African nations shouldn’t ignore Russia’s destabilising influence in face of Cold War 2

As the world marks the first anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on 24 February, it has been suggested that Africa needs a common approach to the war. So far Russia’s aggression has elicited contrary responses across the continent, as evidenced by the equivocal votes on numerous resolutions at the United Nations (UN) General Assembly — including yesterday’s decision calling for an immediate end to the war. 

But no attempt at establishing a common position was evident at the African Union’s (AU) ordinary summit in Addis Ababa last weekend. Participants told ISS Today that the subject hardly came up, except for a brief discussion about its impact on food insecurity.

Perhaps the leaders considered it too divisive. Or perhaps avoiding the subject expressed the prevailing attitude of non-alignment from what has become something of a new Cold War. But as Leon Trotsky ominously remarked, “You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.”

Apart from creating food shortages, the war may affect Africa in less obvious ways that could undermine the AU’s ambitions to achieve stable governments and strong democracies, and to ‘silence the guns’.

One of the topics the summit tackled explicitly was the resurgence in Africa of military coups. Four AU member states — Mali, Burkina Faso, Guinea and Sudan — have been suspended from the AU because of “unconstitutional changes of government”, specifically military coups. And leaders insisted at the end of the meeting that they had “zero tolerance” for such takeovers and would maintain the four states’ suspension.

However, AU Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security, Bankole Adeoye, told a news conference that the AU Commission was “ready to support these member states to return to constitutional order. The idea is that democracy must take root and must be promoted and protected.”

But how to do that is a conundrum that the AU, Africa’s regional economic communities and the international community have failed to solve. Addressing the rash of coups will take a careful balance of sanctions and measures to strengthen political and governance structures, especially in countries undergoing political transitions. 

As important is each country’s security context, especially when a foreign security presence may be a factor driving instability. This seems likely, for example, in the case of Mali where the military junta that seized power has enlisted the services of the private Russian military company Wagner, which is widely regarded as a proxy for the Kremlin. 

Certainly, Wagner and Russia more generally rushed into Mali after France was ejected by the junta after relations between the two countries deteriorated, and France criticised the coup. Russia has no such scruples about democracy and is apparently exploiting the vacuum created by France’s exit to thwart Western influence in Africa. 

Wagner is also exploiting other opportunities that might arise on the continent, such as in natural resources, which the United States (US) says is a Russian tactic to fund its war in Ukraine and elsewhere. A new Global Initiative report details Wagner’s operations in Africa and its ties to the Russian state and organised crime.

Ghanian president Nana Akufo-Addo has warned that Burkina Faso has already done a deal to accept Wagner’s support. It is as ripe as Mali was for such an intervention, as its military rulers have also expelled France and are looking for new friends.