The Kremlin has moved to formalize Russia’s military cooperation with West African states, with President Mikhail Mishustin signing a decree that approves draft agreements with Senegal and with Sao Tome and Principe. The announcement, reported by TASS, signals a structured approach from Moscow toward expanding defense ties with two important partners on the Atlantic littoral.
In the decree, the government approves the draft Agreement on military cooperation between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Senegal, a document proposed by the Russian Ministry of Defense and prepared for submission by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs along with other relevant federal authorities. The wording underscores a procedural path: the defense ministry initiates, the foreign ministry reviews, and the broader executive branch endorses the text before any binding steps are taken. This framework aligns with Russia’s long-standing practice of negotiating security cooperation through interdepartmental coordination and formal government action. (Source: TASS)
Separately, a second order concerns a draft agreement with Sao Tome and Principe, another Atlantic partner where Moscow appears to be pursuing expanded military diplomacy. The public record suggests both proposals share a common objective: to establish formal channels for defense cooperation, including possible training, equipment exchange, and joint exercises under mutually agreed terms. The exact modalities would be shaped by ongoing consultations among Russia and the respective national authorities. (Source: TASS)
Historical context adds nuance to the current stage. Notably, it has been reported that in 2009 a contingent of about 300 Russian military personnel served with the Sao Tome and Principe Armed Forces under various arrangements. That earlier engagement is part of a broader pattern where Russia seeks to maintain a presence through advisory roles, capacity-building missions, and collaborative security efforts with partners across Africa and the wider Atlantic region. The modern actions reflect continuity with those protective footprints while signaling a refreshed diplomatic appetite for formalizing cooperation through official accords. (Source: TASS)
The international arena intersects with other geopolitical developments. Earlier discussions touched on participation by Russian representatives in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit slated to be hosted in San Francisco. An American State Department spokesperson emphasized that participation would proceed in line with U.S. law and sanctions regimes, highlighting the sensitivity of security and economic diplomacy within APEC. The United States stressed its responsibility to host the 2023 APEC Summit, framing the event as a venue where economic collaboration and strategic conversations occur under a strict regulatory framework. (Source: US State Department statements)
Commentary from Moscow has framed the APEC context as part of a broader dialogue about regional security and multilateral engagement. Maria Zakharova, the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, characterized certain U.S. political lines within APEC as flawed, pointing to differences in approach to international cooperation and alignment with national interests. Her remarks reflect ongoing tensions in how great-power diplomacy is conducted within global forums, where governance norms, sanctions, and consensus-building often shape the scope of participation and outcomes. (Source: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia)
Taken together, the contemporary moves toward Senegal and Sao Tome and Principe illustrate a deliberate strategy to formalize security partnerships with selected states while navigating the broader currents of international sanction regimes and regional security needs. For observers, the sequence of government decrees, interagency coordination, and public disclosures provides a window into how Russia seeks to project capabilities, deepen strategic ties, and participate in regional security architectures through official accords and cooperative mechanisms. The overall trajectory suggests a blend of diplomatic signaling and practical capability-building that could affect future military dialogues, training programs, and joint operations at a defined, mutually agreed pace. (Sources: TASS; US State Department; Russian Foreign Ministry)