February 17, 2011
By Kenneth C. Brill and Nate Haken
The Fund for Peace Commentary

Elections are intended as a renewal of the social contract between the people and their government. But they can also violate that contract. In Africa, the 2011 election calendar is packed, adding to the hopes and fears of people across the content. So while the international spotlight is currently focused on the drama playing out in Egypt, a larger drama may be about to unfold elsewhere on the continent.

This is the year of the African election, with national-level elections scheduled in sixteen countries between January and December. Apart from Egypt, Central African Republic, Nigeria, Liberia, Djibouti, Benin, Niger, Madagascar, Chad, Cape Verde, Gambia, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Uganda all have national level elections this year. Some may be contested with force, not just ballots; others will be peaceful and possibly transformative. While democracy requires much more than a single election, good elections support democracy, development and security. Bad elections, including those whose results are overturned, can destabilize entire regions.

One of the most important early elections in 2011 is the presidential election set for February 18 in Uganda. Like Egypt, Uganda plays a constructive role in its region. But also like Egypt’s Mubarak, President Yoweri Museveni has ruled Uganda for decades. Early in his tenure, he was widely praised for bringing stability to most of the country and guiding Uganda through a period of difficult economic reform. But his popularity has been waning and he has won the last three elections with a steadily declining percentage of the vote. This year, for the first time, he may have a truly competitive election, at least in the first round. Museveni faces credible opposition candidates from different parts of the country. Further, he alienated Uganda’s largest ethnic group (the Baganda) when government security forces killed dozens of them in 2009 and 2010 riots against the ruling party. As a result, their traditional leader is widely perceived to be encouraging a vote for Kizza Besigye, the leading opposition candidate. Finally, northern Uganda, which is now rid of the terrorist group, the Lord’s Resistance Army, is more assertive in claiming its place in the nation’s political life, a change that could work against Museveni (though opinion polls have thrown some doubt on that proposition.)

While the European Union is sending election observers, many in the opposition expect Museveni and the ruling party to stack the deck to avoid a run-off. Dr. Besigye and his supporters are planning to announce their own vote count before the official Electoral Commission results are known, to pressure EU election observers into verifying the Electoral Commission’s results. Thus, with a competitive election and Uganda’s history of ethnic group grievances, the stage is set for post-election claims, counter-claims and potential violence. Indeed Dr. Besigye has recently been quoted as saying, “I will not go to the court of law if these elections are rigged. It is useless. I will seek the court of public opinion.” Lest anyone miss his point, he said, “I will support a popular protest against an illegitimate decision of the election.”

The ongoing turbulence in the wake of the Ivory Coast’s presidential elections underscores that whether electoral change produces progress or problems depends on how elections are conducted and whether their verdicts are respected. And two popular uprisings in North Africa this year indicate it is becoming increasingly difficult for leaders to rule without the consent of their people.

It is important, therefore, for Uganda’s future and East African stability and prosperity that the February 18 elections produce a constructive result based on a fair and transparent process, rather than the ethnic divisions and violence that could be produced by manipulated results, or allegations of manipulation. The United States, European Union countries and the African Union should make clear to President Museveni, as well as to his challengers, that they will not accept the results of a manipulated election.

Ugandans, like people the world over, have been watching and listening to the news. They will expect their votes to be counted – and to count. We hope President Museveni has also been paying attention, and that his challengers recognize the wisdom of restraint. If all of Uganda’s leaders act responsibly, then Uganda’s elections will advance its peoples’ future and East African stability – and set a positive example for African elections that will follow later in the year.