For decades, foreign aid has been the sustainer of development in Uganda and elsewhere in Africa. It saves lives, availed funds needed for health programs, and promoted infrastructure projects. For example, it funded ARVs for 1.4 million Ugandans living with HIV, improved maternal health services, and lit communities. On the other side, however, this dependence on foreign aid has equally propagated a system in which the Ugandan government is less accountable to its very own citizens. Critics even say it makes them complacent, avoiding hard decisions and reforms because they rely so heavily on this outside help as a means of meeting basic needs.

But times are changing, and with a number of donors freezing or slashing aid, Uganda seems to have entered an entirely new reality. Indeed, according to some experts, what seemed to be a crisis for some was an opportunity for the country to rethink its priorities and build a self-sustaining future. Could it be that this foreign aid freeze will prove-perhaps counterintuitively-to be Uganda’s coming-of-age moment, and much of Africa’s as well?

Certainly, foreign aid has brought about innumerable benefits to Uganda: health programs that have saved literally countless lives through the fight against HIV/AIDS, maternal health reducing deaths during child delivery, infrastructure projects that better access to electricity and clean water in rural areas. These gains should not go unnoticed.

But it has also built dependence that destroyed local accountability, too: a government knowing it could depend on foreigners to pay for core services had fewer incentives to improve its collection of taxes or better manage public finances. The predictable result has too often been graft and mismanagement, with the public bearing the cost.

History demonstrates that when the resources are meager, any elbow room given to those in power is exploited to their own benefit, as opposed to actual reform. In the past, economic crises only saw the government tighten its hold on power instead of opening it up to democratic reforms. The pattern therefore generates skepticism on the way the unfolding of the aid freeze will play out: for positive change, or just further deepening the problems?

Others feel that this aid freeze will, in one way or another, make the government more responsible before its own people. Not having the foreign funding safety net, the government would have to increase reliance on domestic revenue through taxes. The idea goes that better governance would ensure more transparency in the handling of public money. But such optimism is totally dependent upon the government’s will for reforms.

Arguably, the strongest case that can be advanced for the freezing of aid is that it nudges Uganda further into self-reliance. The country, over the years, has fallen on foreign donors to finance most of its developments. While the results have at best been short-term gains, this in effect crippled long-term growth. Such a reduction would give Uganda space to build more domestic economic robustness.

For instance, the government could invest in agriculture, since it is the majority employer of Ugandans. Improving farming practices and enhancing access to markets would modernize farming and help Uganda export more of its goods, leading to increased job creation. Equally important, investing in education and technology could develop a quality workforce that could drive innovation and growth in this economy.

Of course, there is a long and tough road to self-reliance. The challenges, for instance, are great in Uganda: high levels of poverty, unemployment, and inequality. The Government of Uganda will have to make some tough decisions regarding resource allocation and assurance of resources being put to good use. This shall require strong leadership to ensure transparency and accountability.

In fact, corruption remains one of the major obstacles to development. Without foreign aid, government may resort to increasing taxes or decreasing spending on vital services, either of which may create public discontent and social unrest. Government, therefore, needs to gain confidence from the citizens by using public funds in a prudent manner.

Uganda is not an isolated case. Many African countries have been over-dependent on foreign aid, and the current aid freeze could portend a broader impact on the continent. The ability of Uganda to navigate this transition could therefore be instructive for other countries.

Countries like Rwanda and Ethiopia have had to do just about everything in self-reliance and good governance in recent years. Through investment in infrastructure, education, and technology, these countries have become less reliant on foreign aid and created a more viable economy. This could also have been the path which Uganda is taking, but that would have demanded a bold vision about the country backed by pragmatic leadership.

But the freeze on aid is also an opportunity wrapped in challenge. For the first time in decades, Uganda can take ownership of its destiny. A refocusing of energies toward domestic revenue, better governance, and strategic investments in priority sectors could yield a more sustainable and prosperous future.

This will not be easy, and there are no guarantees of success. But the potential rewards make the effort worthwhile. A self-reliant Uganda would be better able to solve its own problems and create opportunities for its people. It would also send a strong signal to the rest of Africa: that with the right policies and leadership, it is possible to break out of the dependency cycle and forge a brighter future.

All in all, this freeze in aid might mark a turning point for Uganda and Africa. While the challenges are huge, it is also an opportunity to press the reset button and rebuild Uganda with a self-sustaining mindset. Focusing on good governance, domestic revenues, and strategic investments in key sectors could unleash a new era of growth and development for Uganda. The road to the future is not going to be easy, but with will and vision, Uganda could emerge stronger and more resilient than ever before.