The reaction of the countries of the African continent to the events of Ukraine, especially in the Western press and political circles. There are various reasons why the reactions and policies of African countries are under the spotlight on the international agenda. The first of these is that the Russian Federation (RF) develops relations with some African countries. So that; These relations were interpreted as Moscow’s re-existence in the continent. For example, due to the sanctions imposed on Moscow after the annexation of Crimea to the RF, Africa provided various opportunities for the Kremlin to develop relations with different regions and to overcome the negative effects of the sanctions. The second reason can be cited as the difference in the reaction of the continent to the occupation of Ukraine by the RF. In other words, African countries showed a different attitude. Third, the continent is still testing self-determination. Different examples appear in the self-determination test of the continent; There are still movements that demand self-determination, especially within the scope of separation. Next to Western Sahara, Tuaregs in Mali and Kazamans in Senegal are among the regions that demand self-determination. The reaction of African countries to the RF’s policy and aggressive policies towards Ukraine since 2014, the perception of the continent’s self-determination and self-determination are closely related to its attitude towards this right. In other words, with the elimination of colonialism, factors such as the acquisition of independence and the establishment of states in Africa; that is, it has a close relationship with the exercise of self-determination. Because examining some of Africa’s experiences and politics regarding self-determination will be helpful in understanding the attitude of the continental countries towards the occupation of Crimea and finally Ukraine by the RF.
Situations such as the Western Sahara Problem, which is directly related to the abolition of colonialism, still cannot be resolved in the context of self-determination, South Sudan’s self-determination can be operated as a separation from Sudan even though it has nothing to do with the liquidation of colonialism, and there are still self-determination demands, especially separation wishes, in the continent, It shows that Africa has been going through the test of self-determination since decolonization.
There are controversial and different examples of self-determination on the continent. Even though Africa’s relationship with self-determination continues in the context of the exam and different examples are encountered in these relationships, the African Union’s understanding and practices of self-determination are in line with the general acceptance of the right in international law. In short, the inviolability of borders and territorial integrity remain important for Africa.
March 2,2022-UN General Assembly Resolution and Africa
Despite the RF’s criticism and heavy sanctions by the international community, the Moscow administration continues its attacks on Ukraine. In particular, the reactions to the RF, which was sanctioned by the West, were in the form of opposition to the Ukraine War.
African countries, on the other hand, give different reactions. One of the elements that best illustrates this is the United Nations (UN) General Assembly’s Resolution on Ukraine dated March 2, 2022. The aforementioned resolution was adopted with 141 votes in favor, 35 abstentions and 5 negative votes. In Africa, 28 states adopted the resolution, 17 abstained and 8 did not participate in the voting. Considering that there were 35 abstentions in total, it is remarkable that Africa contributed 17 votes.
Three non-permanent African countries of the UN Security Council (UNSC), Kenya, Ghana and Gabon, condemned the aggressive policies of the RF in the process leading up to the invasion. In expressing his opinion, Kenya underlined the well-known principles of Africa, the inviolability of borders and the self-determination of each people. While reminding the world public that the current African borders are determined according to the uti possidetis principle, in other words, the borders drawn by the colonial administrations are protected; He emphasized that although Africa was not satisfied with this situation, the colonial borders were accepted.
The African country that made the most of the reaction was the Republic of South Africa (GAC); because the GAC abstained. As a justification, he showed that the resolution of the UN General Assembly did not create an environment suitable for diplomacy and diplomatic activities. It also called for dialogue to ensure the security of the parties. The traditional foreign policy of the GAC, the importance it attaches to the Non-Aligned Movement and its membership to the BRICS together with the RF can be listed as other reasons underlying its decision.
Mali and the Central African Republic (OAC), which has recently improved its relations with Moscow, also abstained. While Uganda announced its abstention vote, it will sit on the chair of the Non-Aligned Movement; therefore, he declared that he had taken the decision in question for the sake of impartiality. Morocco, Namibia, Algeria, Angola, Burundi, Guinea, Ecuadorian Guinea, Madagascar, South Sudan, Mozambique, Zimbabwe and Sudan also abstained. The African Union, on the other hand, stated that the situation in Ukraine is very worrying; but he did not condemn RF.
Ethiopia and Cameroon did not participate in the voting. Ethiopia has made a statement that the situation in Europe is causing concern. Eritrea was the only country from the continent to vote against the resolution. Mauritania, Kenya, Mauritius, Lesotho, and Nigeria voted in favor of the resolution. Botswana, Capo Verde, Ghana, Malawi, Niger, Seychelles, Sierra Leone and Zambia were also among the other African countries that supported the decision.
Africa’s Approach to Crimean “Self-Determination”
Crimea is a controversial example for Africa as well as for the international community. The attitude of African states on the issue of Crimea differs. In order to understand the reactions, the relevant decision of the UN General Assembly and the attitude of the continental states are important. Resolution 68/262 of the UN General Assembly is called the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine. While the UN reiterated that Crimea is a part of Ukraine, it recognized the Crimean referendum as invalid.
Benin, Cape Verde, Chad, Guinea, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Niger, Nigeria, Central African Republic, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Togo, Tunisia adopted the resolution. Sudan and Zimbabwe said no to the resolution. Angola, Algeria, Djibouti, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, South Africa, South Sudan, Kenya, Comoros, Lesotho, Mali, Egypt, Mauritania, Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe Islands , Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia abstained. Equatorial Guinea, Ghana, Guinea-Bisseau, Morocco, Ivory Coast, Republic of Congo did not participate in the voting.
Sudan has adopted an approach that defends Crimea. Algeria and South Sudan neither supported nor opposed self-determination. By not participating in the voting, Morocco continued its Western Sahara policy in Crimea.
There is no integrity in the attitudes of other countries that are exposed to self-determination movements towards Crimea. Zimbabwe, for example, is a country that has a self-determination movement within its borders; but he voted against the resolution and supported Crimea. Equatorial Guinea, which wanted to return to the pre-colonial era on its territory, did not participate in the voting.
Russian Federation-Africa Relations
It is possible to read the two decisions mentioned above within the scope of RF-Africa relations. Especially during Putin’s second term, relations gained momentum. Among the most important factors triggering this acceleration are the support of the Soviet Union to Africa during the Cold War and the exposure of RF to international sanctions after the Crimea policy. After Crimea decided to join Russia; In other words, it has not been seen that African countries have imposed sanctions on the RF since 2014.
In RF-Africa relations, more defense and military cooperation is being made. For example, half of Africa’s arms imports come from the RF. It is also necessary to mention the summit held between Africa and RF in 2019. The heads of state of 43 African countries attended the summit in Sochi. While underlining the need to develop economic relations; Putin stated that he attaches importance to the stability of Africa. The Summit will meet every 3 years.
Considering its importance in African politics, the reaction of the GAC needs to be examined. At the same time, his statement that he can be a mediator between RF and Ukraine sheds light on understanding the position of the GAC. When RF’s aggressive policies towards Ukraine began, the GAC condemned Moscow’s attitude and called on RF to withdraw from Ukraine. It should be remembered that the GAC has attempted to become a member of the UN Human Rights Committee for the period 2023-2025, and its reaction should be read from this framework.
The fact that Mali cut off its close military relations with France and turned to the RF also makes its reaction to the events in Ukraine important. The successive coups in the country caused both his isolation in West Africa and the straining of his relations with France. In particular, the realization of pulses in a very short time can be considered as an important factor in directing them to RF. Because, as stated above, Mali is under an attempt to isolate. In other words, the RF filled the gap and showed its support for Mali in various international environments. For example, Moscow voted against the UNSC resolution adopting the sanctions of ECOWAS, an important organization of West African countries.
Another prominent part of the Mali-RF relationship is Wagner’s; that is, the claim that Russian mercenaries are operating in Mali. Wagner and his activities in Africa are frequently criticized, especially by Western actors.
The Central African Republic is an African state whose relations with the Russian Federation are developing. Again, Wagner’s activities come to the fore in bilateral relations. So that; It is estimated that Wagner first operated in Africa at OAC in 2017. Later, the official military advisers of the RF came to the OAC. In addition, it is possible to talk about the development of bilateral relations. The aforementioned nature of their relations can also be understood from the RF’s reaction to Ukraine’s policies and aggression. The OAC supported the RF’s decision to recognize Donesk and Luhansk as independent states.
As a result, Africa’s relations with the RF began to develop, especially in the last period of Putin’s administration. It can be said that both sides have gained from these relations. The low rate of opposing votes in the resolutions of the UN General Assembly on the territorial integrity of both Crimea and Ukraine shows that the dominant principles in Africa’s self-determination attitude continue to be adopted. The principles of inviolability of borders and territorial integrity were adhered to.
