Fact check “The Indian Ocean belongs to me and if I don’t get access, there will be wars.” Ugandan president
Executive summary
Uganda’s president Yoweri Museveni warned that landlocked countries denied access to the Indian Ocean could spark “future wars,” saying “that ocean belongs to me” and “I am entitled to it,” remarks widely reported after a November radio interview in Mbale [1] [2]. Kenyan leaders have since downplayed and accused media of exaggeration, with President William Ruto and his government calling some reports misleading while assuring Uganda will not be blocked from access [3] [4] [5].
1. What Museveni actually said — forceful rhetoric, not a formal declaration
Multiple regional outlets quote Museveni from a radio appearance in Mbale where he called it “madness” for coastal states to deny landlocked neighbours sea access, declared “that ocean belongs to me… I am entitled to it,” and warned “in the future, we are going to have wars” if access is blocked [1] [2] [6]. Reports place the remarks around Nov. 9–11, 2025 and characterise them as a warning about long‑term strategic and economic frustrations of landlocked states [1] [2].
2. How regional governments reacted — reassurance and downplaying
Kenyan officials responded quickly. President William Ruto publicly accused some media of twisting Museveni’s comments and sought to reassure the public that Kenya and Uganda remain “brothers and sisters,” while his foreign affairs team emphasised respect for Kenya’s territorial rights and existing international arrangements [3] [5] [4]. The Kenyan government also stressed it would not block Ugandan access through Kenyan ports, though precise modalities were not detailed [7] [4].
3. Media framing and disagreement over meaning
News outlets differ in tone and emphasis. Some present Museveni’s words as an explicit threat of war and quote his “it’s my ocean” phrasing directly [2] [8], while others characterise the remarks as rhetorical, contextualising them within longstanding landlocked-versus-coastal tensions and Uganda’s strategic concerns [9]. Kenyan coverage highlights government efforts to temper alarm and accuses some journalists of sensationalising the remarks [3] [10].
4. Background context — why the issue resonates in East Africa
The controversy taps longstanding regional dynamics: Uganda is landlocked and depends on coastal neighbours for exports and naval access; historical tensions over transit and ports are real, including past episodes of blocked routes [1] [9]. Experts and commentators link Museveni’s language to persistent economic and security grievances of landlocked states, and some argue the warning should be seen as political signalling rather than an imminent war plan [9].
5. Signals from Uganda’s inner circle and outside commentary
Several outlets cite supportive comments from Museveni’s circle, including public backing from his son, General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, who warned of “big problems” if Kenya refused access, which amplified concerns [7]. Other analysts and veteran journalists note that while the rhetoric is alarming, it also serves domestic political purposes and a push for deeper East African Community integration [9] [11].
6. What is not settled in reporting — practical and legalities
Available sources document the rhetoric and political responses but do not provide details on any concrete Ugandan plan to seize access, nor on legal mechanisms Museveni would invoke to claim “the Indian Ocean” as his own. Articles note arguments from think‑tanks about legal possibilities for naval presence and the “global commons,” but reporting does not confirm any state action to militarise the campaign for sea access [9]. Specific operational plans, troop movements tied to this rhetoric, or formal diplomatic demands with binding texts are not found in current reporting (not found in current reporting).
7. How to read the threat — political theatre, grievance, or something more?
Reporting shows three plausible readings: (a) hardline political theatre to pressure coastal neighbours and mobilise domestic support; (b) a legitimate articulation of landlocked states’ long‑standing economic grievances that risks escalation if left unaddressed; (c) a rhetorical warning that could be dangerous if amplified by social media and hardline actors, including military figures close to power [9] [7] [11]. Kenyan officials clearly prefer the first interpretation and have attempted to defuse tensions [3] [4].
8. Bottom line for readers — what the facts support
The factual record in regional reporting shows Museveni made belligerent-sounding remarks about entitlement to Indian Ocean access and warned of future wars; Kenyan leaders have tried to calm the situation and accused media of exaggeration [1] [2] [3] [4]. Reporting does not show concrete military moves or formal legal claims by Uganda to own the ocean, nor does it settle whether the rhetoric will translate into policy.