Emmanuel Macron embarks on a new trip to Africa this Wednesday whose objective is to try to compensate for the offensive of Russia, China and Turkey on the continent. France, victim of severe strategic setbacks in an area of ??its traditional influence, is trying to redefine difficult relations, weighed down by a colonial heritage that its adversaries, especially the Russians, instrumentalize and manipulate with great success.
The French president makes his first stop in Libreville (Gabon) to participate in the One Forest summit, dedicated to the preservation of the forests of the Congo River basin, the second largest ecological lung on the planet. The next stages will take him to Congo-Brazaville, Angola and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
In a speech and subsequent press conference at the Élysée on Monday, Macron presented his vision of France’s future relationship with Africa, good intentions that are repeated by all the Élysée tenants. However, on this occasion his words resonated in a special way because, despite the Macronian lyric, his euphemisms and allergy to self-criticism, it was impossible not to implicitly recognize a failure. In recent months, French troops have been expelled from the Central African Republic, Mali and Burkina Faso, giving way to Wagner’s Russian mercenaries.
The French head of state could not but honor the 58 soldiers who died in the anti-jihadist fight in the Sahel and proclaim victories against the terrorists. He admitted that France raised too many expectations, that it alone could not do the task, that the affected countries had a responsibility.
As Macron went through his complex musings and explained his plans, the audience – a mix of senior officials and journalists, French and African – listened earnestly. He showed special gravity on the face of the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces, General Thierry Burkhard. It will not be easy for him to translate the ideas laid out by Macron on the ground.
The intention is to reduce the French military presence, in number and even more so in visibility, so as not to provide a pretext for anti-colonialist propaganda. Paris will maintain contingents in Senegal, the Ivory Coast, Niger and Chad, but they will no longer be just French bases but shared, “mutualized” ones. Even their names will be changed. Macron spoke of “academies”.
Macron’s words expressed good will but also contradictions and a certain resignation and impotence. A journalist asked him if he did not find it incoherent to complain about Wagner’s penetration and, at the same time, want to lighten the French military footprint.
The French president, in effect, said that the time for Paris to prop up African regimes was over. “France is not a life insurance to solve the political problems of Africa,” he said. But the current trip can make for uncomfortable reading for the Elysium. The president will take pictures with autocrats like Denis Sassou Nguesso, who has reigned in Brazzaville for more than forty years, or with Ali Bongo, whose family has ruled Gabon since 1967.
Macron insisted that France wants to flee from “the logic of power and military presence.” He considered the competition “anachronistic” in these terms. He wants other levers for economic and social cooperation, also taking advantage of the huge African diaspora settled in France.
The French president raised a philosophy “at the antipodes” of what Wagner embodies, which he defined as a “group of criminal mercenaries” and “life insurance for failed and coup regimes.” He denounced his predatory policy (of mining resources) and the violence they sow. According to him, Wagner will end up being rejected because wherever they go they always leave “misfortune”.
Beyond French interests, Macron’s tour is part of the new cold war and the pulse of the West after the invasion of Ukraine. African countries are valuable pieces on the geostrategic chessboard, from the military and economic point of view, as well as ideological and diplomatic. In the fight against global public opinion, Africans are courted for their votes at the UN. They can be very valuable in further isolating Russia or, conversely, in relieving it of pressure.
