By
M. Shahzaib Hassan
Africa-Press – Tanzania. As digital infrastructure spreads, a new kind of empire building is underway, one driven not by armies but by data. Today’s tech giants and superpowers vie to control the pipelines of information, and that tug of war has major implications for national sovereignty. In practical terms, “data sovereignty” means a country’s ability to govern where its citizens’ data lives and how it flows. But when foreign companies build or own the networks, clouds, and cables of a nation, that sovereignty erodes. Commentators have begun calling this digital colonialism. As one analysis warns, China and the U.S. are “carving out new forms of digital dependency” across Africa and Asia, deals that, beneath the rhetoric of aid and connectivity, “strip away nations’ digital sovereignty.”
Control of infrastructure: consider who runs the internet’s highways. Most developing countries’ cloud servers, where governments store records or companies hold data, are owned by a few American corporations (AWS, Google, Microsoft). In Latin America, for instance, Amazon Web Services dominates government and business cloud contracts. One report notes that if geopolitical tensions flare, any U.S. pressure on AWS could expose Latin American data to foreign leverage. Likewise, many African nations rely on Chinese firms like Huawei and ZTE to build their 5G networks and undersea cables. While such projects increase connectivity, they also leave local governments with limited control over the “switches” of communication. In some cases, Huawei technicians (not state officials) maintain critical systems. The result is a form of tech dependency: the country paid for its phones or internet, but the rules governing them can come from abroad.
For instance, about dependency, several cases illustrate this dynamic. Facebook’s “Free Basics” program in Africa (offering limited internet access) was widely criticized as digital colonialism: critics argued it locked users into Facebook’s ecosystem and stifled local content. In India, by contrast, the government has pushed back by requiring data to be stored on domestic servers (data localization) and by building its own Digital Public Infrastructure (the Aadhaar ID system and payment networks) to reduce reliance on foreign platforms. In Europe, fears of U.S. tech dominance have spurred initiatives like GAIA-X, a German-French project to create a homegrown cloud services federation. Even tiny Estonia has taken data sovereignty seriously: it built “data embassies” (government servers hosted on allied soil) so national systems remain under Estonian law regardless of location.
Consequences for sovereignty and inequality—the implications are profound. When private platforms dominate, a country’s economy can end up funneling profits abroad instead of building local industry. The Information and Communications Technology (ICT Works) blog bluntly observes that “digital colonialism is not just about who owns the infrastructure, but who has control over the data and how it’s used, which often results in economic gains flowing outward.” Politically, it means vulnerable citizens and governments may have little recourse if a foreign power decides to cut access or seize information. For example, some African activists worry that reliance on foreign apps makes it easier to block dissent or surveil populations at the behest of those overseas investors. Geopolitically, both the US and China are forging digital alliances: the US promotes “Clean Network” programs restricting Huawei, while China negotiates bilateral internet pacts under its Belt and Road Initiative. In each case, smaller states must choose camps or carve out neutral space, often with little real autonomy.
A way forward: Recognizing the risks, experts suggest various remedies. Investment in local digital infrastructure (data centers, fiber optics, and satellite internet) can blunt outside influence. Strengthening data protection laws, for instance mandating that sensitive government and citizen data remain on domestic servers, is another path (as Austria and others have done). Internationally, there are calls for “digital non-alignment,” where blocs of countries agree not to become captive markets of one tech hegemony. Ultimately, preserving sovereignty in the digital age may require both public-sector action and citizens demanding data rights. Will governments allow their economies and citizens’ information to be quietly “mined” by foreign tech powers? Unless nations aggressively build their own digital ecosystems, they risk inviting a new form of colonialism, one where servers and cables, not armies, determine the fate of their people.
moderndiplomacy
For More News And Analysis About Tanzania Follow Africa-Press
