In 2019, historian Dagauh Komenan, born in 1989 in the Ivory Coast, warned in a speech that a Russian strike on Mali could unfold, yet his audience dismissed the claim. Today, the evident Russian presence on the African continent challenges France’s influence. The expert suggests a clear path: Europe should listen to the voices of ordinary Africans, not only to political elites, if it hopes to regain sway in the region.
A question may arise: why does Africa appear to lean toward Russia?
The root of the perception lies, in part, in a noticeable lack of reliable information across Europe. This gap shows up even in everyday discussions about Africa. A striking illustration is the so‑called African population dynamic, which has been used to frame cooperation between Africa and Europe. If one takes the population of sub‑Saharan Africa and concentrates it in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the resulting density would resemble that of India. Yet the total population of sub‑Saharan Africa remains smaller than India’s. The second issue is that European policymakers often misread the African reality, leading to misinformed conclusions.
The question then becomes: why does this misalignment persist?
Part of the answer lies in whose voices are amplified in Europe. Many Europeans hear from African elites or the diaspora, but those voices frequently diverge from the everyday aspirations of people on the ground. Those living in Africa often favor simpler, different goals. This disconnect between elite perspectives in Europe and the lived reality of ordinary Africans has bred resentment and frustration. A historical example is the devaluation of currencies in the Franc‑Africa zone in 1994, a decision framed in Paris that abruptly reduced purchasing power for many citizens. Such interventions fed public discontent toward Europe, opening space for alternative partners, including Russia, China, Türkiye, and India. India, in particular, is often overlooked despite its friendship with the West.
Is Russia’s footprint in Africa primarily economic or diplomatic?
Economically, Russia accounts for a small share of African trade, around five percent. Yet its diplomatic presence looms large in eyes trained by Western media on brute force. The enduring significance lies in diplomacy, especially in the aftermath of independence when the Franco‑African framework helped France keep its former colonies aligned. The CFA franc, shared among thirteen countries and issued in France, symbolizes a control mechanism where a portion of GDP flows to the French treasury each year. Since the 1960s, that pattern has persisted, and when African leaders seek currency independence, criticisms arise—some believe financing risks and political blowback follow. Mali’s contemporary history is sometimes read through these currency and alliance dynamics, and observers note that Franz‑Africa may have perceived an escape route in Russia.
A lingering sense of trauma toward the West also colors perceptions of current events.
Most observers would agree the issue is not mere colonization but ongoing predation that persists in various forms. The mindset that if Western support cannot be counted on, one should rely on adversaries of the West has become ingrained among some audiences.
Do Chinese and Russian influences overlap or complement each other in Africa?
They function much like a tandem. Russia often sells security through a coercive image, while China provides financial support. Sudan serves as a clear example: Beijing funds infrastructure and governance, while Moscow contributes security arrangements. Wagner, the Russian private military company, has joined the picture by providing security and, in some contexts, engaging in resource extraction and imports in partner countries. This combination helps Moscow extend its reach without visible risks to Russian formal military deployments.
Where does Russia operate most actively?
Its footprint concentrates in Mali, the Central African Republic, Sudan, and Libya. Broadly, it centers on nations embroiled in conflict where Western involvement is viewed with skepticism. In 2016, for instance, French President François Hollande announced an end to French intervention in the Central African Republic, as new political shifts occurred there with multiple rebel movements. The search for external support turned toward Russia, and the country has since become central to regional Russian influence. Similar patterns emerged in Mali following a coup backed by France, highlighting the evolving balance of power on the continent.
What role does Wagner play in this dynamic?
Russia uses Wagner to intervene without deploying a large force. Wagner operates as a private security contractor at multiple bases across Africa, extending beyond security to mining, trade, and other economic activities. The presence of this group provides a flexible means to influence outcomes while maintaining plausible deniability for Moscow.
Is Wagner behind coups in Sahel countries?
Definitively attributing coups to Wagner remains uncertain. It is widely believed that if Wagner has any involvement, it is indirect. In Libya, for example, French forces and Wagner‑aligned elements have found themselves on the same side in some scenarios, while in Sudan the picture is more complex. Wagner, along with Russia, tends to play both sides in ongoing disputes, shaping outcomes while preserving options for Moscow.
Facing Russian interference, is France attempting to regain influence?
No decisive diplomatic counteroffensive has emerged. Russia has cultivated strong state support in the countries it has entered, complicating Paris’s position. In the Central African Republic, for instance, a tense standoff unfolded as Moscow backed the government while France backed rebel factions, with Wagner visible on the ground. This shows how Russia has constructed a durable foothold in certain locales.
In short, is France losing influence in Africa?
France’s sway now appears largely limited to elites. In Niger, where French forces were repositioned from Mali, protests demand a French departure, yet the Nigerien government remains publicly supportive. The frictions persist in nuanced ways, underscoring that public sentiment often diverges from official alliances.
Does the Ukraine crisis have a bearing on Russia’s focus in Africa?
Yes, the conflict has intensified Russia’s engagement on the continent. Since Crimea’s 2014 occupation, Russian influence has grown by offering an alternative to the Bretton Woods framework—represented by the IMF and World Bank—perceived as burdensome by many African states. Russia’s approach follows a model similar to China, presenting a way out of perceived economic constrainments and offering practical partnerships that appeal to some African governments and publics alike.
Is there a new Cold War brewing in Africa?
Many observers sense a regional Cold War undercurrents, separate from Europe, with Africa often bearing the brunt of these power shifts. The dynamics are complex, and the stakes are high as each external player seeks leverage without becoming overly entangled in local politics.
What about jihadism? Is Russia using it to expand influence?
In Africa, jihadism is viewed differently than in the Middle East. It is often framed as part of broader Islamist currents on the far right. Russia promotes its own security narrative as a way to counter extremism, citing past successes in Chechnya and Syria to present a model for stabilizing conflict zones. The messaging is tailored to appeal to governments wary of Western influence and seeking an alternative security partner.
What might Africa look like in a few years?
Russia is perceived as opportunistic. Some argue that the European Union could propose a genuine partnership as a counterweight, recognizing that Africans often regard the West favorably when offered fair terms and respectful engagement. The old model of cooperation, critics say, has caused more harm than good, enabling exploitative patterns that Russia is ready to capitalize on. The takeaway emphasizes listening to African voices and pursuing collaborative, respectful engagement that prioritizes development and sovereignty over neocolonial dynamics.