Learning what? – About Richard Todwong’s interview on the 105th anniversary of the CPC

Richard Todwong, the NRM’s General Secretary, gave Nelson Kiva an interview on the 105th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China for the New Vision from 21st July 2026. Even the Chinese embassy in Uganda featured it on their official website¹.

This interview shows the hypocrisy of the NRM very well. How?

In the beginning Todwong says:

“There are many things we can learn from the Communist Party of China. Communism, as a system of govemance, traces its origins to Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto, which emphasised using the factors of production in a way that enables people to benefit equitably.”²

It is true, Marxism sees the productive forces (which Todwong mistakenly calls “factors of production” here) as the fundamental basis of society and social development and that communism fights for the people benefiting from it. But where does the CPC of today or the NRM do anything into this direction? I have already shown last December the capitalist and even imperialist character of today’s China³. Everyone living in Uganda or even just visiting the country with open eyes sees that Uganda is under Chinese economic control (with Indian imperialism in the second place). Todwong closes his eyes completely on this matter.

He instead says:

“Chinese investment has made an enormous contribution to Uganda’s economic transformation.”⁴

It is true that Chinese investments contribute to Uganda’s industrial growth, as Todwong later states. But it is very unbalanced and could have been also achieved when the NRM government didn’t privatize Uganda’s national industries during the 90s but instead had developed them further like it was pursued under Obote’s two governments. The same applies to the employment question and infrastructure construction.

Todwong sees no problems in Chinese capital inflow for Uganda’s independence. Instead he even endorses it even further:

“We encourage Chinese investors to deepen their presence in Uganda by investing more in industrialisation, manufacturing, agriculture and service delivery.”⁵

This is a completely comprador-bourgeois mindset! The thinking behind it is that Uganda would be incapable to first develop on its own and second that economic dependence would not affect national independence.

Even the NRM itself receives cadre training by the CPC, as Todwong admits⁶. Back in 2023 the CPC helped the NRM to open up an Ideological Orientation School⁷. The NRM’s ideology is formally vaguely based on social-democracy⁸. It has never been Marxism as some journalists from the West used to claim during the 80s. Museveni claimed several times during the 80s publicly that the NRM is not communist⁹. Besigye, back then still a high-ranking NRM official and army commander of the NRA, said on 17th July 1988 in a speech during a state visit by Nyerere to Uganda:

“There was a debate because there are some people saying: Ah, you are taking our people teaching them communism! Teaching them this, teaching them what? Marxism! But finally they have realized that this is not true.”¹⁰

This is what makes the turn to the CPC for ideological guidance even more obscure, even though it is not on an actual Marxist course anymore since 1978 when the Reform and Opening Up policy was implemented.

Museveni used to stress that he would not take sides – neither in the Sino-Soviet Split nor in the East-West confrontation in history and today. The close cooperation with the CPC shows that Museveni’s NRM has taken sides, just like the participation of Uganda in the Belt and Road Initiative by China.

Actually, Museveni already had good relations with the CPC under Deng Xiaoping’s leadership as a talk between both from 23rd March 1989 proves.

Deng said towards Museveni:

“I agree that you do not institute socialism immediately after a successful revolution. I have told quite a few African friends that they should not be hasty about establishing socialism. They should not pursue a closed policy either, because that is not the way to develop. You are right in this respect.”¹¹

Just like Deng’s policy of Reform and Opening Up meant to pursue the path of capitalism connected with privatizations and inflow of foreign capital, Museveni pursued a similar policy in Uganda but from a far lower point of economic development and far smaller size of the national economy.

If the NRM took over anything from the CPC in history, it was not Marxism-Leninism-Maoism but Dengism. That’s the only conclusion that can be made from this statement by Todwong:

“The NRM values the lessons we continue learning from the CPC, particularly in governance, organisation and development planning.”¹²

When the revisionists look up to the CPC they should be pushed with their noses on the fact that it long ceased to be a Marxist party endorsing socialism but instead partners with reactionary parties discouraging socialism. Otherwise it wouldn’t have such close inter-party ties with the NRM.

The NRM is just following the path of the Dengist CPC. What Uganda truly needs is a communist party being guided by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and continuing the socialist path in Uganda pioneered by Obote.

This party is the Communist League of Uganda.