In 2019, Vladimir Putin hosted 43 African leaders for the first Russia-Africa summit – more than similar meetings hosted by London or Paris. In Sochi, the Russian president worked to castigate Western countries, which dictate “their political or other conditions” to African countries – a reference to certain requirements in the field of human rights. “We have a lot to offer our African friends”, launched the master of the Kremlin.
This summit highlighted the increasingly frontal strategy practiced by Russia in Africa. After the annexation of Crimea in 2014, which earned it international sanctions, Russia has multiplied its efforts to sell its weapons, extract mineral resources and support wavering regimes. Now that the country is under much tougher sanctions, Moscow may be tempted to step up its activities on the continent. But are African governments convinced by his offer?
The March 2 vote in the UN General Assembly condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine suggests that many African countries are betting on caution. Of the 54 African countries, 28 supported the motion, 17 abstained and eight did not participate in the vote. Only Eritrea, a veritable prison state, has joined the Russian side, along with Belarus, North Korea and Syria.
African bitterness
The vote at the United Nations reflects historical ties between Russia and ruling parties, particularly in southern Africa. A good part of the elites of this region were educated in the Soviet Union; some have fond memories of it. The independence parties that still govern in Angola, Mozambique (whose national flag is adorned with a Kalashnikov), Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe saw the Soviet Union as an ally in their fight against Western power – power to which Russia should, in their eyes, succeed. All abstained from the vote. Yet Ukraine was also part of the Soviet Union.
Nostalgia goes hand in hand with an underlying feeling of hostility against the West. Murithi Mutiga of the International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based think tank, notes that “how the United States behaved during its period of unipolar power” stirred up a lot d’“bitterness”.
NATO’s intervention in Libya in 2011, in defiance of the African Union, also angered some leaders, such as Yoweri Museveni in Uganda. The chaos that this in
The following is reserved for subscribers…
- Access all subscribed content
- Support independent writing
- Receive the Mail Alarm Clock every morning
Discover all our offers
Source of the article
The Economist (London)
Great institution of the British press, The Economist, founded in 1843 by a Scottish hatter, is the bible for anyone interested in international affairs. Openly liberal, he generally defends free trade, globalization, immigration and cultural liberalism. It is printed in six countries, and 85% of its sales are outside the UK.
None of the articles are signed: a long-standing tradition that the weekly supports with the idea that “personality and the collective voice matter more than the individual identity of journalists”.
On the site of The Economist, in addition to the main articles of the journal, there are excellent thematic and geographical files produced by The Economist Intelligence Unit, as well as multimedia content, blogs and the calendar of conferences organized by the journal throughout the world. As a bonus: the regular update of the main stock market prices.
The magazine cover may vary between editions (UK, Europe, North America, Asia), but the content is the same; in the UK, however, a few extra pages deal with national news.
The Economist 43.4% is owned by the Italian Agnelli family, the rest of the capital being divided between major British families (Cadbury, Rothschild, Schroders, etc.) and members of the editorial staff.
Read more
Our services