Global financial structures limiting Uganda’s economic growth potential 

Predatory global economic stricture: Why the battle to unchain from the dark side of the global economy will take the fight to the last man    
The practice of attaching conditions to the provision of services has become deeply embedded in the global financial architecture and economic structure, oftentimes at the detriment of developing countries like Uganda, Monitor has established.

 For example, the financial architecture of the global economy, dominated by institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF)/World Bank (WB) imposed on Uganda structural adjustment programs that restrict policy and fiscal autonomy.
 Without policy and fiscal autonomy, governments cannot generate their own revenues or allocate resources based on their own priorities.

For a country such as Uganda, fiscal autonomy allows her to pursue policies that support her economic development without necessarily succumbing to the international rules and actions that are times proven to be out of touch with the country’s economic realities.  
According to Mr Africa Kiiza, PhD Fellow, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences; Universität Hamburg, the structural adjustment programs fronted by the IMF/WB often tied to debt relief or loans, mandate reduced government spending, privatization, and trade liberalization—eliminating or reducing government role in business.

 For Uganda, Mr Kiiza who is also a researcher and global trade and investment expert, said in an exclusive interview that conditionality always revolves around cutting social spending, exposing infant industries to unregulated competition, and prioritizing debt servicing over development spending.
“Such conditions leave the country ill-equipped to invest in coordinated infrastructure, proper education, and modern technology, all of which are essential for fostering industrialisation and economic diversification,” he said.

The problem is, even with all its shortcomings, the government of Uganda continues to accrue debts, now in the range of Shs 100 trillion, despite restrictive conditions that come with some, if not most of the agreement.  As long as the primary source of revenue for the government is through accruing debt, the economy will remain at the mercy of global financial architecture and the complex global economic structures.
Monitor also found out that global financial architecture (GFA) mechanisms do little to address the systemic issues of debt dependency and capital flight.

While the Group of Twenty (G20), an international forum for economic cooperation that brings together leaders and policymakers from the world's major economies – representing about 85 percent of the world's total output of goods and services (GDP), and 75 percent of international trade, occasionally meet to discuss debt relief, according to researcher Kiiza’s finding, “they never forget to accompany their measures with conditions”.
“These conditions that culminate to dependencies are not accidental but are deeply embedded in the global economic structure, which prioritizes the interests of powerful nations and corporations over equitable development,” Researcher Kiiza reveals in his analysis, titled: Built for the Sharks: How the global economic structure is undermining Uganda’s trade and investment efforts.

It is for this reason that Uganda and the Global South peers – bearing the brunt of GFA, under the Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation in New York, African governments are part of the efforts looking to democratize decision-making in the tax arena.
This push for reform, initiated by Nigeria on behalf of the Africa Group, has brought what has been termed a historic moment at the United Nations, where for the first time, all countries have a seat at the table to shape global tax rules, according to a statement by a group of African CSOs calling for urgent reforming of GFA.

“This overhaul is critical for creating a fairer, more inclusive global economic order that recognizes and supports the aspirations of all nations,” the statement further noted.
During the course of investigations, Monitor realised that the United Nations Pact for the Future is emblematic of well-intentioned, considering that it aims to address global challenges such as inequality and sustainable development, however according to researcher Kiiza analysis, “the pact lacks enforceable mechanisms to ensure compliance by powerful economies or corporations.”

Additionally, it became clear that the United Nations pact for the Future's reliance on voluntary commitments makes it unlikely to challenge the structural inequities embedded in global trade and finance systems. Moreover, the pact’s emphasis on multi-stakeholder partnerships risks reinforcing corporate interests, sidelining the voices and needs of nations like Uganda.
It also became evident in the course of this investigation that the G20, which purports to represent global economic interests, is dominated by the agendas of powerful economies. Its frameworks and policy recommendations often prioritize stabilizing the global financial system in ways that disproportionately benefit developed economies.
For instance, initiatives to address illicit financial flows (IFFs) or promote global tax reforms lack the rigour to challenge tax havens or hold multinational corporations accountable.

For Uganda which loses more than Shs2 Trillion annually to IFFs – an equivalent of twice the budget for construction and upgrades of national roads and bridges, the G20's tepid approach offers little hope for reclaiming these critical resources therefore offering little in unchaining Uganda and her peers from the global economic structure which is akin to economic slavery.

President Donald Trump…
The BRICS bank, also known as the New Development Bank (NDB), is a multilateral development bank that was established in 2015 by the BRICS countries: Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, and its proposed currency has been touted as alternatives to the Western-dominated Bretton Woods institutions.
“While these initiatives could theoretically offer developing countries greater financial independence, their current scale and scope are insufficient to address the needs of Uganda and the EAC. The BRICS nations have diverse and often conflicting economic agendas, which could limit their commitment to supporting smaller African economies.

“Already U.S President Elect, Donald Trump, has threatened to impose 100 percent tariffs on BRICs members should they replace the U.S Dollar. This is a classic example of how bigger economies thwart alternative financial plans to stay as the top dogs in the global economy,” Mr Kiiza wrote in his assessment of the situation.   
He continued: “Without addressing structural trade imbalances or creating meaningful pathways for industrialization, these initiatives risk becoming another layer of dependency rather than a true alternative.

“The aforementioned initiatives and structures perpetuate underdevelopment by maintaining a global division of labour that locks Uganda and the EAC into roles as exporters of raw materials and importers of finished goods. These dynamics stifle industrial growth and innovation while reinforcing dependency on foreign markets and aid.”
The Deputy Secretary to the Treasury, Mr Patrick Ocailap, in an interview noted that although he is never preoccupied with intricacies of global financial structure and related economic system, it is not lost on him that the representation of developing countries, especially African nations, in key global financial institutions remains limited.

Members of African CSO calling for urgent GFA reforms – who are free and not encumbered to address this situation, believe it’s not just limited representation, but also an aspect of biasness, with dominant powers shaping policies that neglect African economies' unique challenges.
 Despite commitments to inclusive governance, true representation has seen weak progress, leaving African nations underfunded and unsupported. Global tax rulemaking, currently controlled by a small group of Western countries under the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), further excludes developing nations, according to the statement by African CSOs calling for urgent GFA reform.

Grassroots support
Importantly, a quick survey done by Monitor indicates that only 1 in 10 owners of micro, small and medium enterprises, can to some extent comprehend the relationship between their businesses, the economy and the power play of global financial and economic systems.
 As for farmers, out of 10, none even realised the power play unfolding at the global level albeit its immense impact on the output of their daily economic activity.
For as long as this disconnection remains, the necessary grassroots support needed to fuel the overhaul of GFA could take longer than already is the case.