Uganda’s oil pipeline fuels global fight over energy and climate
Uganda’s plan to become an oil exporter through the East African Crude Oil Pipeline has sparked a global battle between economic ambitions and environmental concerns, with Western banks pulling out and activists pressuring insurers to abandon the project.
Chico Harlan reports for The Washington Post.
In short:
- The nearly 1,000-mile pipeline, backed by TotalEnergies and China’s national oil company, would transport Ugandan oil to an Indian Ocean port but has faced financial hurdles due to activist pressure.
- Environmental groups argue the project will displace communities, harm wildlife, and exacerbate climate change, while Uganda insists it is a critical economic opportunity.
- Uganda is now seeking financing from China and the Middle East, as Western banks and insurers withdraw under pressure from climate activists.
Key quote:
““The people who lecture us — they’ve been exploiting their resources for 100 years. So when I find a person in New York who grew up with power, has a refrigerator, and he says ‘Stop EACOP,’ to me, he’s telling my 45 million brothers that they can continue reading with a candle.”
— Ali Ssekatawa, lawyer for Uganda’s Petroleum Authority
Why this matters:
The pipeline embodies a broader dilemma: Developing nations seek to harness their natural resources for economic growth, while climate activists warn of catastrophic local and global consequences from the continuation of exploitative fossil fuel resource extraction. Uganda argues that wealthy nations have long profited from fossil fuels and should not block Africa’s chance at prosperity. Activists counter that projects like this accelerate climate change and disproportionately harm the world’s poorest. The debate exposes deep divisions over who bears responsibility for the energy transition — and who pays the price.
