Financial Security (FinSec) series with Philip Takyi (Dr): Digital Colonialism: Foreign Control over Data Infrastructure in Africa and Asia

0

Digital colonialism refers to the control and exploitation of digital technologies, infrastructures, and data by powerful foreign entities, often multinational corporations or governments, over less developed nations.

This control can manifest in various forms, including ownership of internet infrastructure, dominance of digital platforms, and extraction of user data without equitable benefits to the source countries.

In today’s digitally interconnected world, the dynamics of power and influence have extended beyond physical borders into the realm of cyberspace, giving rise to a new form of neocolonialism—digital colonialism.

This concept underscores the asymmetrical relationships between technologically advanced nations or corporations and developing countries, wherein the former dictate the terms of digital engagement, often at the expense of the latter’s autonomy, security, and economic development.

In Africa and Asia, where rapid digital adoption is often driven by external investments and platforms, local governments and businesses find themselves increasingly reliant on foreign-owned cloud services, software ecosystems, and data centers.

This dependency not only raises questions about digital sovereignty, but also perpetuates systemic inequities in value creation and wealth distribution.

Manifestations in Africa

Infrastructure Ownership: A significant portion of Africa’s digital infrastructure, including undersea cables and data centers, is owned and operated by foreign corporations such as Google, Meta, and Huawei. This ownership structure limits the continent’s autonomy over its digital networks and subjects it to external control and influence (Mail & Guardian, 2024).

Data Extraction and Exploitation: Foreign tech companies often provide “free” digital services, like Facebook’s Free Basics, which, while increasing internet accessibility, also serve as tools for extensive data collection. The data harvested is then monetized by these corporations, with minimal returns to the local economies (ICTworks, 2023).

Surveillance and Authoritarianism: China’s export of surveillance technologies to African nations has raised concerns about the proliferation of digital authoritarianism. For instance, the African Union’s headquarters, built and equipped by Chinese firms, was reportedly subject to data breaches, with sensitive information allegedly transmitted to servers in China (Wired, 2018).

Manifestations in Asia

Dominance of Foreign Cloud Services: In Southeast Asia, countries heavily rely on cloud services provided by U.S. and European tech giants, leading to concerns about data sovereignty and the potential misuse of sensitive information (The Diplomat, 2025).

Export of Surveillance Models: China’s Belt and Road Initiative has facilitated the spread of its internet governance model, emphasizing state control and surveillance. Countries like Pakistan have adopted Chinese surveillance technologies, raising alarms about the erosion of privacy and civil liberties (Wired, 2018).

Implications of Digital Colonialism

The primary and most profound consequence of digital colonialism is the erosion of digital sovereignty—the ability of a state to control its own digital infrastructure, data governance, and technological ecosystem. In developing nations, especially across Africa and Asia, this loss of control manifests in several interlinked and systemic ways, each posing significant threats to national autonomy, economic resilience, and democratic integrity.

Technological Dependency and Innovation Suppression: When critical digital infrastructure—such as cloud services, undersea cables, or mobile platforms—is controlled by foreign entities, local governments and firms are locked into asymmetric relationships. These external players often dictate terms of service, pricing, and data policies that reflect their commercial or geopolitical interests rather than those of the host nation. As a result, local innovation ecosystems are stifled, since domestic entrepreneurs must build within the constraints of imported platforms and technologies, often with limited access to backend systems, source code, or licensing rights. This hinders the development of homegrown solutions tailored to local contexts and perpetuates a cycle of dependency.

Compromised Data Privacy and Exploitation: One of the hallmarks of digital colonialism is data extraction without reciprocity. Massive volumes of user data—ranging from behavioral patterns to biometric identifiers—are harvested by foreign tech companies under the guise of providing free services. This data is then monetized abroad, with little benefit to the communities from which it originates. More alarmingly, the lack of strong legal safeguards in many developing nations means that personal data can be commodified, sold to third parties, or used to manipulate public opinion through targeted misinformation campaigns. The absence of consent frameworks and data transparency leaves individuals vulnerable and disempowered.

Threats to National Security and Civil Liberties: Digital colonialism also has profound implications for state sovereignty and political stability. Surveillance technologies exported by foreign powers—particularly through partnerships masked as development aid—can be repurposed by authoritarian-leaning governments to suppress dissent, monitor opposition, and curtail civil liberties. Tools such as facial recognition systems, smart city infrastructure, and AI-driven surveillance have been deployed in several African and Asian countries without public scrutiny or accountability (Cambridge Core, 2024). These technologies not only enable digital authoritarianism but also tie national security architecture to foreign-made tools, creating long-term vulnerabilities to cyber espionage or coercion.

Unequal Value Chains and Digital Extractivism: In this emerging digital order, developing nations risk becoming mere raw data providers, while the real economic value is captured by data processors and platform owners based in the Global North or China. This mirrors the colonial-era extractive economic model, where colonies exported raw materials but imported finished goods at inflated costs. In the digital age, countries in Africa and Asia risk playing a similar role in the global data economy, contributing labor and user data while importing expensive technology services, cloud storage, and analytics capabilities.

Cultural Homogenization and Epistemic Inequality: Digital colonialism doesn’t just impact infrastructure and economics—it also affects cultural narratives and knowledge systems. Dominant platforms often privilege content, languages, and values from the Global North, marginalizing indigenous voices, local content creators, and non-Western worldviews. Algorithms prioritize certain narratives, subtly shaping public discourse and reinforcing existing global hierarchies. This results in a form of epistemic injustice, where local knowledge is devalued, and cultural autonomy is undermined.

Strategies for Resistance and Empowerment

Strengthening Data Protection Laws: Countries such as Kenya (Data Protection Act, 2019) and Nigeria (Nigeria Data Protection Regulation, 2019) have taken initial steps by introducing legislation that regulates the collection, storage, and transfer of personal data. These laws impose requirements for informed consent, restrict cross-border data transfers, and mandate that companies handling sensitive data establish a legal presence within the country. However, the mere existence of laws is not enough. Effective implementation requires well-resourced regulatory bodies, judicial capacity to enforce penalties, and ongoing updates to address new threats such as algorithmic bias and biometric surveillance.

Investing in Local Infrastructure: Digital independence is impossible without ownership and control of critical infrastructure. Investing in indigenous infrastructure. Local data centers, for instance, help retain data within national borders, support data localization mandates, and reduce latency for domestic users. Countries like South Africa and Rwanda are already leading efforts in building national data hosting facilities. Similarly, local IXPs ensure that internet traffic between domestic users does not need to be routed through overseas servers, improving speed and cost efficiency while enhancing cybersecurity.

Promoting Open-Source Technologies: Open-source technology refers to software, hardware, or platforms whose source code, design, or blueprint is made freely available for anyone to view, use, modify, and distribute. Unlike proprietary technologies—which are owned and controlled by specific companies or individuals—open-source technologies promote transparency, collaboration, and community-driven development.

By adopting and contributing to open-source projects, governments and developers can build context-specific solutions in education, healthcare, and governance. For instance, open-source learning management systems or e-health platforms can be tailored to local languages and regulations. Moreover, avoiding license fees and vendor lock-in reduces long-term costs and fosters technology transfer.

To scale this strategy, countries must invest in capacity building—by integrating open-source curricula in schools, funding local developer ecosystems, and incentivizing public-private partnerships focused on indigenous software development. Programs like Code for Africa and AfriLabs exemplify how communities across the continent are already advancing local open tech solutions.

Conclusion

Digital colonialism presents a complex and urgent challenge for the Global South, echoing the extractive and asymmetrical relationships that characterized historical colonization. Just as imperial powers once exploited natural and human resources through territorial domination, today’s digital empires wield control through data extraction, technological dependency, and platform monopolization. This modern iteration of control threatens not only economic self-determination but also cultural autonomy, national security, and the democratic potential of digital technologies.

Equally important is the cultivation of human capital. Local innovation ecosystems need to be nurtured through education, research funding, and targeted support for startups and civic tech. Governments must invest in digital literacy and awareness, ensuring that citizens are not just users of foreign technologies but informed participants in the shaping of digital futures.

Furthermore, global cooperation should not be sidelined. African and Asian nations must engage in multilateral diplomacy to advocate for fairer global data governance regimes, resist exploitative trade agreements, and push for technology transfer mechanisms that promote shared growth.

Ultimately, digital technologies should be tools of empowerment, not instruments of domination. Achieving this vision demands that digital infrastructure, governance, and innovation be oriented toward public interest, equity, and sustainability. Only then can Africa and Asia chart a path toward a just and sovereign digital age—one where they are not merely passive consumers but active architects of their technological destinies.

References

Post Views: 292

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR