The Role of the African Union in Mediating Global Conflict: A Case Study of Ukraine
- Matthew Parish
- 3 minutes ago
- 6 min read
Since its founding in 2002, the African Union (AU) has aspired not only to promote peace, integration and development across the African continent but also to elevate Africa’s voice in international diplomacy. While much of the AU’s peace and security agenda has historically focused inward—addressing coups, civil wars, and post-colonial instability—the war in Ukraine has prompted a measured yet symbolically significant response from the continental body. In the face of a major global conflict unfolding far from its shores, the AU has demonstrated a cautious but increasingly assertive engagement in global affairs. Here we explore the AU’s evolving role in the context of the Russia–Ukraine war, with a focus on its diplomatic interventions, the motivations behind its positions and the implications for African agency in global geopolitics.
The African Union’s Diplomatic Stance on the Ukraine War
From the outset of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the African Union adopted a neutral stance, expressing concern for violations of territorial integrity without explicitly condemning Russia. The AU Commission Chairperson Moussa Faki Mahamat issued a statement in February 2022 calling for “an immediate ceasefire” and urging dialogue, while affirming the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity enshrined in the UN Charter and the AU’s own foundational documents.
This neutrality has been interpreted by many observers not as passive disengagement, but as a calculated response reflecting the diversity of African interests. African countries were notably divided in key United Nations General Assembly votes: while countries such as Kenya, Ghana and Senegal supported resolutions condemning Russia, others such as South Africa, Ethiopia and Algeria abstained or were absent. The AU, representing 55 member states, had to balance this internal division while responding to the economic and political fallout of the war on African societies.
Impact of the War on Africa: Driving Engagement
The Russia–Ukraine war has had direct and destabilising effects on African economies, particularly through the disruption of global grain, fuel, and fertiliser supplies. Ukraine and Russia are among Africa’s main suppliers of wheat, with countries like Egypt and Tunisia highly dependent on Ukrainian exports. The war drove up commodity prices and intensified food insecurity, especially in fragile states such as Somalia, Sudan and the Sahel countries.
This economic fallout spurred a more active engagement from African leaders. In June 2023 a delegation of African heads of state, including leaders from South Africa, Egypt, Senegal, Uganda, the Republic of the Congo and Zambia, undertook a diplomatic mission to Kyiv and Moscow. This unprecedented initiative marked the first time the AU had dispatched a high-level peace delegation to a major interstate war outside Africa. Although the delegation’s influence was limited in practical terms—it did not result in a ceasefire or concessions from either side—it was a strong symbolic assertion of African diplomatic agency and a call for multipolar dialogue.
South Africa and the AU’s Internal Fractures
South Africa’s central role in the AU’s approach to the Ukraine war highlights both the strengths and contradictions of the organisation. As a BRICS member with close ties to Russia, South Africa has pursued a policy of “strategic non-alignment.” She has resisted pressure to condemn Moscow, while calling for peace and multilateral dialogue. Pretoria has hosted Russian and Chinese naval drills and has been criticised domestically and internationally for being too accommodating to Russia. Nevertheless Vladimir Putin could not travel to the BRICS summit in Johannesburg in August 2023 for fear he would be arrested and extradited to the International Criminal Court, South Africa's judiciary known for the remarkable degree of its independence.
This ambivalence has created tension within the AU, as smaller or pro-Western member states feel their voices are diluted in the pursuit of African unity. Nonetheless the AU’s ability to maintain cohesion despite such divergent national positions is a notable achievement, especially given the difficulty other regional organisations have faced in responding coherently to global crises.
Challenges to AU Mediation: Capacity, Legitimacy, and Influence
Despite its diplomatic outreach, the AU faces several structural challenges in playing a meaningful mediating role in the Ukraine conflict. First, the AU lacks the economic and military leverage that might compel parties to the conflict to alter their strategies. Unlike actors such as the EU, China, or the US, the AU cannot offer substantial inducements or deterrents.
Second, questions of legitimacy persist. The AU has yet to fully shed perceptions of being overly deferential to powerful states, whether in the West or East. Its silence on issues such as Russia’s annexation of Ukrainian territory or attacks on civilians has led critics to question its commitment to the democratic norms and respect for inter-state borders it espouses within Africa.
Third, there are institutional limitations. The AU’s Peace and Security Council, while active in regional conflict resolution, is not equipped to manage or sustain complex multilateral diplomacy in external theatres of war. In this sense, its mediation in Ukraine was more symbolic than strategic.
The Strategic Opportunity: Towards a More Assertive Global Role
Despite these constraints, the Ukraine crisis has presented the AU with an opportunity to define its place in a changing world order. Africa’s demographic, economic, and political weight is growing, and with it the expectation that it should be a stakeholder in decisions affecting global peace and security. The AU’s observer status at the G20 and its increasing visibility at UN forums suggest that its influence is on the rise.
Moreover the AU’s mediation in Ukraine—however modest—signals a potential shift toward a more multipolar world in which non-Western voices are increasingly heard. By advocating dialogue, multilateralism, and an end to proxy wars, the AU is aligning itself with a broader call from the Global South for a reformed international system that is more inclusive and less dominated by great-power rivalries.
Conclusion
The African Union’s involvement in the Ukraine war, while limited in material terms, represents a meaningful attempt to assert African agency in the realm of global conflict mediation. Balancing neutrality with principle, and symbolic diplomacy with economic necessity, the AU has shown that African voices can and should play a role in shaping international responses to war and peace. Whether this engagement evolves into sustained influence will depend on the AU’s ability to unify its member states, build diplomatic capacity and position itself as a credible and consistent advocate for peace in an increasingly fragmented world.
---
Reading List
Academic Sources
Adebajo, Adekeye (2023). “The African Union and Global Peace and Security: Between Aspiration and Realism.”
Journal of Modern African Studies, 61(2), pp. 145–168.
A critical evaluation of the AU’s evolving peace and security architecture, with reflections on its global relevance.
Murithi, Tim (2019). “The African Union’s Evolving Role in Peace Operations: From Non-Intervention to Non-Indifference.”
African Security Review, 28(2), pp. 102–117.
Analyses how AU diplomacy has evolved in internal and external conflicts, offering insights into its principles and limitations.
Shilaho, Westen K. (2023). “Africa’s Positioning in the Russia–Ukraine Conflict: The Limits of Non-Alignment.”
African Journal of International Affairs, 26(1), pp. 34–56.
Discusses the historical context and Realpolitik calculations behind the AU and African states’ responses.
Policy Reports and Think Tank Analyses
International Crisis Group (2023). “How the Ukraine War Is Rippling through Africa.”
A detailed policy paper analysing the economic and political impacts of the war on African countries.
The African Centre for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes (ACCORD) (2022). “Africa’s Neutrality on the Ukraine Crisis: Principles or Pragmatism?”
Explores African diplomatic principles and economic dependencies shaping the AU’s position.
Chatham House Africa Programme (2023). “Africa and the Global Order: Recalibrating Multilateralism Post-Ukraine.”
An assessment of how the war has spurred calls from African states for a more equitable international order.
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace – Nnamdi Obasi (2023). “Africa’s Balancing Act in the Ukraine Conflict.”
Focuses on domestic and regional pressures influencing Africa’s response and role in the diplomacy.
Primary Sources and Official Statements
African Union Commission Press Releases (2022–2024).
Statements from Chairperson Moussa Faki Mahamat and documents related to AU diplomatic efforts.
United Nations Voting Records and General Assembly Resolutions on Ukraine
Key votes where African states were split, useful for mapping regional diplomatic alignments.
South African Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO)
For statements and white papers on South Africa’s foreign policy and BRICS diplomacy during the conflict.
Suggested Further Reading
Sachs, Jeffrey D. (2023). “The Global South and the Ukraine War.”
Project Syndicate, March 2023.
A provocative take on how countries in the Global South view the geopolitical realignment post-Ukraine.
Winkler, Hannes (2023). “Grain, Gas, and Geopolitics: Africa’s Uneasy Position in the Ukraine Conflict.”
Foreign Policy, September 2023.
Insight into the economic dimensions of Africa’s Ukraine diplomacy.