Background
Africa’s historical context regarding foreign influence is critical to understanding the current dynamics at play on the continent. For centuries, African countries have navigated a complex landscape of colonialism, post-colonial struggles, and ongoing external influence. However, after gaining independence in the mid-20th century, many African states faced the legacy of these exploitative relationships, which often left them economically vulnerable and politically unstable. In recent decades, the resurgence of great power competition has seen both Russia and China assert their influence in Africa, often positioning themselves as alternatives to Western partnerships. This has led to a renewed focus on relationships with external powers. The reality is that this historical backdrop exists, is a part of Africa’s current geopolitics, and highlights both the complexities and reality of the significance of General Langley’s assessment of the continent’s role in the world order.
General Langley’s perspective
On September 17, 2024, General Michael Langley, Commander of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), provided a candid assessment of the challenges facing African countries amidst growing external pressures from the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). In a compelling conversation with this writer, Langley emphasized that Africa is increasingly at the center of global power competition, with both Russia and China asserting their influence in ways that often undermine the rules-based international order.
Drawing from his extensive experience, Langley highlighted the complex and evolving nature of Africa’s position within the global system, framing his insights within the broader discussion on AFRICOM’s engagement with the continent. Langley noted that Russia and China have been deeply involved in Africa, driven by profound strategic and economic interests. “Both nations have their own aspirations on the continent that often don’t align with the rules-based international order,” Langley remarked, pointing to activities that include misinformation campaigns, unbalanced economic practices, and unfavorable mining concessions. These actions, he explained, create complications for African nations striving to stabilize their economies and governance structures.
Russia, according to Langley, has demonstrated assertiveness, particularly through activities that challenge African governments’ sovereignty and security. “There are other external players, particularly the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Russian Federation, who bring additional complications,” he said. He elaborated that African countries partnering with the U.S. face a myriad of challenges “while striving to strengthen their economies and institutionalize governance,” he stated, alluding to Moscow’s use of economic leverage and security partnerships that often exacerbate tensions on the continent.
Langley views Africa as a continent with agency and a critical voice in shaping the future of global order. Langley underscored the importance of partnerships rooted in mutual respect, pointing to the collaborative successes of AFRICOM in working alongside African militaries to address regional security challenges.
Excerpt of meeting
Below is an excerpt of the key points discussed in the meeting, closely reflecting General Langley’s original phrasing while maintaining his intended meaning and tone, with minor edits for brevity and clarity:
Pearl Matibe: Now, let’s talk about malign influences. You mentioned earlier, and I said I’d get back to this—cyber, information-related risks, and AFRICOM’s challenges with the Russian Federation and PRC on the continent. Could you comment on that?
General Langley: Yes, you’re seeing signatures of the PRC trying to get into networks across several African countries. Some countries want to protect their networks, but others are investing in untrusted networks, like those from Huawei or other PRC offerings. We caution them about this. We provide a value proposition on how to protect their networks, but sometimes they move forward with integrating PRC-built networks that impact smart cities. Does it protect sovereignty? It’s questionable. So, we offer cautionary tales and overall programs like Digital Africa, which aims to help them build responsible networks that respect privacy.
Matibe: Is it [illegal, unregulated, unreported fishing] not on the decline in the Gulf of Guinea?
Langley: Not from what I’m seeing. I go to the academic community to tell this story. Even African partners, across 10 years, their catch, if you will, has reduced substantially. Because they don’t have what it takes to be able to protect their economic exclusive zones, there’s a lot of trawlers out there. It’s not just the PRC, but PRC is the biggest player in it. There are some other players that are doing over-fishing in these regions, which prevents the African countries from protecting.
Matibe: Is the PRC in that region looking to set up a base, beyond the one they already have in Djibouti?
Langley: We forecast that the PRC is actively seeking. In the maritime domain, I think the biggest threat to African countries is the illegal, unregulated, unreported fishing.
Analysis: Debate on world order
Langley’s perspective resonates with key themes from political theorists such as David A. Lake, Hedley Bull, and Alexander Wendt. Bull’s Anarchical Society (1977), a classic in international relations theory, views global order as an inherent struggle for balance amidst an anarchic system. In contrast, Langley emphasized Africa’s role not merely, as a recipient of order imposed by external forces but as a proactive agent. Echoing Hedley Bull’s argument, Langley noted that “order is not just imposed; it is shaped through cooperative action,” aligning with Bull’s belief in the necessity of a society of states to maintain order within an anarchic world.
David A. Lake, in The State and International Relations (2008), would likely find Langley’s perspective on Africa’s agency aligned with his assertion that states, especially those in the Global South, are actors capable of shaping international relations despite systemic constraints. Lake stresses that while powerful states often influence global norms, smaller or emerging states, such as those in Africa, have the capacity to assert their interests within the global order.
Moreover, Langley pushed back against narratives of African subjugation within the great power rivalry, drawing parallels with Alexander Wendt’s Anarchy Is What States Make of It (2004). Wendt’s approach posits that the international system is not determined by an inherent anarchy but by the interactions and social constructs that states build. The author’s this sentiment, emphasizing that “Africa is not destined to be a pawn in global competition—it is what African nations make of it.”
His remarks prompted reflection on the challenges that African states face in navigating this complex terrain. While many African countries have fostered partnerships with both Western and Eastern powers, they have also developed independent strategies that reflect their unique geopolitical realities. Langley’s insistence on agency highlights the growing recognition of Africa’s importance not just in security terms, but also as a key player in global governance.
The growing interest of major powers in Africa’s natural resources, markets, and strategic locations, coupled with the continent’s internal challenges, presents a double-edged sword for many African countries. Some African leaders have warned that this renewed attention might escalate rivalries and lead to destabilization, while others see opportunities for leveraging these relationships to bolster their own development agendas.
In a broader context, Langley’s emphasis on African agency and strategic partnerships aligned more closely with Lake’s and Wendt’s outlooks, where global dynamics are shaped by interaction rather than predetermined.
As great power competition continues to unfold on the continent, Langley’s perspective on Africa suggests that the future of international order may rest not only on the maneuvers of global powers but also on the strategic decisions of African states themselves. His insights offer a forward-thinking approach to how Africa can transcend traditional narratives of competition and carve out its own place within the global order.
Considerations, in closing.
It appears sensible for collaborative, U.S.-Africa security initiatives to be prioritized. By encouraging American businesses to engage in investments, particularly in infrastructure and technology, the U.S. can help African countries further safeguard their resources for long-term growth. This might help mitigate foreign exploitation. Regardless, Africa is a central player in the ongoing dialogue of global power and order. General Langley recognizes the aspirations of many African leaders and an understanding of Africa’s importance in shaping international affairs.
