More Related News
BUSINESS NEWS
Sports News
When Power Must Prove Itself Again
History often presents leaders with two tests. The first is the struggle to acquire power. The second, and perhaps more difficult, is the discipline required to remain effective after power has been secured.
For President Yoweri Museveni, the first test was passed with remarkable success. Since assuming power in 1986, his government presided over the reconstruction of a country emerging from years of political instability, economic collapse, and civil conflict. Roads were built, public institutions were restored, the economy stabilized, and investor confidence gradually returned.
Ironically, many Ugandans today look back at the early years of the National Resistance Movement (NRM) with a degree of nostalgia. It was a period when the state's developmental agenda appeared clearer, corruption was treated with greater severity, and government officials generally operated under a stricter culture of accountability.
The contrast between that period and the years that followed the introduction of multiparty politics raises important questions about governance, political competition, and national development.
The Developmental State Before Multiparty Politics
The first decade of the NRM administration was characterized by what political scientists would describe as a developmental state.
Uganda's tax base was relatively small compared to contemporary levels. Revenue collection mechanisms were still developing, foreign investment remained limited, and many sectors of the economy were recovering from years of decline. Yet despite these constraints, significant progress was visible.
Major trunk roads were rehabilitated. Public institutions regained functionality. Universal Primary Education was introduced. Macroeconomic stability improved. Inflation was brought under control. Uganda's international standing recovered significantly.
What made this possible was not merely the availability of resources but rather political leadership intensely focused on state reconstruction.
The government at the time faced little organized political competition. As a result, much of its energy was directed toward governance and implementation rather than continuous electoral mobilization.
Corruption: The Difference Between Then and Now
Another distinguishing characteristic of the early NRM years was the perception that corruption carried greater risks.
Public officials understood that misconduct could attract swift political consequences. Government rhetoric against corruption was accompanied by visible disciplinary measures.
Over time, however, public perception changed.
As political competition intensified following the return of multiparty politics, critics argue that political survival increasingly became the central concern of the ruling establishment.
Electoral campaigns became more expensive. Political loyalties became more valuable. Maintaining support networks required extensive resource mobilization.
In such an environment, allegations frequently emerged that political considerations sometimes overshadowed accountability concerns.
Whether entirely accurate or not, many Ugandans gradually developed the belief that corruption was being tolerated provided those involved remained politically useful to the ruling establishment.
This perception alone damaged public confidence in state institutions.
The Multiparty Dilemma
The introduction of multiparty politics was intended to deepen democracy, increase accountability, and improve governance.
Yet Uganda's experience demonstrates that multiparty politics can also generate unintended consequences.
Competition for power demands constant campaigning. Political actors spend enormous energy responding to opponents, defending public narratives, and preparing for future elections.
For President Museveni, the rise of formidable opposition figures such as Kizza Besigye transformed the political landscape.
For the first time since 1986, the President faced sustained and organized political pressure.
Critics argue that this shift gradually redirected government attention from long-term developmental planning toward political management.
Instead of development becoming the primary instrument for securing legitimacy, political mobilization increasingly became the dominant strategy.
The result was a perception among sections of the population that development slowed while politics intensified.
The Emergence of Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba
Against this backdrop emerged Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba, whose growing influence within the state has generated both admiration and controversy.
Supporters view him as representing new energy within government.
Unlike many political actors whose primary focus appears electoral, Gen. Muhoozi is often portrayed as emphasizing execution, delivery, and visible results.
His growing involvement in national conversations has coincided with an apparent acceleration of strategic infrastructure projects across the country.
Whether this relationship is causal or coincidental remains open to debate. However, the perception among many observers is increasingly clear: government agencies appear under greater pressure to perform.
The Military Engineering Revolution
Perhaps the most visible shift has been the growing role of military engineering formations in national development.
For years, public construction projects frequently suffered from delays, inflated costs, and allegations of corruption. Projects that should have taken months often stretched into years.
Today, however, military engineering units are increasingly participating in strategic infrastructure projects.
Supporters argue that the military introduces discipline, efficiency, accountability, and urgency often lacking in conventional procurement systems.
Road projects that previously stalled are advancing at a faster pace. Government implementation timelines appear tighter. Public expectations have risen accordingly.
The involvement of military engineers has also demonstrated that state institutions can achieve rapid results when political will aligns with administrative discipline.
The Oil Sector Pressure
Another notable development is the intensified activity surrounding Uganda's emerging petroleum industry.
The country's oil ambitions have entered a more decisive phase.
Associated road networks, industrial infrastructure, and supporting facilities are being developed with greater urgency than many Ugandans have previously witnessed.
The strategic importance of oil revenues has created pressure for faster implementation and improved coordination among government agencies.
Here again, proponents of Gen. Muhoozi's influence argue that the state's operational culture appears increasingly focused on delivery rather than bureaucracy.
Stadiums as Symbols of a New Urgency
Perhaps no sector better illustrates this transformation than sports infrastructure.
For decades, Ugandans became accustomed to delayed public projects and endless promises.
Today, however, several major sports facilities have either been completed, rehabilitated, or significantly advanced.
The renovation of Mandela National Stadium, the modernization of Nakivubo Stadium, progress on Akii-Bua Stadium, and the construction of Hoima City Stadium collectively represent a level of infrastructure momentum rarely seen in recent decades.
Projects that once seemed destined for perpetual delay are now visibly progressing.
For ordinary citizens, what matters is not which office receives credit but whether results are delivered.
The Rule of Law Question
Yet this emerging narrative is not without complications.
Some critics contend that the growing influence of military figures in civilian development raises important constitutional questions.
Democratic governance requires institutions to operate within clearly defined legal frameworks.
Efficiency alone cannot become a substitute for constitutionalism.
The challenge, therefore, is balancing rapid implementation with respect for democratic principles, civilian oversight, and the rule of law.
A state must not only build roads and stadiums; it must also preserve institutional legitimacy.
Development without accountability creates risks just as accountability without development creates frustrations.
Conclusion
Uganda today appears to be experiencing renewed developmental urgency. Whether driven by oil-sector pressures, military discipline, political succession dynamics, or broader government reforms, the results are increasingly visible on the ground.
The deeper lesson may be that President Museveni's most productive years were those in which governance took precedence over political survival.
If Gen. Muhoozi's emergence has indeed contributed to restoring that culture of urgency, then many Ugandans will welcome the results.
History may ultimately judge him not by political rhetoric but by whether he successfully revives the discipline, execution, and developmental focus that characterized the most productive years of the NRM revolution.
For nations, progress is not measured by promises.
It is measured by roads completed, institutions strengthened, corruption restrained, and opportunities created for future generations.
Those remain the standards by which both father and son will be remembered.
Author's Biography
Evan Sande Ndahura is a Ugandan political and legal commentator, columnist, poet, and social justice advocate whose writings focus on governance, constitutionalism, democracy, and the political economy of power in Africa.
He is widely published on issues of judicial accountability, electoral justice, human rights, and institutional reform, with particular emphasis on Uganda's political and legal systems.
Ndahura writes from a Pan-African critical perspective, interrogating the failures of state institutions and the lived realities of ordinary citizens under entrenched systems of power.
He believes that Africa's liberation will ultimately be achieved through the power of the pen rather than the gun.