In 2006, as Uganda prepared to host the 20th Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, President Yoweri Museveni suggested streamlining the country’s diplomatic missions to align with the value and strength of each bilateral relationship. This proposal, though dormant for a time, reemerged in 2015 during discussions on the National Resistance Movement’s manifesto implementation, where the bloated foreign service again came under scrutiny. One official noted the irony that it was Museveni himself who had appointed many of those now criticized for overburdening the system.
Historically, the idea of trimming Uganda’s diplomatic presence isn’t new. As early as 1987, plans were in place to shut the mission in Tokyo, only for it to reopen two years later. Similarly, in 1999, there were considerations to close nearly all missions except a core few in key capitals. Even closures in Canberra and Havana for budgetary reasons were later reversed. While the matter faded from public discussion after 2015, it resurfaced at a Cabinet meeting on March 31, 2025, when Museveni criticized high allowances and the trend of Foreign Service officers relocating abroad with extended families at taxpayer expense.
He questioned the tangible benefits from countries like Canada—which expelled Uganda’s High Commissioner in 2023 for misconduct—and Australia, where Uganda maintains a mission that also serves numerous Pacific nations. Despite challenges like funding shortfalls and inadequate staff, Uganda’s High Commission in Canberra reported $8.9 million in exports by the end of 2023, alongside 8,636 tourists attracted largely through trade in coffee, tea, and spices.
Financial constraints plague most embassies, compounded by political appointees who lack the necessary expertise. Since 2006, Museveni has increasingly named election losers and loyalists to ambassadorial posts. By 2012, only eight of 34 mission heads were career diplomats; in 2025, just one remains—Isaac Ssebulime in Saudi Arabia. Museveni referenced Norway’s 2023 closure of its Kampala embassy as justification for Uganda’s own downsizing.
The president has now directed that no extra funding be allocated for Foreign Service allowances and instructed Foreign Affairs Permanent Secretary Vincent Bagiire to perform a cost-benefit analysis of all 40 missions. Bagiire subsequently held a town hall with ministry staff to outline a framework for rationalizing Uganda’s diplomatic presence—an initiative that mirrors earlier mergers of government agencies that saw significant job losses, such as Uganda National Roads Authority, which retained only half of its staff.
During an April parliamentary session, junior Foreign Affairs minister John Mulimba stated that plans are underway to reduce the number of missions from 38 to 15, focusing on those that offer the most strategic value. However, when questioned before the Public Accounts Committee in May, Bagiire clarified that the final number would be determined after comprehensive research.
The process is expected to start with internal deliberations between the President and Cabinet, with some embassies set for closure or consolidation, and others possibly reinforced depending on their strategic importance. Yet fears persist within the ministry that competent officials may be sidelined in favor of well-connected individuals as the restructuring progresses. Reports from various missions reveal recurring issues of tribalism, nepotism, internal conflict, and mismanagement.
Such dysfunction undermines Uganda’s international image. For instance, the mission in Ankara reportedly includes only five official diplomatic staff, with an additional 16 appointed by the current leadership. The Washington DC embassy—tasked with liaising with major institutions like the IMF and World Bank—is in disarray following the appointment of Robbie Kakonge, a former educator, replacing one of the last seasoned diplomats, Ambassador Mull Katende. By contrast, the U.S. appointed a seasoned Foreign Service officer, William Popp, as its envoy to Uganda, highlighting a stark difference in diplomatic priorities.
The quality of embassy personnel is directly tied to Uganda’s ability to achieve foreign policy goals. Former Foreign Affairs Permanent Secretary Ambassador James Mugume warned against downsizing, arguing that now is the time to strengthen global engagement, especially with Africa and Asia, to support initiatives like the African Continental Free Trade Area.
Moreover, many Ugandan missions already serve multiple nations, despite limited staffing and resources. The Abuja mission, for instance, covers 15 countries in West Africa, while the Kuala Lumpur embassy oversees relations with nine Southeast Asian nations. Diplomats emphasize that the issue isn’t the number of missions, but rather the quality of staff and leadership in place.
Complicating matters further is the reportedly poor working relationship among the Foreign Affairs ministry’s top officials, including the minister, state ministers, and the permanent secretary. Internal discord has bred a climate of low morale, miscommunication, and strategic drift.
Retired diplomat Harold Acemah described the current plan as ill-advised, echoing broader concerns that reducing Uganda’s foreign footprint could weaken its international presence at a time when strategic engagement is needed most.