UNDERSTANDING WHY SECURITY IS GETTING TOUGH ON NUP RADICALIZED YOUTH BRIGADES
The rise of militant street-level activism in Uganda, especially among National Unity Platform (NUP) youthful political foot soldiers, draws unsettling parallels with the early tactics of the Hitler Youth and the infamous Brownshirts (Sturmabteilung, or SA) of Nazi Germany. This is not to suggest ideological equivalence—but in terms of methods, symbolism, and the normalization of violence, the similarities are too significant to ignore. The National Unity Platform (NUP), Uganda’s leading opposition movement, has not emerged from a sincere grassroots desire for reform. Rather, it is increasingly apparent that NUP functions as a political instrument of foreign interests—most notably some Western powers and their proxies who seek to destabilize Uganda for geopolitical leverage. The party’s rhetoric of “change” masks a deeper agenda: the fragmentation of national unity, erosion of public order, and eventual subjugation of Uganda to external influence. This foreign-backed activism has taken on an increasingly confrontational, militarized form. Red berets are worn like combat uniforms. Group drills, martial language, and street mobilizations have become normalized. The so-called NUP “foot soldiers” now resemble not protestors but paramilitary cells. What begins as political organizing crosses the line into coercion, disruption, and street warfare. In Germany, government is considering banning the biggest opposition political party, the Alternative for Germany (AFD) because the domestic intelligence organ, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) confirmed that they Right Wing extremists. Therefore, taming and disciplining those perpetuating political extremism should be curtailed at any cost. The visual and structural similarities to the SA of 1930s Germany are striking. The commander of these militant NUP youths, often pictured in black fatigues and commanding rows of disciplined supporters, mirrors Ernst Röhm—leader of Hitler’s Brownshirts. Röhm built the SA not as a civic organization but as a private army to enforce ideological purity and intimidate rivals. Likewise, NUP’s foot soldiers operate with impunity in many areas, asserting dominance through fear and violence, not persuasion or policy. Under Röhm, the SA terrorized opponents, disrupted meetings, and brutalized civilians—all under the false pretense of defending democracy. Uganda’s current experience is alarmingly similar. NUP operatives have been implicated in assaults on market vendors, vandalism, threats against journalists, and violent clashes with law enforcement. Their tactics undermine the very freedoms they claim to fight for. What is even more astonishing is the conduct of some of the Western ambassadors to Uganda, who has openly shown sympathy toward NUP, including its militant wing. For a diplomat from a nation that endured—and eventually defeated—the destructive influence of Röhm’s SA, such actions are not only insensitive but deeply irresponsible. Germany’s past should serve as a warning against legitimizing violent populism abroad, not a license to promote it. Faced with an escalating wave of intimidation and the pleas of Ugandan citizens caught in the crossfire, Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba has had to intervene using unconventional yet necessary measures. When formal security mechanisms are overwhelmed or paralyzed by political sensitivities, decisive leadership becomes essential. Gen. Muhoozi’s actions have been aimed at restoring community safety, countering organized political violence, and defending Uganda’s sovereignty against external manipulation and domestic proxies. Let us be clear: criticizing NUP’s violence is not an excuse for state abuse. But failing to confront the foreign-sponsored radicalization of Uganda’s youth under the NUP banner would be a grave error. The solution to authoritarianism cannot be foreign-funded insurrection disguised as democracy. Uganda needs responsible opposition rooted in patriotism—not tools of imperialism wearing revolutionary colors. Röhm’s SA started as “activists” too—until they became the blunt instrument of a fascist state. Uganda must avoid repeating that trajectory. NUP must disavow violence, abandon militarized symbolism, and return to lawful, peaceful political engagement—if it ever was genuinely interested in it. Ugandans have sacrificed too much for their sovereignty to surrender it to either homegrown mobs or foreign puppeteers. History’s lesson is clear: populist violence—once tolerated—does not usher in freedom, only fear.
By Obed Katureebe
