Follow us on social

Wagner Group

Recalibration or Retreat? Russia's shifting Africa strategy

With Wagner’s setbacks and the fallout from Ukraine, Moscow is rethinking its role in the Sahel

Analysis | Africa

After a whirlwind two-year expansion into the Sahel, 2024 saw a number of setbacks for Russian military operations.

The Russian private military company (PMC) Wagner Group’s routing in Tinzaouaten laid bare issues of command and control after a half-handover of operations from Yevgeny Prigozhin’s PMC to the Ministry of Defense (MoD). The fall of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad in December then called into question the future of Russia’s eastern Mediterranean port in Tartus and its critical airbase at Khmeimim, all against a backdrop of a grinding third year of war in Ukraine.

These developments have led some analysts to believe Russia’s influence and ability to project power in the Sahel is waning, or that the Kremlin no longer considers the Sahel and other friendly states in Africa a priority. And indeed, there are members of Russia’s military, political, and expert communities pushing to scale back Moscow’s presence on the continent, or to use Africa as a bargaining chip in any potential negotiations between Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump.

Based on conversations with Russian officers, experts, and members of the PMC community, a retreat from the Sahel, and Africa more generally, still appears unlikely. Rumor and speculation on future strategies are rife, but it is becoming clear that, after several years of expansion, Russian operations in Africa are recalibrating to better match capacity.

Claiming a leadership position within the Global South remains an important priority to the Kremlin, of which Africa constitutes an important, albeit discordant political bloc. The Sahel and Africa more broadly also offer a platform for strengthening Russia’s cooperation with China and Turkey.

And yet, there is still no official Russian state strategy vis-à-vis Africa, no document drawn up, agreed upon, approved, and accepted for implementation. Instead, Russian activity in Africa has tended to occur in an unsystematic fashion, through structures like Yevgeny Prigozhin’s Wagner Group. These structures had freedom to make proactive decisions on the ground in accordance with emerging opportunities.

The success of Wagner’s assault detachments in a counteroffensive against armed groups in the Central African Republic (CAR) in 2021 turbocharged Prigozhin’s security export in Africa, and his PMC began marketing itself as a military solution to complex conflicts. In CAR, Prigozhin’s operation was largely a private initiative. Once Wagner spread through Mali in early 2022, however, the lack of an interdisciplinary analytical center, capable of realistically assessing the Sahel’s compounding crises, quickly became clear.

From the beginning of the Malian campaign, the Russian expert community and a number of military officers criticized both the direct participation of Russian armed contingents in an asymmetric conflict and, in general, solving the conflict exclusively by force.

The constant participation of Wagner units in the most difficult and bloody areas of the campaign, sometimes operating practically independently of the Malian military (FAMa), led to a degradation of FAMa’s combat capability. Without a unified policy of interaction between Russian military planners, Russian military intelligence, Wagner’s commanders, Malian commanders, and Malian ministers, operations lacked a clear chain of command. In this environment, Prigozhin’s structures exerted a degree of independence—still far less than what Wagner commanders enjoyed in CAR—but they still found themselves drawn into the economics of the conflict and tied to the Malian establishment.

Following the death of Yevgeny Prigozhin in August 20023, employees of his structures within Russia were redistributed among security forces or pushed out to Belarus. The handover of African units, however, was more complicated. It was not possible to disband Wagner units or replace them with other structures, since the preparation of cohesive, well-coordinated units takes time.

A half-handover, however, still took place, from PMC Wagner to the MoD-subordinated Africa Corps. In Mali, combat units of PMC Wagner stayed directly involved in hostilities, while a group of military advisers from Africa Corps, together with the Malian General Staff, were involved in planning operations. There were still issues of command and control, supplies, and logistics; Wagner’s assault detachments were technically subordinate to FAMa. The General Staff worked with Russian officers to plan operations, while Wagner commanders tended to receive discrete tasks.

Moreover, Russia’s war in Ukraine drained Africa of experienced Wagner fighters and specialists. The belief that Africa was an “easier” deployment than to Ukraine, issues of nepotism in getting those deployments, and rewards for loyalty over skill further degraded the quality of forces in Mali. Wagner’s routing at Tinzaouaten, an ambush that saw as many as 100 Wagner fighters killed, was the culmination of these trends.

The ambush has given leverage to military officers and experts arguing for Russia to scale back direct participation in Malian military operations. Russians passing through Mali are well aware that Moscow lacks the capacity and desire to tackle the Sahel’s massive developmental, economic, and humanitarian crises. This group is lobbying to shift focus to training local army and law enforcement forces in the region.

Of course, the demand for direct participation is not unanimous among Sahelian states. The military leadership of Niger has not expressed a desire for assault detachments, and the head of the military government of Burkina Faso, Captain Traoré, has repeatedly spoken against foreign military units operating in the country. In Mali, where assault detachments are in demand, the recent delivery of military equipment, including tanks and armored vehicles likely evacuated from Russian military bases in Syria, may serve to reassure Bamako of Moscow’s continued support.

Africa Corps personnel are supposed to be largely comprised of instructors, with combat units intended as an operational reserve to ensure the security of administrative centers and critical infrastructure. The announcement of a 5,000-strong special joint military force of Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso to combat terrorism may fit into this new paradigm, and it is possible Russian instructors will focus on training this force in particular.

Russian investment is planned for soft-power initiatives beyond military training. Government and private initiatives are expected to start non-profits and public associations that capitalize on anti-Western sentiment and distrust of Western interventions in the Sahel. Despite agreement on the importance of traditional values and the failures of liberalism, meaningful cooperation with the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump in Africa remains unlikely. The allure of a Global South aligned against a collective West remains more potent for now.

Indeed, competition between PMCs may be more likely. Trump’s foreign policy is looking to scale back military and humanitarian operations in the Middle East and Africa to focus on North and South America, creating new market opportunities for America’s own private security industry in Africa.

Prigozhin was able to undercut his Western competition through his own deep pockets and access to Russian military equipment and subsidies, which allowed him to tolerate serious risk in hope of long-term returns. Whether American PMCs can lobby for similar deals remains to be seen. If they do and they stick to training, not offensive operations, African leaders will be well-placed to take advantage of a more competitive market.


Top image credit: Russian officers from the wagner group are seen around Central African president Faustin-Archange Touadera as they are part of the presidential security system during the referendum campaign to change the constitution and remove term limits, in Bangui, Central African Republic July 17, 2023. REUTERS/Leger Kokpakpa
Analysis | Africa
Diplomacy Watch
Top Photo Credit: Diplomacy Watch

Diplomacy Watch

Putin and Zelenskyy claim that the other is not ready to negotiate

QiOSK

Russian and Ukrainian leaders appear to be goading one another as to who and who isn’t ready to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov charged late last week that Ukraine is not ready for serious negotiations. “Despite the increasingly loud talk about the need for peace talks,” he said, “there are objectively no practical actions indicating that Kyiv and the West are really ready for them.”

keep readingShow less
Rashida Tlaib
top photo credit: Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) (Photo: Phil Pasquini / Shutterstock.com)

Tlaib: 'Our elected officials should not be able to profit off death'

QiOSK

In an op-ed today for the Detroit Free Press, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) blasted her colleagues who voted to increase Pentagon spending while owning stock in weapons manufacturing companies.

“Our elected officials should not be able to profit off death,” she wrote. “They should not be able to use their positions of power to get rich from defense contractors while voting to pass more funding to bomb people.”

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: Sudan's army soldiers celebrate after entering Wad Madani, in Sudan, January 12, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig REUTERS

Unlikely foes: Egypt and the UAE's hidden battle for Sudan

Africa

In the shadow of Sudan's devastating civil war, a less visible but equally consequential power struggle is unfolding between two regional powers: Egypt and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Egypt supports the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), while the UAE backs the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in a conflict that erupted on April 15, 2023. Nearly two years of fighting have resulted in a catastrophic humanitarian crisis, pushing Sudan toward total collapse.

In its last days, the Biden administration imposed sanctions on both RSF commander-in-chief Hemedti for command responsibility over forces responsible for genocide, and SAF's General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan for obstructing peace efforts, blocking aid, and the alleged use of chemical weapons.

Despite mounting evidence from U.N. and U.S. investigators of the UAE's heavy involvement in supporting the RSF in Sudan's war, Abu Dhabi continues to claim neutrality as a humanitarian actor. However, this claim has been directly challenged at the highest levels of U.S. government.

During his Senate confirmation hearing, Secretary of State Marco Rubio explicitly accused the UAE of "openly supporting an entity that is carrying out a genocide."

Egypt’s role in supporting the SAF and the army-led government in Port Sudan has been increasingly overt. In September, Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty emphasized the "importance of not putting the Sudanese national army in the same category as any other party" during a press conference with Rubio’s predecessor, Antony Blinken.

Abdelatty also recently acknowledged Egypt’s commitment to "supporting the capabilities of the Sudanese army” and doing so in concert with its emerging security partners in the Horn of Africa, Eritrea, and Somalia.

Despite their alignment on most regional issues, Egypt and the UAE awkwardly find themselves on opposite sides of Sudan's war.

Following his rise to power in 2013 when the Egyptian military ousted the democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood government, President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has relied on Gulf states, particularly the UAE, for economic support.

The UAE recently deepened ties with Egypt through a landmark $35 billion investment developing the Mediterranean region of Ras El-Hekma for tourism, providing a crucial economic lifeline to Sisi's regime. However, despite this massive investment, Egypt remains unable to align with Abu Dhabi's approach to Sudan.

For Egypt, the army, not the RSF, represents the bulwark of stability along its southern border. This perspective is reinforced by the pattern of Sudanese refugee movements: large numbers have returned to their homes from Egypt as the army recaptured parts of Sennar state and other parts of central Sudan over the last few months, while conversely, an exodus occurs whenever the RSF gains ground.

The stakes for Egypt are existential: Egypt is managing the influx of over 1.2 million Sudanese refugees since April 2023, now the largest refugee community in the country. Total state failure in Sudan would potentially send millions more across the border.

In addition, Egypt's Nile water security hangs in the balance. The power vacuum in Sudan has significantly undermined Egypt's bargaining position vis-à-vis Ethiopia, its longstanding Nile Basin rival.

Through thick and thin, Sudan has remained a key ally of Egypt in countering the threat posed by the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). In a recent statement, Sudan's foreign minister Ali Youssif reinforced this alliance, pledging that "Sudan will stand by Egypt" and ominously noting that the option of war was on the table if an agreement wasn’t reached.

However, with Sudan's descent into civil war and the resulting weakening of Egypt's bargaining position, upstream Nile Basin countries have seized the opportunity to advance their interests.

In a significant development, the Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA) was recently brought into force with South Sudan's unexpected accession last July.

The agreement challenges the old colonial-era treaties that favored Egypt and Sudan by introducing an "equitable use" principle that substantially benefits upstream countries like Ethiopia.

As a result of its weakened position on the Nile, Egypt has instead moved towards constructing a regional security architecture surrounding Ethiopia, forming a security alliance with Somalia and Eritrea. Critically, Egypt's foreign minister has stated that Cairo will use this security alliance to help Sudan's army combat "terrorism."

Despite extensive support for the RSF, the UAE's strategic objectives in Sudan have been significantly undermined by the paramilitary group's failure to seize control of the country.

The UAE's plan centered on exploiting Sudan's gold trade and enhancing its food security through land acquisitions by state-linked companies. Central to this strategy was the development of the $6 billion Abu Amama port on Sudan's Red Sea coast, which was designed to link agricultural areas to an export terminal and aligned with the UAE's broader regional maritime strategy, complementing its port operations in neighboring countries.

However, the ongoing conflict has derailed these plans, with Sudan officially canceling the port deal and Sudan’s finance minister declaring that "after what happened, we will not give the UAE a single centimeter on the Red Sea."

Furthermore, Sudan’s war has exposed a significant divergence in visions between Egypt and the UAE.

Egypt views the SAF as the critical institutional backbone of Sudan's statehood, mirroring its own military-centric governance model. Consequently, Cairo is firmly committed to ensuring the SAF's stability and aims to position it as the leading force in any future government in Sudan. This vision excludes the involvement of paramilitary groups like the RSF, which Egypt fears could reignite conflict on its southern border.

In contrast, the UAE views Sudan primarily through an extractive lens, seeking strategic access to the country's critical resources. Within this framework, the RSF serves as a pivotal instrument for resource extraction, with Dubai already the key destination for the militia's smuggled gold.

Recognizing that it is confronting a well-resourced force reliant on its foreign patron, the army-led government in Sudan has agreed to direct talks with the UAE but on condition that the UAE cease support for the RSF and pay "compensation to the Sudanese people.”

The offer represents a potential off-ramp to the ongoing conflict, but one that would be reputationally and financially challenging even for the wealthy petro-state.

Fighting has destroyed most of the country’s productive infrastructure and caused losses upwards of $200 billion. The UAE would essentially be obligated to finance the reconstruction of Sudan — Africa's third-largest country — while simultaneously accepting the dissolution of the RSF, which has been crucial to its economic and strategic interests both in Sudan and as a mercenary force in critical geopolitical theaters, such as Yemen, abroad.

Second, it would require that the UAE acknowledge its role in contributing to the world's largest humanitarian and displacement crisis through arming the RSF, actions that starkly contradict its carefully cultivated image as a humanitarian benefactor.

Given the current state of play, Egypt is well-positioned to play a critical mediating role in bridging the widening gap between Sudan's demands and the UAE's persistent narrative of denial.

Sudan's foreign minister has already signaled that such an initiative was underway, following the Egyptian foreign minister's recent trip to Sudan’s war-time capital, Port Sudan, his second visit in the span of six weeks.

The path forward, while challenging, is clear: it requires a meeting of minds between Abu Dhabi and Cairo for a ceasefire to come to fruition in the near term and for Sudan to stabilize in the long-term.

An opening exists for the United States to leverage its diplomatic influence in mediating between Egypt and the UAE, encouraging its allies to find common ground and prevent Sudan from plunging further into crisis.

The alternative is stark — continued support for opposing factions will only deepen the country’s descent into a protracted and increasingly brutal civil war.

Trump transition

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.