Africa’s responses to global crises hark back to the colonial past

The ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine has been a display of sharp contrasts on many levels from the never-ending coverage of Ukrainians seeking refuge in neighbouring countries being welcomed with open arms to Africans struggling to leave the besieged country because of racism. African countries have adopted different approaches to getting out their citizens still trapped in Ukraine mirroring the differences at play elsewhere.

These contrasts were also seen when the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to condemn Russia’s invasion, demanding it stop fighting and withdraw its troops from Ukraine. The Ukrainian president has urged Western powers to enforce a no-fly zone but that has not happened despite the continued loss of lives but apparently the situation was direr in Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya in 2011 when Western powers with the agenda of regime change were quickly to impose a no-fly zone which ultimately toppled the strongman from power.

Libya has been burning ever since but the architects of that destruction have continued to insist that that country is better off now than it was during Gaddafi’s rule.

The votes cast by African countries in the UN General Assembly condemning Russia’s invasion received far more attention than votes cast by other countries in other continents. Some analysts wondered why Africa, as if it were a country, must have a position on that conflict. Others pointed out that the votes cast mirrored the interests of African countries be they economic, military or security in relation to the position of global powers drawn in the conflict in Ukraine. There were those who also pointed at the glaring differences in terms of the attention paid to the invasion of Ukraine but not the many armed conflicts in Africa which in many ways are fuelled by the demand of resources by powerful countries.

Analysts who wondered on what that conflict might mean for the security of Africa were onto something. They argue that deteriorating security conditions because of the withdrawal of Russian mercenaries could lead to ‘expansion wars’ on the continent.

What is left out is the fact that these global conflicts and African countries’ responses to them through various forums hark back to the yokes of colonialism and neo-colonial forces.

An African state at independence in the late 1950s to 1970s was an empty state in most cases, one with all the trappings of power for the new ruling elites but where the central authorities could barely exercise control over their entire territories as inherited from colonial powers or redrawn after post-independence wars with neighbouring countries. In other cases the central authorities have retreated from some of the areas they once controlled because of being overwhelmed by, among others, security challenges.

The many coups on the continent, the democracy projects and many things in between have failed to deliver stability and a state in control of its real estate.

To fill this security void, some former colonial powers never real left the countries they had colonised, retaining sway in security matters by putting boots on the ground. They propped up unpopular regimes as the Cold war waged and helped topple regimes not in their corner. New global players entered the scene leading to a continent blanketed in all sorts of security agreements and foreign military bases in ‘strategic’ countries in Africa to safeguard their interests.

When Western powers toppled Gaddafi under the guise of the ‘Arab spring’, they had opened the floodgates to the many security challenges which had been kept at bay from crossing the Sahara desert further south. With the buffer zone gone, these security challenges faced by some countries like Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, were compounded and led to further instabilities which gave the Russians a foothold on the continent as offering ‘alternative’ security plans with few questions ever asked compared to the stringent conditions attached with the same help from former colonial powers and their allies. While these votes might be reflective of the contexts within each African country, they are equally reflective of the positions of major powers which hold sway in these countries and the ‘usefulness’ or otherwise of the ruler or a regime to these global powers.

African countries, or through the continental body in the African Union are still poorly equipped to respond to the crises in Africa let alone to global conflicts casting their long shadows on the continent’s past and its continued dependence on neo-colonial powers.