Cooperation with Africa has, steadily, taken on a new dimension after holding two Russia-Africa summits. Following the sudden collapse of the Soviet era, there was a long period of slackened relations. Currently, Africa is experiencing the ‘second reawakening,’ and the anti-neocolonial activities are rising across the continent. What is, seriously, at stake relates to achieving economic sovereignty, the main reason why Russia’s influence should not be treated as charity. In fact, Africa’s expectation is to have Russia undertake strategic initiatives and to implement projects in diverse areas.
Quite recently, the Director of the Institute for African Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor Irina Abramova, in an exclusive interview with African Initiative, offered a comprehensive explanation, description, and characterization of Russia’s diverse relations with Africa and concluded that Africa is the continent of the 21st century. Professor Abramova repeated the same old arguments to reach African leaders and, most possibly, executive entrepreneurs and political elites as well as the middle class and the youth. From the perspective of its wealth, opportunities, and resources, Africa’s share of the global GDP, of trade, and of investment occupies a very modest position. It implies—from analytics—that Africa’s development should have been better, with rates of economic growth in both qualitative and quantitative terms.
Economic Conditions Attracting External Actors
That is why the wealth Africa possesses—first and foremost its vast mineral resources—keeps springing surprises every day. Quite literally, new deposits of natural resources are discovered in Africa every year, and, incidentally, these are in demand for the development of modern high-tech industries.
Second is, of course, Africa’s demographic dividend. This is a young population—800 million people under 25. That is a huge figure. And what are young people? Young people are the future. Young people are energy, drive, and opportunity; they are the desire to work and produce something; they are the desire to consume. In this sense, Africa’s consumer market is growing at the fastest rate in the world—it doubles every five years. The continent’s demographic trend offers huge potential opportunities, including for developing consumer markets.
The above factor sets the goals. There is a major struggle for Africa—not only between the Americans, Europeans, and Japanese, that is, the traditional players, but also between China, India, and Brazil, and between the Gulf countries. Turkey is exceptionally active in Africa; although by potential it cannot be compared with Russia, in terms of its relationships, it is already, generally speaking, giving us a head start. In this sense, Africa has become attractive for global key players. It is an undeniable fact that it created the conditions to back away from rhetoric and optimize the position for strategic policy and concrete actions. Geopolitical solidarity, simply, would not give birth to expected development results.
Russia Slams the Doors on Itself
Perhaps, precisely, Professor Abramova has underlined Russia’s accomplishments as a key player during the Soviet times. It left behind 380 projects, including educational institutions and industrial facilities in Africa. As times changed, Russia hurriedly closed the door, slammed it shut, and said, “Why do we need some Africa?” And it, effectively, withdrew from there, from the continent.
And all those dividends—that is, both production sharing and the opportunities, including infrastructure and production facilities, that it had built for Africa—began to be used by completely different actors, primarily the Chinese, followed by Indians, and now from the Arab Gulf region, who picked up this “baton” and are strategically active in the continent. Africa opens up the broadest economic opportunities for these external players. For now, Russia is playing more of geopolitical rhetoric and policy symbolism. “And we must work with Africa. Another matter is that we must understand that we cannot resolve everything at once, fully aware that resources are limited, but constantly referring to the lack of money is ineffective,” according to Professor Abramova.
That, however, means Russia has to study the investment landscape. In this sense, it is important to learn from partners who have successful experience of engagement with Africa. It is necessary to understand clearly and to calculate carefully. Discard reciting administrative rules and regulations; make way for flexibility. And finally, the most important thing is coordination.
For 15 years, Professor Abramova has reiterated—Africa must be approached in a comprehensive and coordinated way. Coordination is the most important thing. First and foremost, it is people, because personnel decide everything. Africans’ attitude towards Russia is, generally, very positive. This is genuinely felt when travelling a great deal around Africa.
Official Russia’s Discrimination
Obviously, Russian officials in the Kremlin and Foreign Affairs Ministry discriminate—they single out a narrow group of priority countries. It has been constantly reflected in speeches and is currently reflected in policy implementation. If we look at Russia’s current relations with Africa even from the perspective of trade turnover, we still see North Africa and South Africa. Around 80 percent of total trade turnover is concentrated precisely in these areas. All of Africa south of the Sahara—between South Africa and North Africa—effectively drops out.
And now, Russia is, most actively, promoting and developing relations from a political point of view; these are, of course, the Sahel states. These three countries—Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger—genuinely stand on positions of friendship, cooperation, and the prioritization of relations with Russia.
On the other hand, Ghana should be of great interest to Russia. It was described in the West as a model democracy. Ghana is an excellent country from the point of view of infrastructure, including financial infrastructure, which may also be of interest to Russia. And the next point, Nigeria is extremely important. It is a large and complex country, but at the same time quite solvent and capable of generating demand for Russian products—for example, pharmaceuticals, electrical equipment, transport, agricultural machinery, and fertilizers. Governors play an enormous role in Nigeria; governorship there varies greatly from region to region. Nevertheless, the Chinese and Americans have a strong presence in Nigeria.
In East Africa. This is, without doubt, Uganda and Tanzania. Kenya is very interesting. Ethiopia is, of course, one of the key countries. First, because it has a huge population—more than 130 million people. Second, it is the headquarters of the African Union. And if we work actively in Ethiopia, we will thereby demonstrate the experience of our relations and transmit it to other African countries.
Neo-Colonialism vs. New Colonialism, Multilateralism
The term “neo-colonialism” is now very popular, but people also use the term “new colonialism” to describe different political and economic phases in Africa. Professor Abramova has always insisted that contemporary colonialism should not be called “neo-colonialism.” First, because neo-colonialism has a clear definition. If you open an encyclopaedia or even Wikipedia, you will see that neo-colonialism means the preservation of instruments of influence by former metropolises in their former colonies.
That is, it is what happened after the dismantling of the classical colonial system. It was formally dismantled, and declarations were adopted, but economic, political, intellectual, and cultural influence remained. And through that influence, countries continued—no longer by direct, but by indirect methods—to plunder former colonies. And what is new colonialism? In Professor Abramova’s view and interpretation, it is a phenomenon that emerged together with globalization, when methods of indirect rather than direct management and influence spread not only to former colonies but, in essence, to the entire world. What does contemporary colonialism represent, and what instruments does it use? First and foremost, technological colonialism. Second, informational colonialism. Until today, around 80 percent of global information resources are controlled by the United States. This is cultural colonialism—that is, the imposition of the uniformity of approaches to life and to the perception of reality.
And there is financial colonialism, because the entire global economy still continues to function through the dollar. The role of the dollar is declining, but abandoning it is frightening. And what happens as a result? In modern conditions, economic potential—that is, real wealth, resources, and opportunities—is concentrated, let us say, in the countries of the global majority, among those very seven billion people. And there remains one billion that holds managerial functions in its hands through the instruments of new colonialism.
That is, conditionally speaking, a kind of base and superstructure. And this superstructure, in essence, through the instruments of new colonialism—financial, technological, administrative, informational, and cultural—continues to manage the entire system and to siphon resources off for its own benefit.
But in reality, if Russia had built a normal new financial mechanism, it would not care. In practical terms, Russia has little foresight. Russia, simply, lacks interconnectedness with Africa and with Africans. That is, elements of psychology and elements of faith are involved. And this is an absolutely new phenomenon that is spreading across the entire world, using completely new, modern instruments. And that is precisely why it is referred to as new colonialism.
For multilateralism, Africa has to, without discrimination, interact and hold regular meetings with external states it considers important for its development. Global players are eyeing the continent, interaction with the African Union (AU) is expanding, and so are regional economic blocs. It is the economic sovereignty of an external player with adequate funds to invest, support, and sustain development. This could be in the framework of multipolar architecture, as Africa is the continent of the 21st century.
