President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni has praised the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) and other security agencies for their exemplary role in maintaining peace and stability during the recent general elections, which facilitated a secure democratic process. Speaking at the 45th Tarehe Sita Anniversary commemoration in Kabale Municipality, the President emphasized that their efforts have not only safeguarded the nation but have also laid the groundwork for accelerated socio-economic transformation. This includes significant infrastructure developments, such as new and expanded airports in the southwestern region.

The event, held at the National Teachers’ College (NTC) grounds under the theme “Defending the Gains of the Revolution and Honouring the Sacrifices of the Freedom Fighters: A Call for National Unity, Peace, and Socio-Economic Transformation,” marked the historic launch of Uganda’s Liberation War on February 6, 1981. On that day, 43 National Resistance Army patriots, armed with only 27 rifles, attacked Kabamba barracks, sparking the revolutionary path that has shaped modern Uganda.

President Museveni, accompanied by First Lady and Minister of Education and Sports Maama Janet Museveni, praised the security forces for neutralizing attempts to disrupt the elections. “I want to salute the UPDF and other security forces for the robust security they provided during the recent elections. They did a commendable job,” he stated. He noted that their quick responses thwarted troublemakers, allowing Ugandans to conduct successful and peaceful polls. The President also extended special thanks to the people of Kigezi and the nation for their overwhelming support of the National Resistance Movement (NRM) during the elections.

In a forward-looking address, Museveni linked the revolutionary legacy of Tarehe Sita to Uganda’s current progress toward becoming a high middle-income country. He emphasized the importance of national unity and wealth creation, assuring residents of Kigezi that the region stands to benefit significantly from tourism, commercial agriculture, and manufacturing.

Central to his vision for the region’s future is a bold initiative to improve aviation infrastructure to unlock economic potential. The President confirmed that Kisoro Airport is currently being expanded to better serve visitors to the area’s renowned attractions. He also announced plans for an additional international airport in the Kigezi sub-region, specifically noting land offered by businessman Amos Nzeyi in Kabale District, dedicated to enhancing tourism. This new facility aims to facilitate direct flights for tourists, eliminating the need for long road journeys from Entebbe.

Furthermore, Museveni revealed ambitious plans for a major new international airport in Mbarara City, focused on trade and business. He described this project as a game-changer that would surpass Entebbe International Airport in scale and capacity, enabling direct links particularly with partners in East Asia (such as China) and South America (including Brazil and Argentina). With partnerships already in discussion, this development positions southwestern Uganda as a strategic hub for international commerce, reducing travel times and attracting investment.

These airport initiatives signal a transformative phase for Uganda’s economy. By decentralizing air connectivity beyond Entebbe, the government aims to stimulate regional growth, enhance export opportunities in agriculture and minerals, and make tourism more accessible in areas rich in natural wonders like volcanoes, lakes, and national parks.

The ceremony also featured remarks from key figures. Defence Minister Hon. Jacob Oboth-Oboth congratulated the President on his re-election, while Chief of Defence Forces Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba pledged the UPDF’s continued loyalty to advance socio-economic goals and regional security. Gen. Muhoozi affirmed the country’s overall peace, describing the recent elections as the most decisive and trouble-free since 1996.

Awards were presented to distinguished officers for their contributions to liberation and national development, including the inaugural CDF Award for outstanding junior officer Lt. Moses Odongo, who received Shs 10 million and a certificate.

As Uganda commemorates 45 years since the spark of its revolution, President Museveni’s remarks underscore a commitment to building on past sacrifices. With peace secured and infrastructure such as these new airports on the horizon, the focus now shifts to translating stability into prosperity; opening the skies for tourism in Kigezi and trade across the southwest, driving the nation toward its high middle-income ambitions.

In an era of deepening global interconnectedness, nations like Uganda can draw critical insights from the political turmoil unfolding in the United States. The U.S., once hailed as a beacon of democracy, is now gripped by extreme partisan division that threatens its social fabric and governance. This division manifests in a vicious cycle: one party loses power, incites unrest, implements polarizing policies upon regaining it, and repeats the process. As Ugandans, we must heed these warnings to avoid similar pitfalls, particularly the role of biased media in fueling conflict. By examining the U.S. experience, we can prioritize national unity over unchecked individualism, ensuring media accountability and responsible discourse for the greater good.

The U.S. political landscape operates in a repetitive loop driven by partisan animosity. When Democrats (often aligned with left-leaning ideologies) lose elections, they have historically mobilized protests and legal challenges that escalate into riots or widespread unrest. For instance, following Donald Trump’s 2016 victory, opposition framed as “resistance” included mass demonstrations and accusations of illegitimacy. When Republicans regain power; as with Trump’s return in 2024, they confront these tactics head-on, implementing reforms that provoke further backlash. Democrats then regain office, enact policies perceived as radical (such as expansive social programs or lax immigration enforcement), leading to public disillusionment and economic strain. Inflation surges, crime rates climb in certain areas, and cultural shifts alienate moderates, paving the way for Republican resurgence. This pattern has intensified over decades, eroding trust in institutions and fostering a zero-sum mentality where compromise is rare.

A key driver of this cycle is affective polarization, where Americans increasingly view the opposing party not just as wrong, but as morally corrupt or dangerous. Causes include generational shifts, with younger voters leaning left on social issues while older ones prioritize economic conservatism; geographic sorting, where liberals cluster in urban areas and conservatives in rural ones; and the rise of identity politics, amplifying divisions along racial, cultural, and class lines. The effects are profound: legislative gridlock, as seen in repeated government shutdowns; eroded democratic norms, with events like the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot highlighting how rhetoric can spill into violence; and a public health toll, including increased stress and social isolation.

Central to America’s division is the mainstream media, which wields immense influence but often prioritizes narrative over neutrality. Studies from UCLA indicate that a significant portion estimated at around 80-90% based on analyses of major outlets leans left, with 18 out of 20 prominent sources scoring liberal in bias assessments. Networks like CNN and MSNBC exemplify this, contributing to what many perceive as a coordinated assault on conservative figures, particularly Donald Trump. This bias didn’t emerge overnight; it stems from a historical shift where journalists increasingly identify as Democrats, leading to skewed coverage that demonizes opponents.

The origins trace back to Trump’s 2016 campaign, when his outsider status and blunt rhetoric clashed with media elites. Coverage of Trump has been overwhelmingly negative; about 92% in his first 100 days of the second term, according to media watchdogs like the Media Research Center focusing on scandals while downplaying achievements. Examples abound: Trump’s “Muslim ban” was labeled xenophobic, yet similar travel restrictions under prior administrations went unchallenged. This selective outrage extends to policy critiques, where media outlets amplify progressive voices while marginalizing conservative ones, creating echo chambers that radicalize audiences.

Immigration policy vividly illustrates media double standards. Previous presidents, including Bill Clinton (who deported over 12 million), George W. Bush (nearly 2 million formal removals), and Barack Obama (over 3 million, earning the moniker “Deporter-in-Chief”), enforced strict border measures without widespread media condemnation. CNN even embedded reporters in ICE raids under Obama, portraying them positively as necessary enforcement, with a 2016 segment granting “exclusive access” to operations in Chicago.

Contrast this with Trump: His deportation efforts, though fewer than Obama’s (around 2 million), were vilified as cruel and racist. Under Biden, policies like expanded parole programs and reduced interior enforcement led to a surge, with unauthorized immigrants reaching a record 14 million by 2023 and over 8 million encounters at the border. This influx strained resources, contributing to crime spikes in some cities and public backlash that helped Trump’s 2024 reelection on a deportation platform. Yet, media outlets and Democrats framed Trump’s plans as “mass deportations” inciting violence, stoking protests and state-level resistance (e.g., sanctuary cities refusing ICE cooperation). When confrontations occur such as arrests turning violent, the blame shifts to Republicans, fueling more unrest and electoral shifts.

This propaganda tactic follows a pattern: Lose elections, amplify outrage through media, incite resistance, blame opponents for fallout, regain power, implement unpopular policies (e.g., “woke” ideologies or unchecked migration), alienate the populace, and lose again. The result? Deepened division, with families fractured and communities polarized.

Uganda, with its own history of political transitions and media influence, must learn from America’s mistakes to foster sustainable development. Media is a vital communication tool but can become a society’s worst enemy when it peddles bias over facts. To prevent division, Uganda should enforce stricter regulations: Revoke licenses for outlets spreading negative propaganda, as unchecked narratives erode trust. Social media moderation is essential, holding users accountable for speech that incites violence or insurrection echoing global calls to curb misinformation without stifling debate.

For societal harmony, individual freedoms must sometimes yield to collective well-being. Criticizing government is healthy, but it should include constructive solutions, not mere provocation. By limiting divisive rhetoric and promoting balanced reporting, Uganda can avoid the U.S.’s fate, building a cohesive nation focused on progress rather than perpetual conflict.

The 2026 general elections in Uganda marked a significant turning point for the National Unity Platform (NUP), transitioning from a remarkable rise to a noticeable political decline. While there remains a strong desire for reform among many Ugandans, NUP failed to harness that energy due to several strategic miscalculations and a fundamental disconnect from the realities faced by the majority of the population. This summary explores the institutional and tactical failures that contributed to the party’s diminished influence in the current political landscape.

Central to NUP’s struggles was an increasingly rigid internal culture, which many observers characterized as hostile to criticism. By adopting an “all-or-nothing” approach, the party leadership often isolated potential allies and marginalized moderate voices within the opposition. This ideological intolerance fostered an environment where any deviation from party lines was viewed as a betrayal, ultimately hindering the formation of broad coalitions necessary to challenge a well-entrenched incumbent. Rather than building an inclusive movement, the party retreated into an echo chamber that valued loyalty over strategic growth.

Additionally, the party faced a significant “vision gap” that alienated pragmatic voters. While the “People Power” movement and the “New Uganda” brand effectively mobilized urban youth through emotive rhetoric and slogans like “Uganda is bleeding,” they struggled to provide a clear governance roadmap. Throughout the 2026 election cycle, NUP was unable to move beyond the language of protest. To the middle class and rural agricultural communities, the party appeared to lack a credible manifesto on issues such as debt management, infrastructure, food security, and digital transformation. This absence of a coherent governing philosophy left a void that voters filled with skepticism, opting for the predictability of the status quo over the uncertainty of undefined change.

The decline was further evidenced by the quality of candidates NUP fielded for parliamentary seats. The 2026 results revealed a significant decrease in the party’s legislative footprint, which resulted from prioritizing social media popularity over professional competence in candidate selection. Many of the MPs elected in previous cycles were perceived as ineffective, lacking the legislative skill to influence policy or provide a serious alternative to the NRM’s parliamentary caucus. This perceived incompetence led many Ugandans to conclude that NUP was not yet prepared for the complexities of governance.

Externally, the party’s reliance on international validation proved to be a tactical error. By continuously appealing to Western organizations like the UN and EU, as well as figures like Donald Trump and Marco Rubio, to intervene and remove the newly elected President, NUP inadvertently conveyed a sense of domestic weakness. Many Ugandans viewed this internationalist strategy with suspicion, interpreting it as an invitation for foreign interference in sovereign affairs. This allowed their opponents to successfully frame the party as a vessel for external interests rather than a homegrown movement rooted in Uganda.

Ultimately, the 2026 elections demonstrated that catchy slogans and a strong digital presence cannot replace institutional depth. NUP lacked the grassroots organizational structure necessary to protect the vote and manage a national campaign. By prioritizing “facts over feelings,” the Ugandan electorate sent a clear message: the majority do not align with a movement that lacks a clear roadmap and refuses to engage with constructive dissent. Without a radical shift towards professionalization and intellectual humility, the party’s performance in 2026 may be remembered as the moment the movement lost its way.