The Widening Divide Between Africa and the West

Mikhail Gamandiy-Egorov
The incessant attempts of the West to dictate the future of African countries continue to produce the opposite of the expected result. If divorces have already been initiated, or are in the process of being initiated, between the West and several African leaderships – in the case of civil society the upper stage of the rupture seems to have already been reached.

With an extraordinary African Union (AU) summit on May 25-26 devoted to counterterrorism and unconstitutional change in Africa, and the US seeking to pass new legislation to monitor and combat Russian presence on the continent, the Western outlook is likely to continue to drift and fall.

As far as the so-called “unconstitutional” changes are concerned, beyond a very particular interpretation on the part of the West and its acolytes, including in Africa, depending on whether this is taking place on the African continent or, for example, in a certain Eastern European country, the fact is that it is admittedly a subject dear to the hearts of the Western elites today, as well as to the local contractors. The case of Mali is indeed shaking the offices of Western capitals and some African countries today.

Patriotic militaries that listen to mass popular aspirations, all within a pan-African and pro-multipolar vision – are indeed a mix that the West wants to avoid – because the Malian case has already demonstrated that the values of true dignity are not purchasable. Pressure, intimidation and sanctions of all kinds – will not have helped the objectives of Western and African governments subject to Western will either.

Speaking of pressure and sanctions, Washington now seems to want to move on to the next level with its European supporters, including France, all with a view to punishing African leaders and governments who collaborate with “the wrong partner”. Obviously not very democratic, purely dictatorial, but so typical of what the West – especially in view of recent events – really represents.

The concern for such initiatives is that by sanctioning African leaders and governments – widely popular with the populations they belong to and very often even beyond the borders of the countries in question – the Atlanticist establishment will then have to deal with tens and even hundreds of millions of citizens of the continent – many of them already very hostile to the West’s schemes and policies.

In a recent poll conducted on the Telegram page of the pan-African television channel Afrique Média, when asked who poses a threat to Africa’s security, 89% of people said it was the West. Moreover, in another poll still in progress, to the question “which of the African leaders inspires you the most”, Colonel Assimi Goïta – President of Mali is for the moment largely in the lead with 86% of the votes… Very revealing of the prevailing feelings and observed for many years on the great African continent.

Faced with this reality, the arrogant and irresponsible policy of those nostalgic for unipolarity risks not only causing the West to lose, in the long run, access to raw materials, the enormous need for which is now known more than ever. And on the other hand, to push the African populations, and in particular the youth, to definitively close the door to any further dialogue.

Some observers in Africa wonder whether this is a problem of intellectual capacity among Western decision-makers. In part, certainly. But the main one is probably a genetic problem among those who run the West – passing on from generation to generation the idea that they have the right of life and death over the overwhelming majority of the earth’s population, which is the non-Western population.

And if many in the Atlanticist camp think that this hereditary arrogance will allow them to limit the damage and breakage, the reality shows rather that they themselves are only accelerating their fall. In this sense, it perfectly suits the objectives of pan-Africanists and supporters of the current multipolar era.