The diversion of the iron sheets meant for Karamoja is a perfect example of how complex development is to understand and even achieve.

There is an amazing Andy Singer cartoon depicting development that I love, demonstrating the before and after of development. It shows that before development, there are trees in the vicinity, there is a close neat family of mother, father and two children holding hands, living in a small grass-thatched house and the birds are literally speaking to each other. 

The after development scene is of a man sitting on one side of the house with a big bottle of alcohol and the son on the other side smoking from a large pipe, while the daughter is dejected and alone. The mother is asking those in development to spare change.  There are of course big buildings and other signs of modernity. 

In many ways, the pursuit of development rarely keeps people at the centre. It is thus easy, to divert resources meant for development, or to think of development projects that injure people instead.

Picture this, someone sat down and conceived the idea that the biggest development challenge for Karamoja is perhaps inability to afford iron sheets. I am assuming this, considering the issue at hand is iron sheets. Billions spent to prove to the region that we want them to develop too. 

Perhaps this way, we can remind them to vote wisely if there are shinning sheets in the sky to demonstrate our commitment to them. Perhaps someone was flying over Karamoja and wondered how these people can be taken out of poverty, because the little grass-thatched houses may represent poverty at its worst. With compassion, we decide that we must do something. In this day and age, it must be embarrassing to say we are a middle-income country when an entire region depends on grass to roof their houses.  With all the commitment to climate justice, where every strand of grass matters, iron sheets would be great. You make the donors happy and you can also make the voters loyal. Then we can ensure every household has electricity, running water and other such amenities. 

Then the children need not come to Kampala streets anymore, because the city will be with them. So Karamoja must develop. To depart from some past leaders who simply gave up and said ‘we cannot wait for Karamoja to develop’, this is a great departure. We must not leave anyone behind.

Yet, Uganda might be an interesting case study on the elusive quest for development. Anyone who has watched our leaders go about the business of pursuing the middle income status and chasing poverty out of Uganda for the last few decades, knows we have done our best.

Even if the iron sheets were the best idea for Karamoja’s development, that it ended up in the hands of people who do not need them, is the best demonstration of how often and in what ways development is delayed or diverted.

We must wonder if we know what development we are pursuing. Judging by the things that preoccupy our national conversations, it is difficult to pin our development aspiration despite policy goals that make sense, because our actions say otherwise.

Critics of donor aid often speak of ‘giving a man fish as opposed to giving them fishing nets’. There are many things we do in the name of development, especially moving the poor out of poverty, which is what development is often reduced to, but which disempower people even more. Take the case of women, we have been doing a lot to involve women in development, and several decades later, we are told, we need probably 300 years to have meaningful gains, and that even the current gains are rolling back.

Aung San Suu Kyi in 1995 put it very well, that the question of empowerment is central to both culture and development. It decides who has the means of imposing on a society the view of what constitutes culture and development.

If one group, say men, are likely to be the ones making those decisions, even when women are in their midst, it will for sure. Put the women as distributors and at the centre of the controversies that might ensue in the case of diversion, such as the ones of iron sheets or even institutional money. And women, are more likely to be vigorously interrogated than men who might do similar things.

How do we empower people? By giving them iron sheets, free milk in schools, free money, cows and goats? Should the political class decide what constitutes culture and development?

Unless we are able to clarify what development means for us, and how best to achieve it, we will continue to discuss the missed opportunities for development, despite our best intentions and doing our best in the pursuit of development. We may even replicate Andy Singer’s cartoon message.

Ms Maractho (PhD) is the director of Africa Policy Centre and senior lecturer at Uganda Christian University.                       

[email protected]