American-British and Israel governments] might say, the people of Uganda believe, like many African countries, in socialism. They believe in the Common Man’s Charter, which has received popular support throughout the country. Now, a group of traitorous army personnel have come forward to say that they know everything, they are the saviors of Uganda … these people, I must say to you quite clearly, are the servants of foreigners: British, Israelis … having been involved in the bloody seizure of power by the Uganda army”(Seftel, p.91).

If we must acknowledge Hennery Kissinger 6）for surviving internal and external conflicts during the process of leading USA intelligence-work to destroying international communism, we must equally remember Bob Astles7）for leading the Intelligence Service of Uganda (State Research Bureau) during Obote’s regime that destroyed traditional political and economic settings, and the same man: destroyed Obote when he turned communist/socialist. Bob Astles was the real man behind all scenes of the dictatorial regime under Amin, which destroyed communism in the country. The following politico-socio-economic operations were planned by the American-British intelligence (led by Bob Astles) and Idi Amin gave them a go head to do away with communism but with violence: - 1. Abolition of Party Politics, this was designed to do away with possible political opposition, i.e., it served as a buffer to deter any possible return of communist thinking and practice through party politics. 2. Unification of Religious And Tribal Groups: the dictatorial policy was to unify Religious and Tribal leaders under a single leadership of the ruler (Idi Amin). First, Idi Amin resolved conflicts over the constitution of the Anglican Church. In so doing, he eliminated Church leaders such as Bishop J. Luwum who supported communist ideas and religious divisionism. Seftel (p.175) recovered an extract from the open letter to President Idi Amin by the Anglican bishops of Uganda suggesting that the killing of Luwum was much influenced by foreign powers; this time they feared to name neither USA nor Britain nor Israel: “Your excellency, have stated … that your government is not under any foreign influence and that your decisions are guided by our Defense Council and cabinet, the general trend of things in Uganda has created a feeling that the affairs of our nation are being directed by outriders who do not have the welfare of this country and the value of the lives and

6）A Walter Isaackson, Biography: Kissinger: New York, Simon and Schuster, 1992. 7）“Bob Astles” was the man behind every presidential act during Obotes’ Regime (1962-1970) and remained the mastermind of all Idi Amin’s Regime (1971-1979). His true identity is still unknown. 114 Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies

properties of Uganda heart” (p.175).

Never the less, the American-British Intelligence had realized that it had become dangerous to add further loan funds (investments) to Uganda at the time when USSR most threatened such investments since its creation as a “New Sate” with £5,000,000 in 1946. The Oil crisis of the 1970s- 1980s had created recessions in America and Western Europe. Therefore, there was need to step- up expenditures on the destruction of the USSR all over the World. In fact, USA was spending more than $300 million a day for the containment of the USSR. These internationally created forms of violence turned into failing states of Africa namely Uganda. The first internal policy that the dictatorial government implemented was the destruction of socialist economic practices. The socialist regime had left a culture redundancy and dependence among poor people. Even without working, Obote had made the majority of poor Ugandans to expect receipt of welfare services through taxation or confiscation of resources from the rich and redistribute it among the poor. The dictatorial government of Idi Amin reversed this imagination by enforcing agricultural production among the poor in the countryside. This started in Masaka District, where Idi Amin attempted to allocate unused land to poor people for Agricultural production. As the result of this policy, in 1970s and 1980s Masaka district was the leading producer of cash crops and food staffs such as bananas, Coffee, etc., in Uganda. The construction of failing stated continued under the design of commercial wars conducted by western dominant sates. In order to protect Uganda’s market from any further communist/socialist infiltration, the American- British Intelligence helped the dictatorial government of Uganda to stop trade relations with the socialist Republic of Tanzania. This broke the Economic Community of . This economic situation continued in Uganda in the period 1970s to the opening period of the downfall of USSR in 1985/89.

(d) End of the Cold War and the Emergence of New Faces of War: Border Conflicts and Terrorism in Uganda/Great Lakes Region In 1985, the British –American Intelligence had succeeded in elevating to power Michael Gorbachev as the President of the USSR. He introduced pro-liberal economic-socio-political policies that finally destroyed communist/socialist administration in USSR and her Satellite States. Tanzania, Libya, Cuba, China etc., were among the many socialist states out of USSR that fell with the collapse of USSR and its communist/socialist ideology. In the mean time, African governments such as Tanzania had not followed closely the changes in international relations relating leading to the end of USSR particularly in the late 1970s and mid 1980s. For this reason, the Government of Tanzania supported Ugandans to fight a socialist inspired Guerrilla war against the dictatorial regime in Uganda, which finally ousted Idi Amin in 1979. There was no need for USA and Britain to defend against the Socialist-Tanzanian invasion of Uganda. They knew that Tanzania would never sustain communism because USSR was heading towards burial in the hands of Gorbachev. It was also timely for Idi Amin to go because he who had known too much to be re-used by the Americans in the post-cold war period that emerged in 1989. Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA：Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in Uganda 115

Therefore, Tanzanians accidentally fought the war that the Americans would have conducted to remove Idi Amin. The Tanzanians did not know this. However, Julius Nyerere (former President of Tanzania) later realized in early 1990s and apologized while resigning from office thus: “ I am sorry, I misled Tanzania [of course to follow communist/socialist ideology and practice under the guidance of the puppet once so-called superpower: USSR].” In the period 1980-1989, Uganda lost about USD $800 billion in situations caused by conflicts between USA and the former USSR. During this is period internal political violence emerged in Uganda due to the swearing in of Obote as President after the 1981 rigged general elections. The event opened up new gates for western powerful states to participate in civil wars, border conflicts involving terrorism in the period 1981-1986, when NRA guerrilla forces led by Museveni’s took over power. The section that follows relate the processes by which western dominant states side by side with their multilateral corporations have since the end the cold war sponsored border conflicts and terrorism within the Great Lakes Region and the Nile Valley.

(e) Method and Tactic of Commercial Wars Through multilateral corporations, Western dominant states have continued to exercise force to access Oil and other Minerals resources such as Colton, Gold, Iron, Diamonds, etc., in the Uganda and the entire Great Lakes Region. They engage these nations into commercial wars involving Terrorism and Border Conflicts in the region to pave the way for access to resources. Uganda, Sudan, Congo and are Oil Producing Nations. But, British, American, Australian and Germany, and French Companies are taking advantage of the inexperience of these nations in Oil Prospecting, Oil Trade and Tactics of Creating Border Conflicts (War) in which these nations loose benefits of trade from such resources. In Uganda, western multilateral corporations have since sponsored wars in specific mineral rich locations particularly along national borders of western, southwestern, and northern Uganda. Let us begin by examining the method and tactics of war used by western dominant states through their multilateral companies, Guerrillas, United Nations Peace Keeping Forces, and the fashion by which government forces in the Great Lakes Region are engaged into hopeless battles to loss resources. First, guerrillas such as (ADF), Kony, Sudanese Peoples Liberation Army (SPLA) and others are created around a mineral rich resource area, for example, Oil, Coltan, Gold deposits, etc. Two unique aspects are associated with the method of installing guerrillas in an area: (a) Guerrillas originate from the immediate neighbor country and are planted near mineral rich areas along national borders; (b) This is more than enough to cause anxiety and insecurity to prompt government deployment of forces to defend state’s territorial integrity and sovereignty against perceived guerrillas. Secondly, United Nations Peace Keeping forces are deployed with professed aims of preventing neighboring states from violating the peace of one another’s state. The UN Forces create a Buffer Zone (Free Zone) exactly around the mineral area and is left accessible to multilateral international corporations for mining. Subsequently, the Buffer Zone (Free Area) is declared a disaster area — in a legal and commercial sense this implies that whatever is extracted from this area is free. It follows that the 116 Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies real aim of the UN forces is to oversee the process of extracting such minerals by multilateral companies of western dominant nations from the resource area (war zone). This is illustrated in

Diagram 1. Diagram1: Method Used in Commercial Wars Govt Forces: UPDF Govt Forces: Sudanese Army

Guerrillas Guerrillas Konny War Zone United Nation Forces: Govt USA, Britain, France, Etc Forces: Congo Mineral UN UN Area Western Companies Mining Free Zone UN UN Guerrillas ADF Govt Forces: RPF(Rwandese) Source: Compare, IPS Report, January 2002.

Another serious implication of this method and tactic of commercial wars in the area is that western dominant multilateral international corporations precede their parent states in capturing resources at that point. This arrives us at specific mineral rich areas where western dominant states have conducted commercial wars at the loss of member states in the Great Lakes Region.

3. Financing Border Conflicts and Terrorism in the Congo, Uganda and Sudan to Capture Minerals by Dominant Western States

(a) Congo Congo has huge deposits of Coltan,8）Uranium, Gold, Diamonds, Oil, etc. These minerals are found around Kivu, Goma, Bunia, Kindu, in fact around the larger part of Triangular Eastern Congo and the borders of Western Uganda. When western multilateral international companies identified these minerals, they created guerrillas around the borders of Eastern Congo and Western Uganda. The event caused the governments of Congo and Uganda to deploy military forces in the area in the period since 2000. The United Nations Keeping Forces came in and

8）Coltan is an Ore made up of two similar atoms that are extraordinarily heat- resistant. These are: (a) Niobium (Nb) or Columbium and (b) Tantalum (Ta). When the two atoms are separated, they form metals that are used to manufacture electronic instruments such as phones, computers, atomic, nuclear and aviation industries. 90% of World’s Coltan Reserves are located near rivers in Africa. So far, four companies in the world are known of processing Coltan into Nb and Ta: (i) Cabott Inc., USA; (ii) H.C. Starck, Germany; Ulba, Kazakhstan, and Ningxia, China. There is serious suspicion that even though companies are scattered they could be sharing one origin possibly Cabott Inc., USA. For details on the manner by which these companies finance wars in the Great Lakes Region, Compare, IPS Report, January 2002, p. 9. Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA：Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in Uganda 117 established a buffer zone between the UPDF and guerrillas (ADF) on one side and the Congolese Army on the other. This enabled western companies to mine resources such as Coltan without interventions from the government of Congo. Table 1, documents detailed processes through which western companies access minerals in the area using the method of war.

Table 1:Multilateral Corporations and Arms Traffickers in Commercial Wars in the Great Lakes Region: The Case of Coltan in the Congo

Cogecom Belgium Yes Jacques Van den Abeele, Aziza Sprl Kulsum, and Gulamali SOMIGL Belgium Yes Gulamali Masingiro Germany Yes Karl Heinz Albers GmgH Eagle Trinitech, Ohio, USA Yes Robert Raun: Alfred Rwigema Wings (President Kagame’s brother Resources in law MDM Belgium Yes Michel Defays, Mudekereza, RPF-Rwandese Supported Rebels H.C. Starck Germany Yes Karl Heinz Albers Cabott Inc. USA Yes Chris Huber Ningxia China Yes Unknown agent SOMIKIVU Germany Yes Karl Heinz Albers Fin concord Switzerland/ Yes Chris Huber: Major Gatete, and and Fin Kazakhstan Kazura: RPA Rwanda Metals mining Corporation Rarement Dutch HollandYes Robert Raun Chemie Pharmacie Source: Compare, IPS Report, January 2002.

(b) Uganda There is Oil, Gold, Copper, Colton, Gold, etc., in Uganda. This section relates the processes of war methods and tactics through which western companies access some of these minerals. An area of about 15,000 Sq Km along Lake Albert in Western Uganda is filled with huge deposits of oil. Three Blocks, i.e., Block1, Block 2 and Block 3 have been since 1990s explored and mined by Canadian Heritage Oil and Australian Hardman Petroleum Companies (see Table 2 and Map 1). Other western companies operating in the area include: (e) Polish- “King and King” Company, French- Total-Fina-Elf, and South African Mercenary Executive Outcomes. These companies 118 Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies have been since 1992 operating multilaterally but in stiff competition to prove effective occupation of the areas (Blocks of Minerals) through military maneuvers. This method served two objectives on the side of multilateral companies financing wars in the area: First, they misdirected government’s attention and administration from resource development to administering insecurity; secondly, the wars caused foreign military intervention in which the companies benefited from declaring the area disastrous (free zone). This is the war method and tactic by which companies from western dominant nations have continued to extract resources in Uganda.

Licence Fields Area Sq Km Tullow Interest Operator Other Partners Block 1 4,285 50.00 Heritage Block 2 4,675 50.00 Hardman Block 3 11 50.00 Heritage Block 3A 3,777 50.00 Heritage

Source: Compare, Dominic: Shifting Sands, WWW. pole-institute. org.

(c) Wars for Gold and Oil around the Borders of Northern Uganda and Southern Sudan Ethnic wars and terrorism at the borders around Northern Uganda and Southern Sudan have since 1986 involved multilateral western companies of western dominant nations to access Gold and Oil in the area. The notorious companies that have since conducted wars and terrorism in area include: Canadian based Heritage Oil Company, Australian Hardman Petroleum Company, and South African Mercenary Executive Outcomes. To secure the area as a free zone (disaster area) for free mining, guerrillas in the names of Sudanese Peoples Liberation Army were planted along around the Uganda -Northern Border to Sudan and Kony guerrillas were installed around the Sudan -Southern Border to Uganda. This caused severed relations between Uganda and Sudan each blaming one another against supporting guerrillas in violation of national territorial integrity and sovereignty. But, the companies achieved their objectives of misdirecting attention for Uganda and Sudan from administering resource development to administering insecurity; and secondly, they succeeded in causing foreign military intervention in which the companies benefited from declaring the area disastrous (free zone). Through these companies, USA, Britain, Germany, Canada, China support the war in Northern Uganda and Southern Sudan. The United Nations has since joined this multilateral enterprise with its multilateral forces to oversee safe mining. Tony Buckingham (Executive Director) of Heritage Oil Company, Vicktor Bout and many operatives South African Mercenary Executive Outcomes are living exhibits of war mongering and serious arms traffickers in the area. To this end, it is evident that the entire process of extracting resources from the Lakes Region through the method of war and tactic is surely primitive. Attempts to transform these wars have since 1986 failed because scholars and official line of observations excluded western dominant Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA：Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in Uganda 119 nations and their multilateral companies from the source the problem. For example, in an executive summery of the report on the theme, “European Companies and the Colton Trade: Supporting the War economy in the Democratic Republic of Congo,” the International Peace Information Service made recommendations to the UN Security Council, EU Council Ministers, European States and Kazakhstan: “… to impose temporary embargo on Colton and other natural resources originating from war torn areas in the Great Lakes Region” (IPS, p. 7). This was faulty because it avoided addressing the use of military method and tactic by western dominant nations through their multilateral companies to access resources in the area. In fact, such agents who supply intelligence advice to dominant western states to exercise violence in order to access gold, oil, etc., in the Great Lakes underestimated returns that they would benefit from conventional trade arrangements rather the than war method.

(d) Projected Trade Benefits for Uganda with Sudan Excluding Oil Products -Beyond Border Conflicts/War with Sudan Restoration of trade relations within and among members of the Great Lakes Region and the western markets would earn an estimated amount of USD 500 billion per year, Libya approximately 93, Sudan USD 80 billion, and the Congo about USD approximately 47 billion within the ten-year development plan 2006-2014 (see, Table 3).

Table 3: Projected Trade Benefits for Uganda and Sudan Product Commercial Value ($USD) 1. Tea $ 80 million 2. Fruits $ 30 million 3. Coffee $ 120 million 4. Tourism $ 20 million 5. Timber $ 10 million 6. Human resources (involving $ 30 million Infrastructure construction) 7. Fish, Beef, and Food $ 100 million 8 Navigation of River Nile $ 15 million 9. Wood $ 100 million (Derived from selected multi-sect oral survey estimates, 2003-2004: Compare Budget Republic of Uganda, 2004-2005).

4. Conclusion

Efforts towards multilateral cooperative institutional development within and among African member states and western dominant states should be adopted to succeed the primitive use of war to access resources in Africa. Available information indicates that trade proceedings within the Great Lakes Region would at least earn these nations, USD five hundred billion per year. However, the nature of relationship that exist between these nations today, forces Sudan to import Coffee, Tea, Timber, Fish from Southeast Asia: China, Indonesia, Malaysia, etc. Sudan exports Petroleum products to the Middle East, which in turn Uganda imports at high prices. 120 Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies

The idea is that even if Uganda gave up all investments in Petroleum and Gold, would be able to fetch USD 400 million per year in trade of other products with the neighbors. Therefore, there is need to redefine national trade interests in the context of these trade opportunities. Similar amounts of resources are recoverable through international Trade from the Congo, Central Africa Republic and some good fractions may be possible from Rwanda This questions the western primitive thinking and practice that war is the continuation of politics, which unfortunately is transcending modern times. For, if this practice and thinking were true, African states would not have emerged out as “Failing States.” If developed nations such as the United States of America (USA) have the capacity of violence (force) to acquire resources and improve their economic performance, do African States have this sort of force? The answer is emphatic no. So, what lies between peace and war is cooperation. Hence, African Renewal would be built upon cooperative multilateral commercial relations and this will constitute her spirit of political economic recovery 9）.

5.Recommendations

However, the paper projects economic benefits that would benefit both developed nations and African States through cooperative productive enterprise rather than war. This arrives the analysis to a new line of thought against the western traditional political theory and practice that “violence is the continuation of politics.” Finally, the paper forwards policy recommendations towards rethinking military commercialism as prerequisite for African Renewal. These include: 1. Africa’s Renewal may require serious questioning of the processes of applying force by dominant states to acquire resources from Africa. In order to achieve this objective, developed nations will have to redefine their interests by focusing attention to greater commercial benefits that exist in Africa through economic cooperation by ending their participation in violence particularly in economically- rich- located -states of the Great Lakes Region and the Nile Valley: These are Uganda, Congo, Sudan, Egypt, Kenya, Rwanda, Burundi and Tanzania. 2. Building capacity to negotiate with developed nations to participate in international trade on the basis of equity. This would be adopted to guide economic cooperation and integration of Africa in World Trade with major actors. This is not a call for equality in the sharing of international resources but just an advocacy for equity and cooperation in International Trade without war. Adam Smith was original and visionary to predict that ‘Third World Nations’ will achieve substantive levels of development through free trade and their interaction with ‘developed nations.’ African Trade in raw materials may be promoted upon the object of acquiring machinery/technology that enhance production of raw materials or semi—finished goods. But, this should be conducted upon African traditional knowledge of resource prospecting and utilization. 3. In order to consolidate the process of African Renewal, the main causes of political and

9）This questions Von Clausewitz’s assumption that “violence is the continuation of politics (development),” (Howard, pp. 83-103). Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA：Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in Uganda 121

economic setbacks in Africa should be transformed. It should be done by the stakeholders involved in the appropriation of resources, i.e., African states on the one hand, and western developed nations in part. The proposal for the restoration of national interests of western dominant states through cooperative institutional development is founded on the realization that poverty problems in Africa cannot be isolated from the devastating actions of War, Diseases such as HIV/AIDS, and Ignorance. These have their origins from western developed nations, which transform them as commercial enterprises in Africa. 4. Democratization of politics for Africa should be re-oriented to take roots within the foundation of African political traditions to avoid conflicts between the local settings and its original western form. 5. Available evidences indicate that the programme of economic cooperation would earn member African States within the Great Lakes Region alone about USD five hundred billion per year. For these reasons, the paper forwards a new line of thought as an African Initiative and or Perspective towards Conflict Management and Transformation.

Map 1: Extraction Oil Resources from Uganda by Western Dominant States

Source: Tullow Oil Company, United Kingdom, 2004.

. Specific Recommendations (i) Parliament should revisit the Dar Es Salaam 19-20 November 2004, Declaration on Peace, Security, Democracy and Development in the Great Lakes. (ii) The State should revisit the 1900 Buganda Agreement and Britain should take corrective measures for the damages she caused to country through the faulty agreement. (iii) The State should revisit the Bretton Woods Agreements and redefine interests with its attending institutions. 122 Agora: Journal of International Center for Regional Studies

References

International Conference on “Peace, Security, Democracy and Development in the Great Lakes Region: First Summit of Heads of State and Government, Dar Es Salaam, 19-20 November, 2004, Provisions: 1-82. African Report No. 45, Somalia: Countering Terrorism in a Failed State, International Crisis Group, Nairobi, May 23, 2002. Boateng, E.A., A Political Geography of Africa, Cambridge, University Press, 1978. Butanaziba, Lubega Yunus, The Making of Administrative and Economic Development Plans for Malaya, 1945-1965: The International Hand, (M.A) Thesis, Kuala Lumpur, and University Malaya, 1997. Cammack, Paul, et.al., Third World Politics: A Comparative Introduction, London, Macmillan Press Ltd., 1996. Clapham, Christopher, African Guerrillas, Oxford, James Currey, 1998.

Dominic, Johnson, Shifting Sands: Oil Exploration in the Rift Valley and the Congo Conflict: A Pole Institute Report, WWW.pole-insittute. Org Hansen, Bernt, Holger (ed.). Changing Uganda: The Dilemmas of Structural Adjustment and Revolutionary Change, London, James Currey, 1991. Hemingway, Ernest, A Fare Well to Arms, London, David Campbell Publishers Ltd., 1993. Hooper & Pirovet (1989). The Minority Rights Report. No. 66 Uganda Howard, Michael, (ed.), Clausewitz on War, London, David Campbell Publishers Ltd., 1993. Issues Paper- Workshop B: Round Table Report on Gender and People Centered Economic Development On the Thematic Area of the Role Peace and Security in the Great Lakes Regions, Mukono, 22nd March –25th March 2002. Kategeya E (1988). “The Genesis Evolution of NRM/NRA.” Weekly Topic, 29 January 1993, pp. 26- 27 Khiddu-Makubuya (1992). . The way forward in Democracy and Human rights in Africa. Baxjo University. Sweden. Kimonyo, Jean-Paul, “Causes of the Rwandan Genocide and Beyond, Center for Conflict Management”, Kigali, Unpublished. Lamwaka C., “Peace process in Uganda”, Unpublished manuscript. Thesis. Department of theology. Makerere University Uganda. Unpublished. Nama, Poku, Redefining Third World, London, Macmillan Press Ltd., 1998. Natukunda E. Women at war: A study of women’s involvement in war and its implications. Kampala. Makerere University. Daphane Eviator, “Spend $150 Billion Per Year To Cure World Poverty,” The New York Times Magazine, November 7, 2004, Section 6, pp. 46-49. Nyaba Adwork Peter, Politics of Liberation in Southern Sudan: An Insiders View, Kampala: Yunus Lubega BUTANAZIBA：Changing Faces of Commercial Wars in Uganda 123

Fountain Publishers, 1997. Ondoga Ori, Amaza, Museveni’s Long march from Guerrilla to Statesman, Kampala: Fountain Publishers, 1998. Pevear Richard and Volokhonsky, Larissa, (trans.), Crime and Punishment, London, David Campbell Publishers Ltd., 1993. Prunnier, Gerard, The Rwandan Crisis 1959-1994: A History of Genocide, Kampala: Fountain Publishers, 1995. Rodney, Walter, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Nairobi, East African Educational Publishers, 1989. Seftel, Adam, (ed.), Uganda: The Rise and Fall of Idi Amin: From the Pages DRUM, Lanseria: A Bailey’s African Photo Archives Production, 1994. Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations, London, David Campbell Publishers Ltd., 1991. Tolstoy, Leo, (trans.), War and Peace, Vol. 2., London, David Campbell Publishers Ltd., 1992. Walter Isaackson, A Biography: Kissinger, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1992.