Opinion / Emma Searle
Committed to memory
Global tragedies have a way of sticking in our memories. Most can remember the September 11 attacks and the moment when they heard the news. And 24 February, the day that Russia invaded Ukraine, will be no exception. In my case, I was sitting at the tip of Africa in Cape Town, thousands of miles away, on my first visit home in two years. Much like in the West, the prevailing feeling in the initial weeks was one of shock, outrage and support for the Ukrainian people. But by early March, the focus shifted to South Africa’s muted stance on Russia.
Criticism of Nato from president Cyril Ramaphosa (pictured) has been a particular point of contention. “The war could have been avoided if Nato had heeded warnings from among its own leaders and officials over the years that its eastward expansion would lead to greater, not less, instability in the region,” the South African leader said recently. When the UN General Assembly voted to condemn Russia’s invasion in early March, South Africa was one of 17 African states that abstained. In the past week, South Africa again withheld support for a resolution demanding that Russia grant aid access in Ukraine, backing a separate draft that avoided any mention of the invasion.
Some speculate that the ambivalence of many African countries might be motivated by nostalgia for the Soviet Union’s support of their own liberation movements. The ANC, for instance, received military training in the Soviet Union during the fight against the apartheid regime. And while China’s activities in Africa are well known, Russia has also been extending its economic and security influence, supplying mercenaries to countries such as Mali and the Central African Republic. The war in Ukraine is testing pan-African solidarity. The stance of the continent’s governments will be remembered for years to come.