Preservation, Sacrifice, and the Long Game in a Neocolonial World
This essay advances more than a defense of a political leader. It presents a comprehensive worldview; a theory of power, resistance, and temporality within the Global South. At its center is the Sovereign’s Dilemma: the choice between immediate integration into an extractive global order and a risky, long-term strategy of resource preservation aimed at future sovereignty. The argument progresses from political economy to grand strategy, ultimately offering a stark interpretation of contemporary geopolitics.
Two Developmental Paths
The piece begins by outlining two divergent trajectories for resource-rich states.
The first is exemplified by the Democratic Republic of Congo: vast mineral wealth exploited through foreign capital and local intermediaries, generating global value while leaving citizens in poverty. This “extractionist” model reinforces structural dependency and national weakness. The second path, attributed to Uganda under President Yoweri Museveni, is one of calculated restraint. Resources such as oil, gold, and uranium are not relinquished immediately but preserved until the state can negotiate from a position of strength. The question “for whom are these resources preserved?” is answered not with specific beneficiaries but with a vision of a future Uganda capable of determining the terms of its own development.
The Geopolitical Arena: Narratives and Punishment
The argument then situates Uganda’s approach within a wider pattern: nations resisting established global economic structures are frequently subjected to narrative warfare, sanctions, and destabilization.
Venezuela’s attempt to transact oil outside the dominant financial architecture drew sanctions, regime-change efforts, and delegitimizing labels. Iran’s assertion of sovereignty over its energy sector produced similar consequences. These cases illustrate a consistent pattern: states seeking independent resource governance are targeted through economic isolation, political interference, and information campaigns. Within this framing, the label “dictator” is not a neutral description but a geopolitical tool. It authorizes punitive measures, strengthens opposition groups, and prepares the international environment for intervention, whether through economic pressure, sponsored coups, or military action. Museveni’s longevity and strong central control are thus interpreted not as purely domestic political choices but as defensive measures against external manipulation.
The Question of Sacrifice
A central challenge to the preservationist strategy is the burden placed on citizens. Youth unemployment, poverty, and delayed development goals create legitimate concerns about internal equity. The argument responds by comparing this hardship to that experienced in states pursuing immediate resource integration. Kenya, despite active resource engagement and alignment with global financial expectations, faces debt distress, inequality, and persistent poverty. Leaders in such environments may be constrained by political systems susceptible to external influence, limiting their capacity to pursue independent strategies.
Thus, the choice is reframed as:
The Sacrifice of Preservation: Temporary hardship borne in service of long-term sovereignty, where domestic elites remain tied to the survival of the national project. The Sacrifice of Extraction: Hardship perpetuated as national wealth is continuously externalized, with a comprador elite aligned to foreign interests.
The first sacrifice is represented as strategically purposeful; the second as structurally permanent.
Strategic Endgame: Pan-African Leverage
The argument culminates in a continental strategy. Museveni’s call for “access to the Indian Ocean” is interpreted not as a threat to neighbors but as a critique of the transactional politics of East African integration. Regional access, shared infrastructure, and collective security are framed as essential steps toward building a power bloc capable of escaping the Sovereign’s Dilemma. A unified East African military, harmonized political institutions, and consolidated bargaining power are presented as the structural foundations for negotiating with global powers on equal terms. Resource preservation becomes a component of a broader Pan-African strategy rather than a unilateral national tactic.
Conclusion
This essay articulates a clear and internally consistent theory: the contemporary international order functions less as a rules-based system and more as a hierarchy sustained by coercive and narrative power. Within it, genuine sovereignty is costly, contested, and often punished.
The label “dictator,” in this context, becomes a predictable designation for leaders who maintain autonomy long enough to frustrate external attempts at influence. The domestic sacrifices incurred through preservation are framed as the necessary price of resisting neocolonial extraction. Ultimately, the argument extends beyond Uganda. It positions the struggle for sovereignty as a continuing chapter in the unfinished project of decolonization. The central question it confronts is whether the possibility of future autonomy justifies the hardships of the present. Drawing on African, Latin American, and Middle Eastern precedents, the essay offers a definitive answer: in a world defined by structural inequality, the long game may be the only path available.
Posted 15/12/2025
