Russia and The AK 47: Africa Learns from Russia, USA and Europe

There is a famous African proverb among the Chewa People: Those who don’t ask eat the wax!

The moral is that those who seek to understand are likely to make less mistakes. The wax talked about here is that of the bee hives. The proverb points out that those who may not know and don't ask may end up eating the hives and not the honey.

Russia and Africa share a thing in common: they are notoriously misunderstood and misrepresented in the more accessible forms of media. Also the subject of Russia or Africa is one that is not popular and easily dismissed as purely academic.

Africa is depicted as a continent divided in three: The area North of Limpopo and South of Sahara (aka Sub-Sahara Africa); Republic of South Africa; and the North Africa. These names, make it is possible for the pen to label Africa in reinforced stereotypes. In cutting up Africa and mislabeling her to fit simplistic stereotypical shelves, we all fail to genuinely be part of the crafters of positive development narratives about Africa.

Is Russia keen on seeing Africa in a symbiotic cast or will their relation 200 years from now turn out to reveal sinister and precarious machinations?

Is Africa learning lessons as she is forced to avoid being weaned, but at the same time voice needs while in nestle?

It will take pro-active discernment to read between the lines as well as get African governments to invest in social development projects.

Russia, is officially the Russian Federation and the current president is President V. Putin. Unless, one is discerning enough, the Russian Federation part may be missed. Instead Russia is depicted as a very powerful but a “Dennis the menace” nation-state.

Popescu (2009) alludes to this in a European Council on Foreign Relations report titled: The Limits of Enlargement-Lite: European and Russian Power in the Troubled Neighbourhood. In it one traces deliberate monitoring of Russia’s practices in the region. 

The report’s abstract is as follows:

  “Over the past year, war in Georgia, the Ukrainian gas crisis and the burning of the Moldovan parliament have all dominated the front pages of European newspapers. But behind the headlines the story is just as bleak: politics in the “neighbourhood” is a toxic mixture of authoritarianism and stalled democracy, ongoing secessionist tensions continue to stoke fears of violent conflict, and the economic crisis is wreaking havoc throughout the region. The implications for the EU are profound. Renewed hostilities or economic collapse could see an influx of immigrants into eastern Member States. Several banks in western Member States are exposed to the imploding economies in the east. But beyond these immediate dangers, there is an emerging contest between the EU and Russia over the political rules that are to govern the neighbourhood. Since the 2004 Orange revolution in Ukraine, Russia has been working tirelessly to draw the countries of the region into its sphere of influence while the EU has continued to pursue a technocratic strategy best described as “enlargement-lite” – offering the neighbourhood states the prospect of eventual political and economic alignment with the EU while dampening down any hopes of actual accession.” The contrast is clear. Russia is the Nero. Europe is the discerning Tacitus.  But Russia is not ready to be depicted by Europe as Roman historian Tacitus described Nero’s period as “a period rich in disasters … even in peace full of horrors.

Russian Soft Power

Russian soft power supporting Africa can be seen in many ways: Lumumba University became the education formation for many Africans; Military Academies in many former Soviet Union countries were formative grounds for many present day African rank and file in cities such as Sofia of Bulgaria; Technical expertise in the various ministries of African governments have benefited from Russia in one way or another.

Russian Symbolism as a metaphor for productive work

The AK 47 is perhaps the most ubiquitous of Russian symbols, as the Converse shoe is for the USA or Volkswagen Beetle is for the Germans or the Monarch is for the British. 

According to the Business Insider report, “today, there are reported to be more than 100m Kalashnikov rifles in use worldwide. The weapon, which is favoured by both armies and militants, is said to be responsible for 250,000 deaths annually. An AK-47 appears on the flags of Mozambique and Hezbollah, as well as on the coats of arms of Zimbabwe and East Timor.” The image of an AK 47 is a metaphor for sophistication and adherence to strict rigours of technical or craft expertise that Russia can transfer to Africa.

Russia’s Post-Cold war stance

An analysis of Russian Foreign Policy documents, points to a deliberate and strategic determinism. Russia is now not only strategic but a confident active player-nation in the areas of foreign policy, peace interventions, finance, energy speculation, technological expertise, space exploration, deep ocean exploration, military, mineral exploration, research and development. 

In the International Affairs journal, Monaghan (2008), highlights how “Russian foreign policy reflects an evolving balance between vulnerability and opportunity. For much of President Putin's second term, Russia has been on the defensive. Despite increasing economic strength, observed in greater activity and an apparently more confident rhetorical stance, Russian diplomacy reflected a sense of vulnerability in Moscow. Indeed, diplomacy was largely inward looking: on the one hand it was a tool with which to unite and mobilize the Russian population rather than confront the West; on the other hand, it was a means of preventing external interference in Russian domestic affairs. On another level, Moscow sees an international situation destabilized by the unilateral actions of the US and an attempt by the ‘western alliance’ to assert and export its value system. But Moscow also believes that the international situation has reached a moment of transition, one which presents an opportunity for a Russia that lays claim to a global role. Russian foreign policy reflects a broad consensus in Moscow that asserts Russia's status as a leading power with legitimate interests. This moment of opportunity coincides with Moscow's desire to rethink the results of the post-Cold War period and to establish Russia as a valid international player. Continuing constraints and recognition that its domestic priorities proscribe Moscow from seeking confrontation with the West, which it cannot afford. Nonetheless, the attempt to establish the legitimacy of sovereign democracy as an international model of development appears to represent an important development in how Russia will approach wider European politics.”

Russia’s Self Determination and Re-invention

Russia has maintained herself as a nation that supported herself through reconstruction. By having plans in place, the Russians have a clear path toward economic growth, independence and development. The strategic approaches can be mined from various policy documents. I have limited myself to the period 2000-present time. According to the report by Gonzalez (2013) titled: The Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation: A Comparative Study, Russia has formulated a systematic approach to doing business. This reflects the Putin-Medvedev-Putin era.  What one should note is that, there is so much that goes into how nations can develop themselves or gain the support ( or subversion ) of others. There is a parallel between Weimar and Nazi Germany of the 1920’s-1950s and present-day Russia.

Russia Compared to post-war reparation era Germany

Molina (2003) points out the reasons why German did not recover so fast after World War I, were that German goods faced tariffs and heavy conditions imposed by France, England and other countries. One such condition was that France had to occupy Germany Ruhr Industrial complex as part of the reparations for war. Germany had embarked on a Social spending policy that way the Germans could buy German-made products. This in turn meant the money was re-invested in Germany economy. However, this failed and caused so much bitterness among the people. This bitterness would later turn out to galvanize the Germans who rallied behind Hitler in future.  It took other more lenient plans to get Germany to develop at a faster rate and since then, they have stayed developed. One such intervention came from USA in form of the Dawes Plan. The Dawes Plan of 1924 was an agreement between the Allies and Germany. The basic idea behind the plan was to make it easier for Germany to pay reparations using reparations gold reserves as well as other means such as legal prosecutions for wrong-doing and it had two key parts:

1.     Reparations were reduced in the short term to 50 million pounds per year

2.     The United States gave loans of $25 billion to Germany to help rebuild its industrial capacity (this made it easier for Germany to generate the tax revenues needed to meet reparations).

As a result, reparations payments resumed, the Germans invested in Technical education, enrolled many Germans into school, graduates had jobs and the Germans were able to take over strategic Banking and the Ruhr Industrial Sectors. These measures helped to improve the German economy as German industry thrived with the support of the loans and employment increased. Tax revenues also increased and employment grew.  In Journal article by  Costigliola 1976) titled: “The United States and the Reconstruction of Germany in the 1920s,” he argues that the foreign economic policy of the United States in the aftermath of World War I was not isolationist, but selectively interventionist. With a group of very able American businessmen-diplomats in the lead, the nation pressured the French to accept the Dawes Plan, helped solve the reparations problem, encouraged healthy economic recovery and growth (which embraced large sales of American capital goods to Germany), and ensured peaceful contentment in Europe. Most of the WW I, occurred in France and destroyed large parts of the country. So, France felt so bitter and required enormous reparations. Other players were the private businesses that expected to make profits out of the money they would lend to Germany. So, this diversity of interests at both private and public levels, ensured losses were socialized and gains were privatized. This still left Germany in a worse off place and stoked angry sentiments too.

Hallmarks of a Geopolitical Influencer

Scholars on Germany talk about two things. One is, the reasons why it took long to recover. Secondly, is the fact that she is now a super power, she should take on Global leadership roles. 

Three such reasons for slow growth given by Kagan (2019) were: Germany is a young nation, found in the center of a very turbulent continent and Germany’s Sonderweg, the unique and troubled path the nation took to modern democracy, by way of failed liberal revolution, hereditary monarchy, authoritarianism, frail democracy, and, finally, totalitarianism, all in the first seven decades of its existence. 

But, Kagan, also points out now that “the Germans have become arguably the most liberal and pacific people in the world, everyone’s choice to take on the now unclaimed mantle of ‘leader of the free world.’ Many on both sides of the Atlantic want to see more assertiveness from Germany, not less, in the global economy, in diplomacy, and even militarily.” 

This has insights for Africans to pick up lessons from. It could also be that Russia is learning lessons from Germany and would not like to repeat same mistakes. The other lesson to learn from all this is that a nation has to consolidate her potential forces for development. According to King (2019), United States has a global role to play because of it boasts of a heritage rooted in respect for life and dignity. It should be as “vindicator of the prerogatives of other democratic nation-states”—in other words, a defender of the idea that a world of culturally defined nations is humanity’s state of nature. Russia, seems to have picked up a lesson from these examples.

Russian Statehood and Foreign Policy

The new ideology is to fill in gaps. According Light (2006) in an article titled: In search of an identity: Russian foreign policy and the end of ideology, Russian Federation obsession now is to establish Russia’s new identity and fill the vacuum left by Marxism-Leninism. They also served to establish a consensus about the main principles of Russian foreign policy. Later concepts responded to perceived changes in Russia’s internal and external environment. They provide a map by which one can chart the evolution of Russian thinking about the world and Russia’s place in it. Although they reflect Russia’s current national values and fulfill important roles, they represent an attempt to deal with the end of ideology, rather than an endeavour to create a substitute ideology.”  The main goal of the foreign policy of Russia defined what a society would be at first in 2000; then it went into the realm of how the society would benefit the individual through ensuring peace and security in 2008; and by 2013 the priority was how interests that arise in such relations are addressed mutually. Accordingly, in 2000, the priority was “To protect citizens' and society's interests. In 2008, the priority was to protect citizens', society's and State's interests. And in, 2013, it was to Guarantee the protection of citizens', society's and State's interests,” (Gonzalez, 2013).  

According to Kurowska ( 2014), in an journal article titled: Multipolarity as resistance to liberal norms: Russia's position on responsibility to protect, Russia managed to overcome lawlessness experienced in a period termed by scholars as Bespredel and Betrayal to a time where there is accountability. Currently, there are structures that conform to internationally approved laws and regulations. There is a unique position Russia finds herself and the nature of kinship with other former Soviet Union states. Sometimes this relation spills into interventionist roles where Russia is forced to occupy other neighbouring countries. 

According to Forsberg (2017) in an article titled: The Psychological Dimension of Russian Foreign Policy: Putin and the Annexation of Crimea, Putin is forced to portray the image of a protector of Russia. Russia had a higher willingness to take risks in the context of the Ukrainian crisis.

Lessons For Africa

Russia is a key player today in world affairs and has the hallmarks of a powerful and influential kind. Such hallmarks include the wherewithal to organize policies for self-development and facilitate them. Russia, avoided the problems faced by post Weimar and Nazi Germany which had to play by agreements for reparations. Many of these were so punitive, suffocating, economically and psychologically damaging. Russia, has avoided the kind of politically supported ethno-nationalism that calls for valourizing certain races and regression of other races. This kind of policy has midwifed slavery, racism, apartheid, holocausts, genocides, mass evictions from land and World Wars. These two areas are lessons African can pick up from Russia. Africa, lacks financial credit to facilitate social development programmes and has to rely on loans and begging. In her case, she needs one who is willing to soften the interests on the loans. Russia has come out as the kind of nation willing to work with Africa and show her the things that needed to first be done. Africa, needed to get her diverse house in cultural, political, legal, social and economic order through having instruments that galvanize support, win popular participation by the people who will benefit, can be referred to in case of disputes and are fair enough so as to evoke respect and no resorting to wars or animosity. This way, rule of law, electoral and liberal democracies will increase in Africa. This leads to increased volume of goods, services and people engaged productively. Consequently, benefits of wealth will flow all ways; policy formulation will be regularly facilitated; enhanced multiparty democracy will increasingly be upheld; and strengthened institutional capacity for African governments and non governments. 

Statue of Mikhail Kalashnikov in unveiled in Moscow. Photograph: TASS/Barcroft Images