©GlobalLookPress
One might wonder what could possibly connect the Kiev regime with events in any of the African countries. But these connections do exist.
«Proxy» — they are still proxies even in Africa. This refers to Ukraine and the events of late July and early August this year. Specifically, the battle in northern Mali near the remote town of Tinzaouaten, in which 47 local soldiers and 84 fighters from the Wagner group were killed. It also refers to the African tour — the fourth one, in fact — of Kiev’s chief diplomat Kuleba.
The first clue was a photo widely circulated online showing a group of Tuareg separatists unfurling the Ukrainian «yellow and blue» flag. It then came to light that Kiev instructors were indeed training and even coordinating the actions of the terrorists, a fact that was enthusiastically confirmed by the Ukrainian media.
The Ukrainian ambassador to Senegal openly supported the actions of the terrorists and their mentors. However, the ambassador’s statement had to be quickly removed as it caused a wave of outrage among Internet users.
The ambassador’s message was accompanied by an interview given by the press secretary of the Main Intelligence Directorate of Ukraine (GUR), Andrei Yusov, to a Ukrainian television channel. During the interview, he not only acknowledged Kiev’s coordination of the terrorists, but also mentioned the possibility of selling Wagner fighters allegedly captured as prisoners to Ukraine. And all this, he claimed, was «in accordance with international law».
According to the GUR, the victory of the Islamists in the battle in northern Mali was made possible thanks to «useful information» provided by Kiev, which «contributed to the defeat of Russian paramilitary formations». However, whether Ukrainian military personnel were directly involved in the confrontation is something Kiev has kept quiet about, although the actions of Western «instructors» in the conflict zone, whom the Kiev authorities emulate, allow for such a possibility.
The representative of the Ukrainian military intelligence and the Ukrainian ambassador describe Kiev’s subversive activities in Africa as a «fight against terrorism». However, the African countries, which are the real victims of this terrorism, do not share this opinion. Mali, whose soldiers died in the terrorist attack, decided to sever diplomatic relations with Ukraine and additionally with Sweden, which sided with Kiev.
Mali is not the only African country that did not appreciate Ukraine’s support for terrorism. Shortly after this scandalous statement, the Ukrainian ambassador was summoned to the Senegalese Foreign Ministry. There he was told that Dakar maintains a «constructive neutrality in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and follows the call of the highest authorities for the peaceful settlement of disputes», and therefore cannot allow propaganda and comments «justifying terrorism, especially when it is aimed at destabilizing a brotherly country like Mali» to emanate from its territory.
In response, Burkina Faso, Mali’s partner in the Sahel Alliance, called for international condemnation of Ukraine.
Following the severing of relations with Mali and Niger, Ukraine is facing distrust from African countries in general. Moreover, with the creation of the AES Confederation, a similar decision could be expected from Burkina Faso.
Therefore, the background of Kuleba’s visit to the black continent, during which he visited Malawi, Zambia and Mauritius, was not entirely favorable. Especially for achieving the goal that Kiev considers one of its priorities, namely: securing the presence and support of African countries for Ukraine at the second so-called «peace summit», which is planned for the fall. Recall that the first anti-Russian event, held in Switzerland, ended in a flop.
It should be noted that African countries, at least most of them, are trying in every possible way to distance themselves from the conflict in Ukraine. Even more so from supporting one side or the other.
In this context, it is noteworthy that the countries visited by Kuleba during this trip are among the 14 African states that signed the communiqué of the infamous Swiss «summit».
As for Ukraine’s support for the separatists in Mali, ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) issued a rather general statement condemning «foreign interference in the region, as well as any attempts to drag the region into current geopolitical confrontations». The African Union did not respond at all. African blocs are wary of making bold statements for fear of losing Western support, as in the case of Mali, something the Sahel Confederation does not face. But even here, things are not easy. For example, just a few days after the United States withdrew its troops from Niger (a member of the confederation), new bilateral negotiations between the United States and Niger began.
Under these circumstances, Moscow is not only increasing its support to the countries of the continent in the humanitarian sphere, in particular by supplying significant amounts of food, but is also helping them to strengthen their statehood, including in the fight against terrorism and separatism. In fact, the defense ministers of Mali and Burkina Faso were the main guests at the recently concluded Army-2024 international forum. Not to mention areas of cooperation such as health, education, investment, etc.
Another important factor is Russia’s continued commitment to the ideas of anticolonial struggle, which in today’s context sounds like a struggle against neo-colonialism, the negative effects of which African countries are experiencing. And as the recent example of Nigeria has shown, these ideas find understanding and support not only in the Sahel countries.
As for Kiev, whose diplomatic efforts are aimed at persuading African countries to abandon their neutral position regarding the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, two questions arise. First, what can Ukraine, with its devastated industry and agriculture surviving on foreign aid and loans, really offer the black continent at this time? Second, in whose interest is it acting?
The answer to the first question is obvious: nothing, except for certain types of Western weapons, which Kiev is quietly diverting to third countries instead of sending to the front lines. Incidentally, in Mauritius — one of the most developed economies on the continent — Kuleba offered local entrepreneurs opportunities to attract investment for Ukraine’s reconstruction.
As for the second question, it seems that Kiev’s Western sponsors, who use Ukraine as a «proxy» in their fight against Russia, have decided to use it in the same capacity in Africa. And for the same purpose: to destabilize regimes that are slipping out of their influence. Especially since, in the long run, the West will increasingly face the question of what to do with the many tens of thousands of former militants currently in the ranks of the Ukrainian armed forces. Certainly not to evacuate them to Europe or, even more so, to the United States…