I read in the papers last week that the American Ambassador in Kampala made comments about longevity in power of the President. This and what I read in the papers recently that Secretary Hilary Clinton is to report to Congress on Uganda's electoral process, is big brother business.

I have read about elections carried out under the guidance of America in Afghanistan and Iraq. In the first elections held in Iraq after the fall of Sadam, I recall reading an article in the Guardian that a week before the elections, the voters didn't know the candidates for fear of terrorist attacks on the candidates. But when eventually elections were held, they were hailed by America. If that happened in a country like Uganda, I don't know what madam Clinton would report.

It's true that Uganda needs a free and fair election. However, this shouldn't be done to please Americans but Ugandans. On longevity, what is it? When the liberals in Japan stayed in power for over 50 years since World War II until they were replaced recently, was that longevity? Is longevity about an individual leader or a system? I have seen both Democrats and Republicans working under successive president. In the recent Bush administration, many people, including Bush Snr., had worked in the Reagan administration. In the Obama administration, many were in the Clinton government. Is democracy about changing a leader and leaving systems intact?

What people in the Western have to appreciate is that democracy is a process. They shouldn't compare their democracies which are centuries old with ours that are decades old. The history of democracy in the West shows that they have gone through what many African countries are going through. In the 1840s, there were revolutions in most of Europe.

Italy and Germany only came into being about 250 years ago following the unification of some principalities in Europe (in 1861 to make Italy and in 1871 to make Germany). Germany later split between East and West Germany only to be reunited recently. What happened to a country once called Prussia? It's no longer on the world map. As for France, it's now a fifth republic. From the French revolution through the Napoleonic wars, the first up to the fifth republic was a period of wars which later consolidated the current stability in France.

The US, which is now monitoring Ugandan elections, went through both a the war of liberation against Britain and a civil war in the 19th Century. If you read about how the Americans solved the land issues between those who came from Europe and the natives, it's no different from what most African countries have gone through. The Tomhawk rights on land similar to the Bibanja tenants in Uganda. People who had claim on land but had no titles for the land. Those rights had to be accepted in the legal systems in all the states. All this is explained in De Soto's book, The Mystery of Capital. The West was able to settle after the tribulations it went through. I am convinced that Africa will also settle and stabilise.

The West has been able to maintain its big brother watch on Africa simply because they are rich and many African countries are poor. But the situation is now changing.

With China and India transforming from poor to rich countries with an increasing middle class, Africa will sell its food to a bigger market. Uganda, for instance, has discovered oil. So the big brother watch will soon be history.

Mr Byaruhanga is a special presidential assistant on political affairs