The Danish foreign minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, recently launched the country’s new Africa strategy, titled “The African Century”. By 2026, Denmark will open three new physical embassies – in Senegal, Tunisia and Rwanda – and upgrade its existing outposts in Egypt, Nigeria, South Africa and Kenya into regional hubs. It will also create its first African “innovation centre” in Kenya. Meanwhile, Copenhagen is actively seeking to attract more African students to Danish universities, a policy that China has employed to great success on the continent.

It’s a bold statement at a time when the Global South is perceived to be turning away from the West and while European diplomatic efforts in Africa flounder. And it’s a welcome recognition of the fact that there is no substitute for a physical diplomatic presence. As well as the infrastructure upgrade, the Danes’ rhetoric has changed: talk now focuses on boosting trade and economic interests, with less emphasis on influencing domestic politics and values through aid and lectures. As the press release put it, Denmark must “come with better offers, less moralising and more equality”. Indeed, on a recent visit to Ghana (from where Denmark once traded slaves and was a colonial power until 1850), Rasmussen did not commence his press conference with a critique of the Ghanaian government’s new anti-lgbt law, as a Danish foreign minister might well have done in the past.

In presenting the new approach, the Danes have been using one of their favourite words, øjenhøjde (“eye level”) – a shorthand for showing respect while not necessarily “seeing eye to eye”. It’s more like two equals having a conversation than a paternalistic donor talking down to the receiver of aid and it’s an acknowledgement of several factors. One is the success of China and the Gulf states in using their debt-leveraged economic “partnerships” to secure access to Africa’s mineral and human resources – a form of economic colonialism, yes, but without the value- based conditions that the West has traditionally imposed. As Rasmussen pointed out in his speech at the launch of the policy, last year the Gulf states invested four times as much in Africa as the US did.

Denmark’s plan also stems from a recognition of the need to counter Russian influence in Africa, which Moscow has achieved through its use of mercenary forces and propaganda. Increased co-operation with East African coastal lands in dealing with piracy will benefit Denmark’s significant shipping interests too.

The only surprise is that it has taken this most pragmatic of nations so long to change its strategy. As wealthy as Denmark is, its African-development resources were thinly spread and of dubious value. According to the African Development Bank Group, the continent is home to 11 of the world’s top 20 fastest-growing economies; in 2024, Denmark’s resources would be better spent on diplomatic efforts to boost trade and soft power. But the policy isn’t without controversy. There’s concern that Denmark’s previously robust stance on, say, lgbt rights, will be sacrificed to other exigencies. As recently as last year, the Danes withdrew support for the Ugandan government following the latter’s anti-homosexuality law but that kind of tactic seems to have been consigned to the history books.

Good riddance, says one of Denmark’s leading experts in African relations, Copenhagen University’s Holger Bernt Hansen. He branded the finger-wagging approach a colonial throwback, telling the Politiken newspaper, “Sanctions and value politics damage our interests in Africa more than it supports them.” Rather, skilled diplomats operating in African capitals promoting the best of Danish technology, culture and business will be far more likely to achieve the success that Copenhagen is hoping for. As the country shutters its embassies in military dictatorships Mali and Burkina Faso, it makes sense to focus its resources on the African countries that will be more receptive to its considerable charms. –– L