Photo by UK Government is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0 via Openverse
By Newz.Africa, Politics Desk | March 6, 2026 | Africa | Russia’s Influence in Africa
Afrobarometer’s latest survey across 38 African countries shows that fewer than four in 10 citizens view Russia’s influence positively. Meanwhile, most prefer their governments to remain neutral in the Russia-Ukraine war.
What’s Happening
Afrobarometer, a pan-African survey research network, has released new findings from its Round 10 surveys (2024/2025) covering 38 countries. The data provides a continent-wide snapshot of how Africans perceive Russia’s political and economic influence. It also shows how they want their governments to respond to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war.
The survey reveals that only 36% of Africans see Russia’s influence as “somewhat positive” or “very positive.” By contrast, 23% describe it as negative, while a significant plurality, 42%, do not offer an assessment. This suggests that Russia’s role in Africa is not only viewed less favourably than other global powers. It also remains ambiguous to many citizens.
Country-level differences are striking. Mali stands out with overwhelming approval, where 88% of respondents view Russia positively. Cameroon (60%), Guinea-Bissau (55%), and Côte d’Ivoire (55%) also show relatively high levels of support. In sharp contrast, Southern African nations such as Zambia (15%), Lesotho (14%), Eswatini (14%), and Botswana (13%) record some of the lowest approval ratings.
When compared to other powers, Russia trails significantly. Positive perceptions of China stand at 62%. Regional economic organisations are at 56%, the African Union at 55%, the United States at 52%, and the European Union at 50%. These figures highlight Russia’s weaker standing in Africa’s geopolitical landscape.
Awareness of the Russia-Ukraine war is widespread. Seven in 10 Africans (70%) say they have heard of the conflict, with awareness levels exceeding 90% in Cabo Verde, Seychelles, and São Tomé and Príncipe. Among those aware, more than seven in 10 (72%) believe their governments should remain neutral. Mali is the only surveyed country where a majority favour one side, with 72% supporting Russia.
Afrobarometer’s surveys are conducted through face-to-face interviews with nationally representative samples of adults, in the language of the respondent’s choice. Results carry margins of error of +/-2 to +/-3 percentage points at a 95% confidence level. This ensures robust and reliable insights into African public opinion.
What Netizens Are Saying
Online conversations about Russia’s role in Africa reflect themes of scepticism, exploitation, and historical parallels. Some users claim that African recruits are being promised money to fight abroad. One post reads: “Russians promised me that they will give me $30,000 if I die on duty; it will allow me to buy a new car and help my family.”
Others frame these arrangements as exploitative. A commentator wrote: “These men were probably sold just like slaves were hundreds of years ago. Their lives have already been paid for.” Another user added: “African regimes play along if they get paid.”
There are also voices defending Russia’s military practices, with one user insisting: “No Russian soldiers are referred to as cannon fodder. Russia has the capability to extract their wounded from the battlefield, and they do it.”
Across platforms, netizens express distrust about Russia’s intentions, with scepticism about whether African lives are valued in these arrangements. Themes of exploitation, financial incentives, and historical parallels dominate the discourse. This echoes the survey findings where neutrality emerges as the preferred stance for most citizens.
Newz.Africa Analysis
The Afrobarometer findings and online narratives converge on a critical point: Russia’s influence in Africa is limited, contested, and overshadowed by stronger relationships with other powers. While Mali stands out as an exception, most African countries show either neutrality or scepticism. This reflects broader concerns about external powers using Africa as a proxy in global conflicts.
The social media commentary, though anecdotal, underscores why neutrality resonates with citizens. Allegations of exploitation and recruitment feed into long-standing fears of foreign manipulation. For many Africans, the idea of being drawn into a distant war evokes historical memories of colonialism and imperialism. External powers once dictated the terms of engagement.
From a geopolitical perspective, Africa’s cautious stance is strategic. Neutrality allows governments to avoid alienating major powers while maintaining flexibility in foreign policy. It also reflects a pragmatic recognition that Africa’s priorities lie in domestic development, economic growth, and regional stability. Rather than in external conflicts, these priorities shape policy decisions.
Russia’s relatively low approval ratings compared to China, the United States, and the African Union suggest that its influence is not deeply entrenched. China’s economic investments, the AU’s continental legitimacy, and the US’s long-standing partnerships provide stronger foundations for positive perceptions. Russia, by contrast, appears to be viewed as a less reliable partner. Its influence is concentrated in a few countries rather than across the continent.
For African governments, the challenge is twofold. First, they must navigate external pressures from global powers seeking allies in the Russia-Ukraine war. Second, they must respond to domestic sentiment that overwhelmingly favours neutrality. Failure to align with public opinion could undermine trust and legitimacy, particularly in countries where citizens are wary of foreign entanglements.
Looking forward, the data suggests that Africa’s geopolitical posture will remain cautious. Neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine war is not just a preference. It is a strategic stance shaped by history, public sentiment, and the desire to avoid entanglement in conflicts that do not directly serve African development goals.
For Russia, the findings are sobering. Despite efforts to expand influence in Africa, perceptions remain weak compared to other powers. Unless Russia can build more sustainable partnerships based on mutual benefit, its role in Africa is likely to remain limited.
For Africa, the lesson is clear: external conflicts should not distract from the continent’s priorities. Development, governance, and regional cooperation remain the central pillars of progress. Neutrality in global conflicts is not a sign of weakness, it is a deliberate strategy to safeguard Africa’s future.
About the Author
