Dear Engineer Kenneth Shaaka,
First, allow me to sincerely appreciate you for the depth of thought, research, and intellectual rigor reflected in your contribution. Your observations regarding capability-building, industrialization, technological competence, institutional strength, and the dangers of development faddism are both timely and valuable. They challenge us to move beyond rhetoric and focus on the practical foundations of national transformation.
I would therefore respectfully request that you consider the analysis below not as a counterargument, but as a complementary perspective and perhaps a potential necessity for Uganda’s development journey. My intention is to explore whether historical development experiences, such as China’s structured capability-building approach, can provide us with a useful appraisal framework through which we can objectively assess our own progress, identify gaps, and determine the most appropriate course of action for Uganda.
The value of such an exercise is not in copying other countries, but in learning from their successes, failures, sequencing, and institutional discipline while adapting those lessons to Uganda’s unique realities, aspirations, and resource endowments.
Using China’s Development Journey as a National Appraisal Matrix for Uganda
The Chinese development experience should not be viewed as a blueprint for replication but rather as a strategic appraisal matrix through which Uganda can assess its own stage of development, identify capability gaps, and determine appropriate courses of action.
Every nation develops according to its unique history, geography, culture, resources, institutions, and political realities. However, there are universal principles of transformation that can be studied, adapted, and applied. China’s evolution from an agrarian society into a global industrial and technological power offers one such learning framework.
The fundamental question for Uganda is not whether we should become China. Rather, it is: Where are we on the capability ladder, what capabilities are missing, and what actions must we take to move to the next level?
Proposed Uganda Capability Appraisal Matrix
Stage 1: Security, Stability and State Formation
Chinese Equivalent: Precondition to all Five-Year Plans
Uganda Assessment:
✓ Largely achieved under the NRM Government.
Achievements:
- National security and territorial integrity.
- Political stability.
- Macroeconomic stability.
- Regional integration initiatives.
- Expansion of social services.
Score: High
Remaining Challenge:
Translate stability into accelerated economic transformation.
Stage 2: Infrastructure Foundation
Chinese Equivalent: 1st to 5th Five-Year Plans
Uganda Assessment:
✓ Substantial progress made.
Achievements:
- National road network expansion.
- Energy generation growth.
- ICT backbone infrastructure.
- Airports and border infrastructure.
- Industrial parks development.
Score: Moderate to High
Remaining Challenge:
Transform infrastructure into productive wealth.
The critical question becomes:
How many factories, jobs, exports, and household enterprises are emerging from these infrastructure investments?
Stage 3: Agro-Industrial Transformation
Chinese Equivalent: Reform Era (1980–2000)
Uganda Assessment:
△ Partially achieved.
Achievements:
- PDM.
- OWC.
- Emyooga.
- Agricultural commercialization efforts.
- Expansion of coffee and export crops.
Gaps:
- Low value addition.
- Weak storage systems.
- Limited processing.
- Fragmented value chains.
- Inadequate agro-industrial integration.
Score: Moderate
Priority Reform:
Move from agriculture as a livelihood activity to agriculture as an industrial ecosystem.
Stage 4: Manufacturing and Export Competitiveness
Chinese Equivalent: WTO and Global Integration Era
Uganda Assessment:
△ Emerging but weak.
Achievements:
- Industrial parks.
- Growing manufacturing sector.
- Regional export opportunities.
Gaps:
- High import dependence.
- Limited industrial depth.
- Small manufacturing base.
- Weak machine-building capabilities.
Score: Low to Moderate
Priority Reform:
Develop strategic industries linked to local raw materials.
Stage 5: Technology Absorption and Innovation
Chinese Equivalent: Innovation Transition (2016–2025)
Uganda Assessment:
△ Early stage.
Achievements:
- ICT expansion.
- Digital services.
- Emerging innovation hubs.
- Growing youth technology ecosystem.
Gaps:
- Low research commercialization.
- Limited industrial R&D.
- Weak university-industry linkages.
- Dependence on imported technologies.
Score: Low
Priority Reform:
Create a national innovation-to-industry pipeline.
Stage 6: Strategic Self-Reliance and Global Competitiveness
Chinese Equivalent: Dual Circulation and Frontier Technology Era
Uganda Assessment:
✗ Not yet achieved.
Future Priorities:
- Semiconductor and electronics assembly.
- AI adoption.
- Biotechnology.
- Blockchain applications.
- Advanced manufacturing.
- Defence-industrial capabilities.
- Strategic minerals beneficiation.
Score: Emerging Opportunity
The Missing Link
The appraisal suggests that Uganda’s greatest challenge is not planning.
We have Vision 2040.
We have NDP IV.
We have the Tenfold Growth Strategy.
We have PDM.
We have OWC.
We have UDC.
We have Industrial Parks.
The missing link is execution integration.
Our institutions often operate vertically rather than as a coordinated production ecosystem.
The next phase of Uganda’s transformation should therefore focus on:
Harmonizing institutional synergies.
Converting infrastructure into wealth.
Linking agriculture to industry.
Linking universities to production.
Linking finance to enterprise growth.
Linking technology to productivity.
Establishing a real-time national performance dashboard.
The future belongs not to nations that merely admire successful countries, but to those that systematically learn, adapt, execute, measure, and continuously improve.
In conclusion, I believe that Uganda’s challenge is not a shortage of ideas, policies, strategies, or development programmes. Rather, our challenge is to continuously evaluate where we are, identify what is missing, harmonize our institutional efforts, and translate our collective ambitions into measurable and sustainable outcomes for our people.
The Chinese experience, among many others, simply provides one possible appraisal matrix that can help us ask the right questions:
Where are we?
What have we achieved?
What are we missing?
What should come next?
By honestly answering these questions and acting upon them, we can strengthen our own uniquely Ugandan pathway to transformation and prosperity.
Finally, allow me to thank our Dear Afande Gen. Caleb Akandwanaho for creating and nurturing this forum. It has become an important platform where intellectuals, practitioners, policymakers, entrepreneurs, and development enthusiasts freely exchange ideas, challenge assumptions, and contribute propositions that enrich our collective understanding of national development.
The forum’s greatest value lies in its ability to blend Afande’s visionary idealism, practical experience, and unwavering commitment to Uganda’s transformation with the diverse intellectual contributions of its members. Through such engagements, ideas are refined, perspectives are broadened, and practical solutions emerge for the benefit of our country without undermining anyone and with love for our country.
For that, we remain grateful.
Respectfully,
Col (rtd) Dr. John Francis Ongia
Senior Liaison Officer UDC.
About the Author
