“Akhtar Ali Syed explores how domination is not only imposed by foreign entities but is equally entrenched through domestic actors who replicate colonial hierarchies”
by Muhammad Obaid Ahmed
The departure of colonial powers from their former colonies was not the end of exploitation, but the beginning of a more covert, sophisticated form of domination. This system, famously described by Kwame Nkrumah as “neo-colonialism,” replaced physical occupation with economic manipulation. As nations celebrated political independence, their economies were quietly ensnared in webs spun by international capital.
Nkrumah sharply identified international capital controls as a crucial tool wielded against developing nations. He argued that global financial structures are rigged to ensure developing countries remain subservient. High interest rates, for instance, function as shackles tightening around the economies of the Global South. These nations, often desperate for liquidity, find themselves at the mercy of powerful financial institutions.
The data from 2023 starkly illustrates this reality. According to the World Bank, developing countries spent a staggering $1.4 trillion servicing their debts last year. Interest payments alone soared to $406 billion, marking a 30 percent increase compared to 2022. For the world’s poorest nations, those eligible for International Development Association (IDA) loans, the burden is crushing: they paid a record $96.2 billion in debt service in 2023. Alarmingly, their interest payments have quadrupled over the past decade.
Multilateral institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, IFC, and IDA, often dominated by U.S. capital and influence, play pivotal roles in this system. While they present themselves as lifelines for struggling economies, these institutions frequently impose harsh conditionalities that strip nations of their economic sovereignty. The seemingly benevolent aid transforms into a mechanism of control, subtly dictating the policies and priorities of recipient states.
Citizens are led to believe that security, prosperity, and stability are privileges granted by the ruling elite, rather than inherent rights of citizenship. This manufactured dependency erodes civic confidence and stifles dissent
John Perkins’ Confessions of an Economic Hitman vividly exposes how these economic weapons are deployed. He narrates how countries are enticed into unsustainable infrastructure projects funded by international loans, only to be ensnared by overwhelming debt obligations. When repayments become impossible, debtor nations are forced to concede political favours, resource concessions, and open markets, perpetuating a vicious cycle of dependency.
Thus, neo-colonialism operates not through overt conquest, but through debt traps and financial instruments that tighten the noose around developing economies. Independence, in this light, appears increasingly illusory.
Invisible Siege
While the spectre of neo-colonialism has long haunted postcolonial states, the reality of hyper-colonialism demands a deeper interrogation, particularly of internal forces that perpetuate subjugation from within. Akhtar Ali Syed’s exploration of hyper-colonialism illuminates this insidious dynamic—where power is not only imposed by foreign entities but is equally entrenched through domestic actors who replicate colonial hierarchies for their own gain.
In Pakistan, the phenomenon of internal colonisation is starkly evident. The rise of exclusive housing developments like Defence Housing Authority (DHA) and Bahria Town exemplifies this. Originally intended for military personnel and civilians, these areas have morphed into semi-autonomous territories with their own administrative systems. They often expropriate large tracts of land, displacing local communities under the guise of “development” and “security.”
These urban enclaves embody a “divide and rule” strategy, creating spatial and economic divisions that segregate society along class lines. These gated communities offer security and modernity to the elite while reinforcing exclusionary urban apartheid, thus exacerbating social fragmentation. Internal colonisers often exploit existing social fault lines, such as religious differences, sectarian divisions, ethnic identities, and regional disparities, to maintain their control. They may manipulate religious narratives or fuel sectarian tensions to create an environment of fear and distrust, preventing the population from uniting against their oppressive rule. This manipulation of identity politics serves to distract from issues of economic inequality and political disenfranchisement, allowing the ruling elite to consolidate their power.
Equally significant is the pervasive military influence in Pakistan, which extends far beyond its constitutional mandate of national defence. The military’s dominance over crucial sectors—from foreign policy to media narratives and economic ventures—mirrors the characteristics of traditional colonial administrators. For instance, the military’s influence on Pakistan’s foreign alliances, particularly its strategic relationships with major global powers, often appears to serve institutional interests more than national sovereignty.
Domestically, the military’s control over vast business conglomerates like Fauji Foundation and Army Welfare Trust perpetuates economic monopolisation, leaving limited space for competitive civilian enterprise.
This internal colonisation is not unique to Pakistan. Across South Asia, elites often emulate colonial power structures to solidify their dominance. In India, the persistence of caste hierarchies and the monopolisation of land and capital by dominant groups reflect a similar internal colonisation, where societal fragmentation sustains power imbalances. However, in Pakistan, the nexus between the civil and military elite has created a particularly impenetrable barrier to equitable development and political plurality.
The most damaging aspect of internal colonisation lies in its psychological impact. By monopolising narratives of progress and national identity, internal colonisers cultivate a dependency mindset among the populace. Citizens are led to believe that security, prosperity, and stability are privileges granted by the ruling elite, rather than inherent rights of citizenship. This manufactured dependency erodes civic confidence and stifles dissent, echoing the psychological strategies detailed in Frantz Fanon’s works and other analyses of colonialism.
Breaking the Chains
Neo-colonialism explains much about the enduring grip of foreign powers on postcolonial states, but hyper-colonialism reveals the deeper entanglement of internal and external dominators. In Pakistan and across the Global South, it is not only international actors but also domestic elites—armed with land monopolies, economic empires, and psychological warfare—who perpetuate cycles of exploitation. Genuine emancipation requires an unflinching examination of both these forces. Only by confronting the internal colonisers, alongside resisting external pressures, can societies hope to dismantle the complex web of hyper-colonialism and reclaim true sovereignty.–This essay was originally published in The Friday Times, a digital portal.
The author graduated in Economics from the University of Chakwal. His primary interests lie in the field of political economy, focusing on the intersection of politics, economic structures and societal dynamics. He can be reached by email: obaidahmed373@gmail.com.
The High Asia Herald is a member of High Asia Media Group — a window to High Asia and Central Asia