The Debt Trap Playbook: How Sovereignty was sold One Loan at a time

 

The entrapment of the Global South did not begin with debt — it began with conquest. The Papal Bulls (edicts issued by the Pope) of the late 15th century gave Western explorers divine license to seize, convert, and occupy lands across the non-European world, triggering nearly 500 years of invasion, genocide, and plunder. Under these edicts, colonial empires massacred native populations, destroyed indigenous legal, educational, and spiritual systems, and looted lands, resources, and heritage — crimes for which no Western power has ever been held accountable. The dream that independence in the mid-20th century meant freedom was short-lived; the colonizers simply switched tools. Colonial rule was replaced by economic chains — banks, bonds, loans, and aid — ensuring that the plunder continued under new names and local agents, often operating through post-independence governments and administrative apparatuses. Crucially, colonial education systems had groomed a class of local elites to serve as intermediaries — fluent in foreign ideals, dependent on Western approval, and ultimately loyal to external interests. The so-called “development aid” that followed was never about justice, but control. What follows is the step-by-step playbook of how newly independent nations were systematically trapped in a cycle of debt, dependency, and submission.

“The colonizers may have left, but their banks, bonds, and budgets stayed behind.”

After gaining independence, most nations of the Global South had little to no external debt, healthy reserves, and aspirations for national development. But within a few decades, many became trapped in crippling debt, beholden to the IMF, World Bank, credit-rating agencies, and vulture funds.

How did this happen? We look at the modus operandi used to keep newly independent nations economically dependent and politically vulnerable through engineered indebtedness.

 

Step 1:

Install Loyal Elites — Eliminate the Defiant & Ostracize those who could pose a threat

 

As colonial flags were lowered, a new class of Western-trained natives were elevated to political, administrative, and economic leadership.

 

• As colonial empires withdrew, theyinstalled local elites trained in their own image — products of colonial education, fluent in the colonizer’s language, values, and worldview, and trained in their military academies.
• They were positioned to managenewly “independent” governments, but within systems designed by the colonizers — with policies aligned to foreign frameworks: capitalism, liberal democracy, and externally dictated “development”
• Many post-independence leaders servedWestern interests over national interests, whether knowingly or by indoctrination.
• any leader who challenged Western control, sought genuine sovereignty, or aligned with alternative models (e.g. socialism, non-alignment, nationalization) wastargeted for removal — often violently.

Leaders who were eliminated or overthrown:

Those who refused to comply with the “independent” Western model — a continuation of colonial rule in a different format.— and demanded real sovereignty, nationalized resources, or aligned with socialist or non-aligned blocs — were targeted for assassination, coups, smear campaigns, sanctions, or long-term isolation.

 

• Patrice Lumumba (Congo)– democratically elected, assassinated in 1961 with CIA/Belgian involvement after opposing Western exploitation of Congolese resources.
• Aung San (Burma)– national hero who negotiated independence from Britain, assassinated in 1947 shortly before formal independence.
• Mohammad Mossadegh (Iran)– overthrown in 1953 by the CIA and MI6 after nationalizing Iran’s oil.
• Kwame Nkrumah (Ghana)– deposed in a 1966 coup backed by Western powers after pursuing pan-Africanism and rejecting IMF dependency.
• Jacobo Árbenz (Guatemala)– ousted in a 1954 CIA-backed coup after land reforms threatened US corporate interests.
• Salvador Allende (Chile)– democratically elected, overthrown in 1973 with US support after implementing socialist reforms

Leader who were Ostracized, Smeared, or Silenced:

Even when direct removal was not possible, leaders who asserted national sovereignty or challenged Western dominance were subjected to smear campaigns, international isolation, sanctions, and systematic delegitimization.

 

• Subhas Chandra Bose– sidelined by both British and post-colonial narratives for demanding armed independence.
• Muammar Gaddafi– vilified, sanctioned, and eventually overthrown in 2011 after proposing an independent African financial system.
• Fidel Castro– survived dozens of assassinations and decades of embargo for defying U.S. dominance.
• Julius Nyerere– marginalized internationally for his socialist Ujamaa policy despite his moral leadership in Africa.
• Slobodan Milosevic – Serbian leader, deposed, imprisoned, accused of war crimes, died mysteriously in cell & 14 years after death international court exonerates him from all war crimes allegations!
• Mahinda Rajapaksa– relentlessly targeted by Western governments, NGOs, and UN bodies after defeating the internationally backed LTTE in 2009 and refusing to cede national sovereignty.

 

Key Point: Leaders who prioritize national interest over Western dictates are punished — whether through regime change, non-state actors, assassination or judicial harassment.

 

Step 2:

Replace Colonial Chains with Financial Shackles

 

• After formal independence, Western powersweaponized World Wars I and II to reshape international law and global power structures. They established a new treaty-based world order led by so-called “rules-based institutions” such as the United Nations and its financial arms — the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank — all under the guise of multilateral cooperation.

 

• These global institutions effectively became thenew colonial governors, and their “global laws” were elevated above national sovereignty inspite of claiming otherwise. We see this today in the form of UN Special Rapporteurs pressuring countries to amend national laws, or treaties like those being pushed by the World Health Organization, which propose to strip individuals of the right to refuse vaccines or pursue alternative medicine — all signed by local lackeys without national debate.

 

• TheBretton Woods institutions were presented as “facilitators” of development — but in reality, they were controlled by the same Western powers that had once ruled through empire. Their new weapon was called “development aid”, and it came dressed as loans.

 

• These loans were marketed as essential for infrastructure, modernization, and economic progress — but in truth, they came withhidden costs: policy conditionalities, interest burdens, foreign contractors, and the enforced restructuring of entire economies to serve foreign priorities.

 

Key Point:

These loans replaced military occupation with economic subjugation.

Nations were lent money in their own currencies — but interest had to be repaid in U.S. dollars, locking them into export-driven dependency. In order to service these debts, countries were forced to restructure their economies around the needs of the Global North — converting their lands, labor, and resources into raw material supply chains for Western consumption.

 

Strategic Impact:

Aid became addiction.

The borrower could no longer say “no.”

Debt became diplomacy.

Economic policy became externally dictated.

 

All nations – were now caught in the web

 

Step 3:

Create “Need” Through Underdevelopment

 

Centuries of colonial extraction had systematically dismantled local self-reliance and left most newly independent nations with:

• No industrial base
• Reliance on a few exportable cash crops or minerals
• Poor education, healthcare, and transport infrastructure
• Fragile or non-existent national institutions
• A post-independence political class loyal to former colonial powers, obstructing any real effort to build nation-first, self-sustaining economies

 

Western economists, policy advisors, and global development agencies framed these voids as urgent development deficits — instead of addressing the root causes or rectifying the destruction left by colonial rule, they offered loans and aid as the solution.

 

“You need to modernize – and we can fund it.”

 

• But thefunding came with terms. Nations were not free to define “development” for themselves or to decide what should be prioritized. The path to modernization was externally dictated — what to build, how to build it, and most importantly, who would benefit.

 

• Infrastructurewas often designed and constructed by foreign firms, with imported materials and overpriced consultants.

 

• Agriculturewas restructured for export, not food security.

 

• Social serviceswere deprioritized.

 

• Educationwas redirected to support foreign-driven economic models, not local empowerment.

 

The result was a deepening of dependency under the illusion of progress — a system where nations remained unable to escape the web they were told was “modernization.”

 

• Meanwhile, anew generation of post-independence elites was being cultivated: natives molded to become local agents of the same global agenda. They were rewarded with positions, promotions, scholarships, international conferences, and global awards — not for their service to their people, but for their loyalty to the system that kept their countries weak and dependent.

 

• However, an equal number of people began seeing through the deception of decolonizationand took it upon themselves to raise awareness, challenge the narrative, and expose the continuation of colonial control.

 

• But the masters of manipulation were swift to respond — infiltrating these movements and installingdouble agents tasked with containing resistance and mitigating opposition only to a manageable level.

 

Key Point:

Underdevelopment was not a natural condition — it was engineered.

The same forces that caused it, then monetized it, and then controlled the “solution.”

 

Reflection: Those reading this must now ask themselves:
“Which group do I belong to?”

• Am Iserving foreign interests, knowingly or unknowingly?
• Am Ia managed dissenter, allowed to speak only within safe limits — but never truly disrupt the masters gameplan?
• Or am I among thetrue nationalists — those who believe in building a self-sustained nation, governed by its own people, on its own terms, free from foreign control?

 

 

Step 4:

Offer Loans — But Tie Them to the Lender’s Interests

 

Once nations were made to believe they were “underdeveloped” and in need of foreign help, the next phase of the trap began: offering loans and foreign investments — but always on the lender’s terms.

How It Worked:

• Loans were givenwith strings attached, known as “conditionalities.” These conditions often forced governments to cut spending on education, health, welfare, youth programs, and support for senior citizens — the very sectors that empower people to think critically, organize, and resist exploitation.
• Countries were told to “reduce government spending” and “open up markets.” What that really meant was:
  – Cut subsidies for the poor.
  – Privatize public services.
  – Allow multinational companies to take over key sectors of the economy.

 

The Illusion of Foreign Investment:

Multinational corporations (MNCs) entered developing countries claiming to bring “investment”, “development,” and “jobs.”

 

But behind the PR slogans, the reality looked like this:

 

• Cheap Labor: They came to exploit low wages — not to uplift communities.
• Leased Land: They acquired huge plots of land (often for 50–100 years) for very little cost, with no real accountability for long-term environmental damage or local displacement.
• Tax Holidays & Waivers: In many cases, they paid little orno tax at all — sometimes for decades.
• Profit Extraction: They sent most of their profits back to their home countries — often using legal loopholes written into trade deals and investment treaties.
• Imported Inputs: Even the furniture, equipment, and machinery were imported — meaning local industries gainedalmost nothing from these “investments.”

 

In Simple Terms:
Most foreign investments look impressive on paper, but when you dig deeper:

• Governments rarely get upfront payments.
• Local workers get paid little.
• Natural resources get exploited.
• Profits leave the country.
• Infrastructure is built for the investor, not for public benefit.

 

A proper audit of most “foreign direct investments” would reveal that the host country often gains less than it gives away.

The Hidden Role of Central Banks:

To tighten external control, many national central banks were restructured or declared “independent” — supposedly to shield them from domestic political interference and corruption.

 

But in reality:

• These banks becameindependent of the governments and citizens who fund them — but dependent on foreign powers and institutions that do not.
• Their staff, training, economic models, and policy prescriptions are aligned with theIMF, World Bank, and BIS (Bank for International Settlements) — not with national priorities or local realities.
• Key decisions likeinterest rates, inflation targeting, and monetary stability are taken based on foreign textbook models — often at the cost of domestic needs.

 

Case in point — Sri Lanka:

In 2023, Sri Lanka’s Central Bank was made “independent” as part of IMF reforms. This means the government — even during crises — cannot intervene to control inflation, regulate interest rates, or stabilize prices. Elected officials are now powerless to use national monetary policy to protect citizens — all decisions are made by technocrats adhering to external frameworks.

 

So, while the illusion is independence, the reality is deeper dependence — governments are stripped of their ability to manage their own economies.

 

Key Point:

Aid and investment were never meant to build nations — they were designed to extract, exploit, and control.

The loan was a hook.

The conditions were the chain.

And behind every “independent” central bank is a blueprint written by foreign creditors while the return on “investment” was one-sided — always favoring the lender.

 

 

Step 5:

Liberalization & Structural Adjustment — The Death of Economic Sovereignty

 

By the late 1970s and into the 1980s, the trap snapped shut. Developing nations — already struggling under engineered debt, broken institutions, and externally defined “development” — were now told they had one path forward:

liberalization through Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs).

 

These policies, designed and enforced by the IMF and World Bank, required countries to:

• Privatize public assets— from transport and utilities to healthcare and education
• Deregulate markets— removing protections for local businesses
• Open up to foreign investors— allowing external ownership of key sectors
• Remove subsidies and price controls— exposing the poor to market shocks

What happened on the Ground?

 

• Ghana(1983): Told to float its currency and reduce public spending — leading to high inflation and layoffs, especially in health and education.

 

• Jamaica(1980s–90s): Forced to cut social spending and liberalize trade — its dairy and poultry industries collapsed under the weight of cheap U.S. imports.

 

• Bolivia(1985): Under “shock therapy,” inflation was curbed, but at the cost of massive job losses and a dismantling of state enterprises.

 

• Zambia(1990s): Privatized its copper mines under pressure from the World Bank — resulting in layoffs, loss of government revenue, and foreign control of its most valuable resource.

 

• Sri Lanka(from 1977): Opened its economy, removed price controls, and began a wave of privatization under IMF guidance — eroding domestic industries and increasing reliance on imports kickstarting loan taking debacle.

 

• Indonesia & Thailand(1997): During the Asian Financial Crisis, bailout loans forced austerity and deregulation — allowing Western investors to swoop in and buy distressed national assets.

 

• Greece(2010s): A recent example from the Global North — after debt crises, IMF/EU-enforced austerity devastated social services and pushed millions into poverty.

 

The Result?

A wave of devastation swept across the Global South:

• Collapse of local industries
• Mass job losses
• Increased reliance on imports
• Soaring inequality and poverty
• Rising debtto cover social and trade deficits

 

Countries were then forced to trade economic sovereignty for access to more loans.

Manufactured Crises, Engineered Dependency

Once debt levels became unsustainable, all it took was a shock to trigger a repayment crisis:

• Anoil price surge
• Awar or political disruption
• Acommodity collapse
• Apandemic or global economic slowdown

 

Many of these crises were either externally engineered or strategically exploited to push nations further into dependency.

Good to consider how the 2022 economic crisis in Sri Lanka could have also been engineered!

 

Unable to repay, countries returned to the IMF for a “bailout” — which came at an even steeper cost:

• Austerity measuresthat gutted public services
• Sale of national assetsto foreign corporations
• Loss of controlover national economic decisions

 

More loans → Higher debt → Crisis → Conditional bailouts → Deeper dependency

 

Key Point:

SAPs didn’t develop nations — they dismantled them.

What was sold as “economic reform” was a carefully designed program to weaken resistance, remove state power, and permanently entrench external control.

 

Each country has a different story — but the playbook is always the same.

 

Step 6:

Use Global Finance to Enforce Submission

 

Once nations were tied into debt and had opened up their economies, a new weapon emerged in the 2000s — International Sovereign Bonds (ISBs).

What Are ISBs?

These are loans, that governments borrow from private investors on international markets — not from other governments or institutions.

 

They look attractive at first but come with dangerous strings:

 

• High Interest Rates:Usually between 6% to 9% — much higher than IMF or World Bank loans.
• Foreign Legal Control:These loans are written under foreign laws (like New York or London), meaning that any dispute or default is judged outside the country.
• Open Season for Vulture Funds:If a country struggles to repay, vulture funds — aggressive firms that buy defaulted debt — can sue for full repayment, plus penalties.

 

Example Nations:

• Argentina:Defaulted multiple times; was sued by vulture funds in U.S. courts and forced to pay huge settlements.
• Sri Lanka:Defaulted in 2022 — over 40% of its external debt was in ISBs. Debt restructuring is now being handled by foreign legal and financial advisors, not by Sri Lankan policymakers.
• Ghana:Struggling with ISB repayments; credit rating downgrades led to loss of investor confidence and currency collapse.
• Zambia:Became the first African country to default during COVID-19, triggering drawn-out negotiations with foreign bondholders.

How Global Finance Keeps Countries Under Pressure:

• Credit Rating Agencies(like Moody’s or Fitch) can downgrade a country’s rating — scaring off investors, crashing the local currency, and triggering panic.
• Debt Restructuringis controlled by foreign law firms and banks — often the same ones that helped issue the debt in the first place.
• Courts in the Westdecide the outcome of disputes — leaving countries at the mercy of foreign judges, foreign laws, and foreign creditors.

 

Key Point: Sovereign bonds may appear modern and independent — but in reality, they are traps. One signature on a foreign bond can hand over your nation’s financial future to a court in New York.

 

Step 7:

Take Control of National Assets as Collateral

 

Once countries were deeply indebted and unable to repay, lenders began demanding something more than just promises — they wanted assets.

What this Looks Like:

When a nation defaults or struggles to repay loans, foreign creditors — both states and private firms — often demand control over national assets in exchange for bailouts or debt restructuring.

 

This includes:

• Strategic ports
• Airports
• Power plants
• Natural resources
• Land and water rights
• Telecom and data infrastructure

Often these are leased, privatized, or handed over through secretive deals made under pressure — a form of modern resource colonization.

This is where local agents in Govt are tapped to facilitate this change of hands by using their positions to justify to the People of no other alternative!

 

Real Examples:

• Greece:
  During the 2010 debt crisis, Greece was forced tosell key airports, ports, and even islands to foreign investors — in order to satisfy EU/IMF bailout conditions.
• Chad and Republic of Congo:

In both cases, oil resources were effectively mortgaged to trading firms and creditors who dictated national budgets and export policies.

 

Trincomalee Oil Tank Farm (India):

In 2022, 85 out of 99 tanks were handed over to India’s IOC under a long-term lease.

These tanks are strategically located and were once the backbone of Sri Lanka’s wartime fuel resilience — now under foreign control.

 

Renewable Energy Deals (Adani Group, India):

Massive wind and solar projects in Mannar and Pooneryn have been handed to India’s Adani Group without competitive bidding.

Adani was not chosen on merit — these were political deals signed under pressure.

The land, infrastructure, and energy output may remain in Indian hands for decades, with little benefit to Sri Lankan citizens or grid independence.

 

West Container Terminal (Colombo Port):

After rejecting India’s earlier claim to the East Terminal, Sri Lanka offered a larger share of the West Container Terminal to India’s Adani Ports.

This terminal is one of Sri Lanka’s highest-earning assets — and the deal was done with little transparency and immense geopolitical pressure.

 

The Hidden Danger:

These assets are rarely valued properly.

The public is not consulted.

Future generations are locked out of using their own resources.

 

Often, the contracts:

• Are signed inforeign courts under foreign law
• Allow foreign companies toevade taxes
• Give lenders control overrevenue streams for decades

 

Key Point:

In the name of “rescue,” powerful nations and corporations are buying up the foundations of national sovereignty — not with armies, but with debt contracts.

When a country cannot pay in cash, it pays in land, ports, and people’s future.

 

Shape the Narrative — Control the Blame

Once the economic trap is complete, the final step is psychological and political control — shifting the blame away from the real perpetrators (foreign lenders and their local collaborators) and onto the very nations they’ve destabilized.

 

How this Works:

 

1. Blame Local Corruption — But never the System

• Media, think tanks, and global institutions paint a picture of debt-ridden nations asirresponsible, corrupt, and mismanaged.
• This hides the truth:corruption was often incentivized, funded, or enabled by foreign interests — and embedded in the loan process itself.

 

2. Promote Foreign-Funded “Reformers”

• NGOs, economists, and “civil society activists” are deployed toadvocate austerity, privatization, and Western economic models — often in the name of anti-corruption or “good governance.”
• These figures are funded by the same sources that created the crisis — and are used tosuppress genuine nationalist alternatives.

 

3. Hijack Media and Education

• Local media is bought, funded, or trained by international agencies and embassies.
• School and university curricula emphasize globalism, foreign aid dependence, and international law — while demonizing nationalism as “extremism.”
• Dissenting voices arelabelled conspiracy theorists, isolationists, or xenophobes.

 

4. Control Data & Ratings

• Global indices (e.g., Ease of Doing Business, Democracy Index, Press Freedom Index) are manipulated to reward countries that comply and punish those who resist.
• Credit rating agencies can tank economies overnight — a downgrade triggers capital flight, higher interest rates, and panic.

 

5. Rewrite History

• Colonial atrocities are minimized or erased.
• Post-independence resistance leaders are smeared or omitted.
• Economic dependency is reframed as “development,” and betrayal is rewarded as “visionary leadership.”

Real-World Examples:

• Greece:
  Blamed as irresponsible spenders — even though the bailout money went toGerman and French banks, not to the Greek people.
• Argentina:
  A constant IMF client. Public is blamed for inflation, while IMF loan failures arenever audited.
• African nations:
  Leaders like Gaddafi or Nkrumah who proposed pan-African alternatives were demonized or erased from public discourse.

 

Sri Lanka:

• After economic collapse in 2022,Western media and think tanks blamed corruption and nepotism, but were silent on ISBs, IMF conditioning, and India-Adani asset grabs.
• Local influencers funded by foreign embassies pushed privatization of national resources as the only solution.

 

Key Point:

When the theft is done, the story must be managed.

Foreign creditors rewrite the narrative so that the victim becomes the villain — and the looter becomes the savior. Control of the story ensures there will be no resistance, no justice, and no memory of how it all began.

 

Step 9:

Hijack Sovereignty through Treaties and Trade Deals

 

With the economy weakened, debt piled up, and blame deflected — the final noose is tightened through legally binding treaties, trade deals, and international agreements that permanently limit a nation’s right to govern itself.

How It Works:

1. Trade Agreements that Favor the Stronger Party

• Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs), and regional pacts are sold as “economic opportunity” — but they oftenlock developing nations into rules that benefit multinational corporations and foreign governments.
• These deals includeInvestor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) clauses — allowing foreign companies to sue governments in international courts if they pass laws that harm corporate profits.

 

2. Treaties that Override Domestic Law

• Global frameworks (WTO, TRIPS, TPP, WHO IHR, climate treaties, etc.) increasingly dictate national policies onhealth, environment, education, agriculture, digital safety, and public services.
• Countries lose the ability to protect local industries, control medicine prices, ensure food security, or even respond to public health crises —without violating treaty obligations.

 

3. National Laws Amended under Pressure

• UN Special Rapporteurs, World Bank policy papers, and EU/US ambassadors pressure governments to change national constitutions or laws in favor of “international standards.”
• These includegender identity laws, environmental laws, education policies, digital safety laws, and even central banking reforms — all tied to foreign funding or diplomatic leverage.

 

4. Local Lackeys Sign on Behalf of Nations

• Often these treaties aresigned without public consultation, debate, or informed consent — by officials trained, funded, or rewarded by foreign powers not to insert exit clauses that protect the State.
• These treaties cannot easily be revoked — they becomesupranational obligations, enforced through global courts or diplomatic pressure.

Real-World Examples:

 

Sri Lanka:

• CEPA and ETCA (proposed deals with India) would have allowed foreign professionals and companies to flood the domestic market — risking local jobs, services, and industries.
• TheWHO Pandemic Treaty and IHR Amendments (currently being pushed globally) aim to give international bodies control over national public health responses, potentially overriding Sri Lanka’s health sovereignty.
• BITs signed decades ago prevent Sri Lanka fromcanceling harmful privatization contracts or renegotiating deals with multinationals.

 

India:

• Lost multiple ISDS cases (e.g., Vodafone, Cairn Energy) — forced to pay billions for trying to tax foreign companies.
• As a result, India began reviewing and withdrawing from many BITs — a rare pushback.

 

Argentina & Nigeria:

• Both sued by multinational corporations for regulating utilities and local policies that affected foreign profits — and lost.

Key Point:

What colonization did with guns, and loans did with banks, treaties now do with pens.

 

Once signed, they bind nations to rules written by others — with penalties enforced in courts beyond their borders. It’s not just loss of land or wealth — it’s the loss of control over destiny.

 

Step 10:

Make Resistance Illegitimate

 

Once nations are economically shackled, politically weakened, and legally constrained, the final strategy is to criminalize and delegitimize any form of opposition or resistance — ensuring that sovereignty movements are marginalized or crushed.

How It Works:

1. Label Nationalists as Extremists or Threats

• Governments, media, and international bodies paint sovereignty advocates as“populists,” “nationalists,” or “authoritarians” — often associating them with violence, extremism, or corruption.
• This creates public distrust and weakens their legitimacy.

 

2. Use Legal Systems to Harass and Silence

• Opponents facearrests, show trials, surveillance, and judicial harassment under laws often introduced or influenced by foreign advisors.
• Anti-terrorism laws, sedition acts, or vague “hate speech” regulations are used to target dissidents.

 

3. Divide and Conquer

• External powers exploit ethnic, religious, or social divisions to fragment resistance movements.
• They fund proxy groups, co-opt moderate voices, or engineer social unrest to discredit nationalist leadership.

 

4. Control Education and Youth

• School curricula emphasize loyalty to globalism, tolerance of foreign aid, and skepticism of nationalism.
• Youth are recruited into NGOs, international scholarships, and social media campaigns promoting the “accepted” worldview.

 

5. International Isolation

• Sovereign countries and leaders who defy globalist agendas aresanctioned, excluded from forums, or subjected to smear campaigns
• This further isolates genuine sovereignty efforts from allies and resources.

Real-World Examples:

 

Sri Lanka:

• Mahinda Rajapaksa and supporters have been subjected to relentless international pressure, travel bans, and accusations despite their role in defeating terrorism and defending sovereignty.
• Local activists promoting self-reliance and anti-globalization narratives face NGO-funded opposition and media vilification.

 

Venezuela:

• The government’s socialist policies and anti-imperialist stance have been portrayed as authoritarianism, justifying sanctions and international interference.

 

Russia and China:

• Both labeled as “revisionist powers” and “authoritarian regimes” to justify diplomatic isolation and economic sanctions.

 

Key Point:

The final phase is psychological and political warfare. When a nation dares to reclaim control, its leaders and citizens are painted as enemies of progress and peace — making resistance dangerous, lonely, and costly.

 

Final Result: Sovereignty in Name Only

 

 

Shenali D Waduge

 

NEXT:

PART 2 – Sri Lanka: A Case Study in Economic Ensnarement