July 3, 2023
In a continuation of the West’s coordinated diplomatic, media, and academic attacks on Uganda, the United Kingdom (UK) in its latest travel advisory warns of a terror attack on Uganda, specifically targeting foreign nationals or popular locations frequented by them.
The advisory then lists several instances of terror attacks that have occurred in Uganda over the past two decades. However, one cannot help but question the intentions of the UK. This appears to be a false flag alert motivated by ulterior foreign policy objectives of the West to reassert its diminishing dominance over Uganda. What then, could be the aim?
It is important to note that the Government of Uganda has not issued any such warning or indicated an imminent attack, beyond the regular occurrence of daily crimes. Therefore, the UK’s decision to issue such a warning only adds to a growing coordination of attacks on Uganda originating from the diplomatic, media, and academic arms of the West’s foreign policy architecture.
An example of this was the recent article in the New York Times, which criticized the country on humanitarian, human rights, and moral grounds, using misleading statistics and labeling Uganda as “one of the poorest nations” where “nearly half the people eat fewer calories,” and “excess fat is often a sign of wealth.”
Backlash over LGBTG Law?
The West’s recent surge in criticism towards Uganda can be attributed to several factors, most notably the country’s enactment of the anti-LGBTQ law. This legislation has garnered significant international attention and drawn disapproval from Western countries, resulting in threats of sanctions and discontinuation of aid.
Additionally, Uganda’s president’s growing rhetoric against the West and closer relationship with Russia and China is not sitting well with the West and is contributing to the negative portrayal of Uganda before Western audiences.
What, then, is the aim of this latest diplomatic attack on Uganda? It is twofold. Firstly, it is intended to portray Uganda as an unsafe country that should be avoided by foreign nationals and tourists. This, in turn, directly impacts the country’s economy.
Psychological Operation for Planned Terror attack
Secondly, it could be a psychological operation (PsyOp) aimed at conditioning the public perception and preparing for a potential foreign-sponsored terror attack on Uganda. By issuing a warning and emphasizing the likelihood of such an attack, those orchestrating the PsyOp could capitalize on it if an incident were to occur, claiming that they had foreseen and warned about it.
In this scenario, the PsyOp would effectively achieve both aims previously discussed. Firstly, it would contribute to the portrayal of Uganda as an unsafe destination, discouraging foreign nationals and tourists from visiting the country. This, in turn, would have a detrimental impact on Uganda’s economy, as tourism plays a significant role in its revenue generation.
Moreover, a foreign-sponsored terror attack would align with the recent trend of military setbacks that Uganda has faced in its domestic and foreign military operations. The country has already experienced targeted attacks, such as the assault by gunmen resulting in the tragic deaths of over 40 students and the attack on the Uganda contingent of ATMIS troops in Somalia. Another terror attack would further reinforce the narrative that Uganda is an insecure and unstable nation, potentially damaging its reputation on the international stage.
Undermining Museveni’s campaign narrative
Furthermore, the political implications of this situation cannot be overlooked. As the 2026 Uganda elections draw near and the political climate intensifies, the perpetuation of insecurity in Uganda could deliver a significant blow to President Museveni.
Throughout his long tenure in power, President Museveni has built his political platform on the promise of “keeping the country secure.” This has been a major campaign point that has resonated with the Ugandan population and contributed to his electoral success.
However, the strategists in Western boardrooms, who are wary of President Museveni’s increasing opposition and alignment with Russia and China, seem to be plotting to undermine his campaign narrative and weaken the notion of “keeping the country secure.”
By presenting the country as insecure, and potentially supporting actions that contribute to instability, they aim to erode President Museveni’s strong position on national security. By creating doubt about Uganda’s safety and stability, Western strategists hope to diminish public confidence in President Museveni’s leadership and bolster alternative candidates or forces aligned with Western interests.
A pretext for intervention to loot resources
Furthermore, the UK’s travel advisory and the PsyOp targeting Uganda could be driven by a desire to exert control over Uganda’s resources and geopolitical positioning.
Uganda is known to possess significant natural resources, including oil reserves, minerals, and fertile land. The country’s strategic location in East Africa also makes it attractive in terms of regional influence and trade routes. These factors make Uganda a valuable asset for global powers seeking to secure access to resources and establish geopolitical dominance in the region.
By perpetuating insecurity and destabilizing the country, the West could be plotting to create a pretext for intervention or exert influence over Uganda’s internal affairs. This could involve exploiting the resulting vulnerabilities to gain control over valuable resources or reshaping Uganda’s alignment with regional and global power dynamics. By painting a picture of an unsafe nation, they can justify their interference and present themselves as saviors or stabilizers.
Therefore, in addition to economic and political factors, the desire to control Uganda’s resources and geopolitical positioning could be another driving force behind the efforts to perpetuate insecurity and weaken the notion of “keeping the country secure.” It highlights the complex web of interests and power dynamics at play in the region, with various external actors vying for influence and control over Uganda’s future trajectory.
Bully Uganda away from Russia/China
Additionally, Uganda’s growing ties with Russia and China could provide these non-Western powers with opportunities to expand their influence in Africa, potentially challenging Western hegemony. Western strategists, therefore, may aim to weaken Uganda’s relations with these emerging powers by fostering an atmosphere of insecurity and painting the country as a risky destination for foreign nationals and tourists.
Ultimately, the objective could be to assert Western control over Uganda’s political direction, economic partnerships, and access to its resources. By manipulating the perception of insecurity and exploiting it for their geopolitical advantage, Western powers are clearly seeking to safeguard their interests, counter the influence of non-Western actors, and maintain their dominant position in the region.
The article first appeared on africainterest.org
