Africa’s peace initiative: Mission improbable?

The leaders of seven African countries last weekend undertook an unlikely and gaffe-plagued peace mission to Ukraine and Russia, where the battle on the ground remains in full swing. The controversial South African arms dealer-cum-philanthropist Ivor Ichikowitz was allegedly at the heart of this East European roadshow. What, then, are the real prospects for peace?

The African mission visited Kyiv and St Petersburg to hear directly from both sides and seek an improbable end to hostilities. The Kremlin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine 16 months ago has cost thousands of lives, uprooted millions, destroyed critical infrastructure, and affected global food security. The conflict doesn’t appear to be “ripe” for resolution, as both sides still believe they can improve their position on the battlefield. Ukraine has launched a much-expected spring counter-offensive, and Russia relentlessly continues to pummel its neighbour.

Nevertheless, spearheaded by South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa, the delegation also included the presidents of Comoros (currently chairing the African Union), Senegal, and Zambia, and senior officials from Egypt, the Republic of Congo, and Uganda, whose presidents couldn’t (or wouldn’t) make the trip.

The journey started badly. First, the three presidents pulled out. Then, a plane full of South African security personnel and a contingent of journalists grabbed the headlines when it was grounded at Warsaw’s Chopin International Airport. They were supposed to accompany Ramaphosa to both Ukraine and Russia. They were embarrassingly delayed on the plane in Poland for more than 24 hours, reportedly because of inadequate paperwork for the security team’s weapons. Ultimately, the passengers didn’t make it to Kyiv or St Petersburg, and returned to Johannesburg. They became the story, which affected coverage. The presidential delegation arrived in Kyiv during a Russian air raid, and had to take cover. The Democratic Alliance has already called for an investigation into how much this jaunt cost taxpayers.

But how is Ichikowitz involved? As Simon Allison reported in The Continent, on 5 June, the African presidents met virtually on Zoom to discuss the initiative. They were joined by French veteran arms baron and business tycoon Jean-Yves Ollivier who was said to have masterminded the mission through his little-known Brazzaville Foundation. Ichikowitz also unofficially popped up in the meeting, and is clearly recognisable in a photo tweeted by Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni.

Ichikowitz owns the Paramount Group, one of Africa’s largest suppliers of drones, combat vehicles, patrol ships, and fighter jets, to all manner of countries. He’s also a major benefactor of the African National Congress (ANC). His role in the peace mission is unclear, but he probably used his influence and contacts to smooth the path for the visit. He may well be touting for business from one or both sides.

So, what should we make of this mission as a whole? It’s too early to tell whether this was a colossal waste of time and money, an ingenious masterstroke to bring this violent conflict to an end, or something in between.

On the one hand, as John Lennon famously sang, “All we are saying is give peace a chance.” By that measure, any serious attempt to broker an end to hostilities should be welcomed and supported. We don’t know which peace making attempts may ultimately bear fruit. African countries wanted to show unity around what has been a very divisive conflict. This visit might just save the Black Sea grain deal struck last year that is coming under increasing pressure.

And Africa certainly knows about conflicts – it has had more than its fair share of them, and its leaders have conflict-mediation skills and experience. Ramaphosa himself was the lead negotiator for the ANC in the talks that gave birth to a democratic South Africa between 1990 and 1994. South Africa recently helped to stop the fighting between the Tigray and central government of Ethiopia. Ramaphosa helpfully pointed out that all conflicts eventually end in negotiations. There has been some exchange of prisoners-of-war, which is commendable and helps to build much-needed trust. Often, warring parties need to be pushed towards making a conflict “ripe” for resolution, through dialogue, carrots, and sticks.

The trip did try to show much-needed even-handedness in meeting both sides. Ramaphosa emphasised the importance of internationally recognised boundaries and the United Nations’ decisions, and security for all states in the region. The visit also helped rebalance South Africa’s non-aligned stance, after many actions that saw it labelled as pro-Moscow.

On the other hand, this particular mission seemed ill-prepared and somewhat unwieldy, with a seven-headed hydra as the mediation team. The debacle in Warsaw should have been preventable if everyone had done his or her job properly. Do the Africans have the insight and the resources to see this through realistically? Critics panned the presidential parade as a publicity exercise for all involved.

The timing is also problematic. Armed by the West, Ukraine is battling for its very survival as a state. It wants all its occupied territory back, including Crimea, “annexed” by Russia in 2014. Russia cannot afford to lose face in what Putin still euphemistically calls a “special military operation”. And the murky involvement of arms dealers should make us wary of the African peace initiative.

Only time will tell if this mission flops or comes out tops.

• Steven Gruzd is an analyst at the South African Institute of International Affairs. He writes in his personal capacity.