Every liberation movement eventually faces two defining tests. The first is the struggle to capture power. The second, often more difficult, is building institutions strong enough to survive the departure of the person who led that struggle.
The National Resistance Movement (NRM) has long been associated with the leadership of President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni. But as the movement approaches the inevitable question of generational transition, it must confront a fundamental challenge: how does it preserve its identity, purpose and achievements beyond its founding leadership?
Mzee Museveni’s guidance on succession, as interpreted through the principle of institutionalisation, offers an important way of approaching this question. The emphasis should not be on identifying the individual who will succeed the founder, but on defining the unfinished tasks that the next generation of leaders must accomplish.
In simple terms, the question should not begin with who will lead? It should begin with what must be done?
This distinction is critical because succession politics can easily become a contest of personalities, ethnic interests, financial influence, factional loyalties and political alliances. When the debate centres on individuals before the movement has agreed on its mission, the danger is that personal ambitions begin to overshadow collective objectives.
That is how movements risk turning a leadership transition into an internal struggle for power.
An institutionalised movement takes a different approach. It establishes a clear mission, defines measurable objectives and develops systems through which leadership is identified, evaluated and renewed. The individual becomes a custodian of the mission rather than the owner of the movement.
This is the essence of institutionalisation: transferring loyalty from an individual to a shared national and political mission.
For the NRM, this calls for an honest examination of the historical tasks that have shaped its struggle and the work that remains unfinished.
Two major tasks can be identified as having been substantially accomplished: securing political independence and establishing democratic governance as a principle of the country’s political order. However, acknowledging these milestones should not mean pretending that every challenge associated with democracy and governance has been resolved. Institutions must continually be strengthened, protected and held accountable.
Beyond these milestones, three strategic tasks deserve particular attention as the movement considers its future.
The first is prosperity through a bigger market.
Africa’s economic potential cannot be fully realised while its markets remain fragmented, its productive capacity constrained and trade between countries limited by barriers. Economic integration is therefore not merely a diplomatic ambition. It is a practical development strategy.
A larger African market would create opportunities for producers, manufacturers, entrepreneurs and investors to reach more consumers, expand businesses and generate employment. It would also strengthen the continent’s capacity to build industries, retain more value from its natural resources and compete in the global economy.
For the NRM, the task is to make economic integration a practical priority, not simply a political slogan. The next generation of leaders must demonstrate how regional cooperation can translate into jobs, industrial growth, increased household incomes and improved living standards.
The second task is security through bigger unity.
No African country can afford to treat its security challenges as entirely isolated from those of its neighbours. Terrorism, organised crime, instability, external interference and regional conflicts often cross national borders. Addressing them requires cooperation, stronger regional institutions and, where politically feasible, deeper forms of political integration.
The argument for African unity is therefore also an argument for collective security and strategic independence.
A continent that works together can strengthen its ability to defend its interests, manage its challenges and negotiate with the rest of the world from a position of greater confidence. Political integration, including the possibility of federations where there is sufficient consensus, deserves serious discussion as part of this long-term vision.
The third task is unity through our shared African identity.
Economic and political integration cannot succeed through government agreements alone. They require people who see one another as partners in a common future.
Africa’s shared history, cultural connections and sense of brotherhood should become practical foundations for cooperation, particularly among young people. The next generation must be encouraged to see beyond national boundaries and appreciate the opportunities that come with belonging to a wider African community.
This means deliberately investing in cultural exchange, education, youth engagement and people-to-people relationships. African unity must become something people experience in their everyday lives, rather than an idea repeated at political gatherings.
These three tasks, prosperity, collective security and shared identity, provide a framework through which the NRM can assess its future leadership and institutional direction.
They also offer a more constructive basis for discussing succession. Instead of asking which individual has the strongest political connections, the greatest financial resources or the loudest supporters, the movement should ask who understands these tasks, who has demonstrated the ability to deliver and who can build institutions that will outlive their tenure.
Leadership should be measured by the capacity to advance the mission, not simply by proximity to the founder.
This does not mean that individuals are unimportant. Every institution requires capable leaders, and every political movement must have a legitimate process for choosing them. But leadership selection should be guided by agreed principles, transparent procedures, demonstrated ability and commitment to collective objectives.
The tasks should define the qualities required of the leader. The movement’s institutions should provide the framework for identifying and choosing that leader.
That is how succession becomes a process of renewal rather than a battle for inheritance.
It is also how a political movement can prepare its cadres and young people for responsibilities beyond the founding generation. They must be taught not merely to defend personalities, but to understand the historical mission, appreciate the unfinished work and develop the competence to deliver it.
Ultimately, the survival of the NRM should not depend on the continued presence of one individual. It should depend on the strength of its institutions, the clarity of its mission and the ability of successive generations to advance the objectives around which the movement was built.
A movement does not lose its way simply because its founder eventually leaves the stage. It loses its way when it forgets why it was established and abandons the tasks that gave it purpose.
The real test of institutionalisation, therefore, is whether the NRM can build a future in which leadership changes without the mission changing direction.
Protect the tasks, strengthen the institutions and allow the work to define the leadership required.
Because, in the final analysis, the WHAT must choose the WHO.