Mr Museveni is a highly skilled and experienced political operator, a military strategist unlike many we have seen before, who often approaches politics as a true Muyekera—a trait he himself has always seemed proud of.
When you are playing chess with him, be very careful which pieces he touches. Most likely, he is not making the move you see before you; he is already thinking three moves ahead.
We have made Dr. Lawrence Muganga's citizenship the headline issue, as though that is the real story. Yet Uganda has the External Security Organisation (ESO), the Internal Security Organisation (ISO), military intelligence and, from what we know, counter-intelligence structures within the Special Forces Command (SFC).
Can anyone seriously argue that there is a single name on the list of ministers—especially the new entrants to Cabinet—that reached that stage without being processed by one or all of those agencies?
In fact, aside from our own laziness in examining the matter, should the fact that Dr. Muganga was once picked up from his offices by security personnel over allegations of espionage not be the very reason he would have been thoroughly vetted and re-vetted before consideration for such an appointment? Do we even know how those allegations were resolved?
How and why would President Museveni settle on this particular nominee for the sensitive Internal Affairs docket of all ministries?
Let us also remember that when you remove a trusted four-star general from a ministry, you do not replace him with someone you have not scrutinised carefully. What was it that Gen. David Muhoozi could not do that Dr. Lawrence Muganga can?
It even appears there may have been a meeting between the President and his preferred minister before this deployment. We have all seen the photograph of President Museveni and Dr. Muganga together, with the President dressed in a military overcoat. What was discussed at that meeting? Was it a form of vetting? Was it about education and improving Victoria University? We simply do not know.
What we do know is that President Museveni knew everything there was to know about Dr. Muganga. By the time his pen placed that name on the Cabinet list, every issue now being raised had already been considered. He had undoubtedly consulted his legal advisers and mapped out the path toward the outcome he wanted.
The challenge is that many people have fallen victim to an inability to understand how Mr. Museveni plays his political chess.
Years ago, President Museveni nominated Hon. Aidah Erios Nantaba for a ministerial position. It was a controversial appointment that did not sit well in some quarters. The then Speaker, Rt. Hon. Rebecca Kadaga, chaired the appointments process and was uncompromising in her handling of the vetting exercise. Kadaga rejected Nantaba and effectively sent her back to the appointing authority.
Mr. Museveni remained silent.
What followed was a standoff between the Executive and Parliament. Nantaba and others appointed at the same time did not take office, resulting in a deadlock that lasted for roughly two months. Eventually, Nantaba returned for vetting and Museveni ultimately got his way.
There is, therefore, a precedent.
My reading of the situation is that President Museveni will remain quiet and allow Jacob Oboth-Oboth's Parliament to find a solution to what has become a challenge of its own making, because all indications suggest that Museveni wants his man.
I am not sure the new Speaker wishes to begin his tenure by denying President Museveni his preferred choice. Does he?
Given the precedent highlighted above, there will likely be another sitting of the Appointments Committee to reconsider this nomination. By the time swearing-in ceremonies begin, this issue may well have been politically managed.
I also suspect that a way will be found to manage the vetting concerns surrounding the Minister of Information. She is not an ordinary Cabinet member and may well be among the most senior figures in the new Cabinet, second only to a few key appointments, including the Minister of Water and Environment.
Lastly, I am not entirely sure why we are comfortable allowing someone to lead a university but uncomfortable with the idea of that same person serving as a minister. After all, a minister is a political appointee, supported by technical officers who handle much of the day-to-day implementation.
Are we really saying that serving as a minister in Uganda is more consequential than leading a university and shaping an entire generation of Ugandans?
If so, then we have a serious problem with our priorities.
Dr. Muganga was born in Mukono, and it is there that his late mother is buried. There are many Ugandans like him who, largely for economic and professional reasons, have acquired other citizenships. What is so difficult to understand about that reality?
Should we deny such people the opportunity to serve their country when they possess skills, knowledge and experience that could add value to the nation?
My answer is simple: no, we should not—at least not if we are serious about national development.