By Benadeta Mwaura - Reporter
Uganda, 5 January 2026 - President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda has sharply criticised recent U.S. foreign policy moves, including the dramatic capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro by U.S. forces in early January 2026.
Museveni said that such interventions reflect a troubling global order where African ambitions are sidelined in favour of great-power interests, language that resonates with many African leaders who feel the continent is often an afterthought in great-power diplomacy.
It may seem distant, but the U.S. operation in Venezuela has rippled outward, including into African capitals, because it underscores a more assertive Trump foreign policy, one that combines militaristic action with economic interests.
After capturing Maduro, Trump declared that the U.S. would temporarily govern Venezuela and bring in major American oil companies to redevelop its energy sector, signalling that economic leverage and security operations are once again intertwined in U.S. foreign policy.
For many African leaders, this reinforces perceptions that the United States still approaches global affairs not just through traditional diplomacy, but through hard power and economic deals, sometimes without adequately consulting regional partners.
Experts say Trump’s expanding engagement with Africa, even if controversial, reflects a convergence of geopolitical calculation and domestic political strategy:
Transactional Diplomacy Over Aid-Driven Policy: Under Trump, the U.S. has dismantled traditional foreign aid frameworks like USAID, preferring direct economic and health funding agreements that tie assistance to co-financing and strategic cooperation.
For example, new “America First” health deals with countries such as Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda and others reflect a shift toward mutual investment and self-sufficiency ambitions rather than aid dependency.
Shifting Focus from Democracy Promotion: Unlike previous administrations that emphasised democracy and human rights, Trump’s approach has prioritised trade, investment and security cooperation, often with a pragmatic lens that critics argue sidelines democratic governance concerns.
A December analysis noted Trump’s foreign policy pivot in Africa reflects a trade-first, resource-driven approach that prioritises partners who open markets and facilitate American business interests.
Countering Competitors: Africa remains a strategic theatre in the broader competition with China and Russia. U.S. policymakers have explicitly positioned countering Chinese influence as a core objective, framing engagement with African states through economic partnerships and security assistance.
Analysts note that Washington’s official strategy documents emphasise countering rival influence, even as critics warn this risks undermining African autonomy.
The Trump administration’s involvement in African affairs has taken several forms:
Military Engagements: Drone strikes and other operations in places like Somalia have increased, prompting debate about the balance between security objectives and long-term stability.
Diplomatic Decisions: Trump’s expanded travel ban restricting nationals from several African countries, including Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso, triggered reciprocal visa bans and strained diplomatic relationships.
Related articles
Trade Relations: Proposed tariffs and trade measures, especially targeting exports from African markets like South Africa, have signalled a more protectionist U.S. trade stance that could reshape bilateral economic relations.
Controversies and African Reactions
Trump’s policies have drawn mixed responses across Africa.
Some governments welcome direct investment deals and security cooperation, while others argue that aid cuts and altered foreign assistance paradigms have undermined public health, food security and humanitarian support. The suspension of USAID funding, for instance, has adversely affected malaria, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS programmes, raising concerns about public health setbacks across the continent.
Other policies, such as the White South African refugee program, sparked diplomatic pushback in Pretoria, where leaders and civil society rejected the premise of white persecution that underpinned the initiative.
Why Now: Strategic Timing and Global Shifts
Analysts point to several reasons why Trump’s Africa policy has become more visible in 2025 and 2026:
Post-Pandemic Realignments: As global competition for resources, technology supply chains and geopolitical influence intensifies, Africa’s vast mineral wealth, youthful markets and strategic location have elevated its importance in U.S. foreign policy.
Domestic Political Messaging: Trump’s approach sometimes mirrors domestic priorities, appealing to constituencies focused on immigration, security and economic nationalism, which spill over into foreign policy narratives about who the U.S. partners with abroad.
Global Instability: Events such as the Venezuela raid, shifting alliances in the Middle East, and intensifying global security challenges have reshaped how Washington defines its international role, including in Africa, where stability, resource access and strategic partnerships are increasingly front and centre.
President Museveni’s remarks reflect a broader sentiment among many African leaders who believe that global power plays often overshadow Africa’s own developmental goals.
By framing the capture of Maduro and other U.S. interventions as signs of a disrupted global order, Museveni underscores a growing desire among African policymakers for greater strategic autonomy and a more balanced engagement with global powers.
For many on the continent, the challenge is to navigate this complex geopolitical environment, securing investment and cooperation where beneficial, while safeguarding national interests and avoiding overdependence on any single global actor.
Museveni Decries ‘Lost African Dream’ After U.S. Captures Maduro
Why Trump’s Footprint in African Politics Is Growing
.jpg&w=3840&q=75)