Browse all documents

Africa’s geostrategic alignments in response to the Ukraine war

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This research paper examines the diverse responses of African nations to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and proposes four strategic options for the continent to advance its political, economic, and social interests amid the shifting geopolitical landscape.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • African countries have shown varied diplomatic responses to the invasion of Ukraine. While 28 of the 54 African Union member states—including Botswana, Cabo Verde, Ghana, Malawi, Mauritius, Niger, Nigeria, Kenya, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, and Zambia—voted for a March U.N. General Assembly resolution condemning Russia, 26 others voted against, abstained, or did not vote, often to maintain bilateral ties and military cooperation with Moscow.
  • Despite condemning the invasion, some African nations have highlighted Western double standards. Kenya expressed concern over the discriminatory treatment of Africans attempting to flee Ukraine and neighboring countries, and other observers noted the disparity in international media coverage and financial assistance provided to Ukraine compared to crises in Africa.
  • The author proposes four strategic actions for African countries: taking a leadership role in peace negotiations to raise their international profile; leveraging resource gaps caused by Western sanctions to broker equitable trade agreements (specifically suggesting Angola, Mozambique, and Libya fill oil, maize, mineral, and gas shortfalls in Europe); diversifying imports of oil and wheat to stabilize economies against price shocks; and using the crisis to strengthen pan-African solidarity and continental unity.
  • South Africa adopted a "balanced" approach by refusing to explicitly condemn Russia, instead proposing a U.N. resolution for a ceasefire and peaceful settlement. This positioning aimed to maintain its relationship with Moscow through bilateral partnerships and its membership in BRICS.

Cite the original document

APA
Vayez, A. (2022). Africa’s geostrategic alignments in response to the Ukraine war. Africa Policy Research Institute. https://afripoli.org/africas-geostrategic-alignments-in-response-to-the-ukraine-war
Chicago
Vayez, Aaliyah. Africa’s geostrategic alignments in response to the Ukraine war. Africa Policy Research Institute, 2022. https://afripoli.org/africas-geostrategic-alignments-in-response-to-the-ukraine-war.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Vayez |first1=Aaliyah |title=Africa’s geostrategic alignments in response to the Ukraine war |publisher=Africa Policy Research Institute |date=30 June 2022 |url=https://afripoli.org/africas-geostrategic-alignments-in-response-to-the-ukraine-war |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{vayez2022africas, author = {Vayez, Aaliyah}, title = {{Africa’s geostrategic alignments in response to the Ukraine war}}, institution = {Africa Policy Research Institute}, year = {2022}, month = jun, url = {https://afripoli.org/africas-geostrategic-alignments-in-response-to-the-ukraine-war}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated