Contemporary World Politics: ‘Core-Periphery’ relationships today.
Analysing two distinct and current case studies: Françafrique and Ukraine
Prelude
The legacy of the imperial movement from the 19th century is far-reaching as it continues to characterise global politics, social power distribution, and international relationships today. For instance, the intense rivalry that existed between the major European countries at the time led to the ‘Scramble for Africa’ in the 1880s including other conquests in Asia (Du Bois, 1915). Albeit heavily debated and controversial, these imperial conquests were considered as a mechanism for economic development and political empowerment by industrialised nations whom the renowned academic John Friedmann names the Cores. He also defines the exploited territories as peripheries lacking authority and social stability but rich in natural resources and labour (Friedmann and Alonso, 1975).
This new international relation system between the makers or the cores and the takers or the peripheries represents the premises of a capitalist system as exhibited in much of the world today. Seen as a necessity in post-colonial world politics, the core-periphery relationship has been conceptualised and justified under the modernisation theory (Young, 2016). Nonetheless, with the endemic poverty, long-lasting social instability and failed states across peripheries in Africa, it becomes necessary to pay more attention to a relationship of dependency as posited by many sociologists including the German American Andre Gunder Frank (Kvangraven et al., 2017).
From empirical case studies such as the relationship between France and its ex-African colonies, also known as ‘Françafrique’, it can be asserted that the continuing power relations inherited from the imperial era, are set to prevail in the future. Another contemporary case study to demonstrate the core-periphery relationship and its prospects in world politics is the claim and conquest of countries such as Ukraine in today’s post-Westphalian world order. However, with the growing emergence of the concept of political voices, and growing nationalistic sentiment, there are possibilities for the status quo in world politics to be challenged as more and more countries decide to protect their sovereignty, at all costs.
Drawing on the dependency theory of modernisation, this paper will analyse the core-periphery relationship today and the prospects for a possible change of system in world politics. On the one hand, Section I of this paper will focus on Françafrique by showcasing the perceived need of the French in Africa’s politics and the existing convoluted relationship. On the other hand, Section II will dive into the power relationship between Ukraine and Russia while drawing lessons on core-periphery relationships for the future and its likely impact on world politics.
Section I: Françafrique
The imminent American sociologist and historian Williams Edward Burghardt Du Bois offer an explicit account of colonisation and what it really meant for both the cores in the West and the peripheries in Africa (Du Bois, 2007). The Berlin conference of 1884 was determinant in legitimising the conception that the African continent was a perfect playground for western powers to strengthen the core’s s economic status, through the exploitation of raw materials, and at the expense of the African people. Thus, the conference contributed to the partitioning of African territories among European powers, and to a series of agreements that overrode any types of African autonomy and self-governance (Pakenham, 1991). The assumption remains that the past, current, and future relationship between European powers and the African continent, would have been different if the peripheries had a considerable say during the Berlin conference of 1884. But, it is fair to highlight that the partition of Africa or its scramble, made room for structured exploitation of the continent by European countries, including France, which was present on the continent since the 17th century.
1. The perceived need for formal French colonies to be modernized
Following the scramble of Africa, the French empire and its ‘mission civilisatrice’ foreign policy under the second and third French republic, claimed to inculcate its modern and beautiful civilisation to its African colonies mainly spread across the Western and Northern sides of the continent. This civilising mission from the French appeared as a reasonable foreign policy and statecraft as it could be perceived as bringing value and knowledge to the indigenous people of Africa while extracting the raw materials and using the available labour needed to power its economy in the metropole (Zambakari, 2021). Over time and in an effort to better administer its colonies, the French imperial project in Africa was enhanced in structure through what is known as the ‘French West African Federation’ - a federation of eight French colonial territories - which later collapsed as a result of the growing nationalistic sentiment across Africa in the 1960s, leading to the wave of independence. This is a historically important account as it helps to understand the current influence that France still has over its ex-colonies today.
Although most African countries had achieved their independence in the 1960s, France still ensured to keep a level of control over its ex-colonies through the installation of puppet regimes which was in fact possible due to the structured governance established during the colonial period (Ali-Dinar, 2022). It could also be argued that the newly independent African countries lacked the necessary direction to manage and exploit the richness of their natural resources, which gave no other choice to the newly chosen African leaders than cooperating and making legally binding compromises with France which remains the core today. This is illustrated in the Franco-Ivorian cooperation agreements signed with France by former local governor Felix Houphouet Boigny between 1959 and 1960. These agreements were of commercial, economic, military and defence order and progressively replicated across France’s ex-colonies, with most of them still enacted today. A more tangible aspect of these agreements is the heavy presence of French troops in strategic locations across Africa today (Wyss, 2021).
2. An established dependency from the Core: France
The strong political, economic, military, and cultural connections between France and its ex-African colonies are undeniable today and the prospect of a future change remains abstract. With the quasi-integration of French colonies into the economic growth of the French empire, it is now a complex task to untie the knots made from the imperial era to the post-colonial system despite the African states’ independence and the opportunities of liberalism and globalisation. This neo-colonialism,
8
particularly in Francophone Africa is amplified by various structural and dependency factors including financial, political, and cultural.
Cultural dependency
One of the main goals of the French civilizing mission across its colonies was to transform its colonial subjects into ordinary French people under the assumption of their perfectibility (Conklin, 1997). Today, it is blatant that the core’s culture reflects across most of the African peripheries now known as Senegal, Ivory Coast, Benin, Togo, (French) Guinea, Gabon, Mauritania, Niger, Burkina Faso, and Mali. These countries all inherited the French language from France and copied most parts of the French education system which arguably could have been a lesser option post-independence (Gamble, 2009). But it is obviously a greater challenge to adopt a unique national language or curriculum suited to the peripheries when factors such as the multiplicity of local dialects and the need to continue cooperation with the core prevail.
Political dependency
In order to maintain the flow of resources between the ex-African colonies and France, it is necessary for the metropole to maintain certain leverage in its international relations with Africa. This goes through the various military and security agreements signed with countries such as Ivory Coast, Mali and Gabon for example (Pickett, 2017). In fact, the logic of a successful trade relationship requires some securities from both trading parties. This suggests that it makes perfect sense for the core, France, to secure its continuing investments in its peripheries. Today, the French government recognises that Africa is a key focus of France’s development policy. As a result, France allocated 2.9 billion Euros as foreign aid to a dozen of African countries in 2020, mostly representing its ex-colonies (France Diplomacy, 2022).
In addition to the use of soft power to maintain some sort of dependency across West Africa, France has often been accused of political interference in the peripheries' political domestic affairs. For instance, there are strong allegations of France's involvement in regime change across strategic peripheries such as Gabon, Ivory Coast, Mali, Guinea and Senegal (Powell, 2022).
In addition, the current dramatic political situation in Mali which now records three military coups over the past decade alone and a total of five coups since its independence illustrates the complex journey towards a sustainable political change in direction and stability post-independence. Albeit being a far more complex peripheral case due to the advances of terrorist groups in the country, the latest leader of Mali vows to review the current relationship with France with who current diplomatic exchanges have reached a deadlock (AlJazeera News, 2022). Overall, the intricacies of the current political system in Francophone Africa remain heavily linked with France's foreign policy and the possibilities for a political change in that part of the world are narrow on the political front alone.
Financial dependency
Seen as a more hopeful assumption for a change in the relationship between France and its ex-African colonies, is the effects of globalisation in the form of diversity in Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs) and financial independence. Since its independence, the ex-African colonies have been tied economically with the French metropole by using a common domestic currency, the CFA Franc, which is attached to the Euro currency on some financial principles. One main principle is the centralisation of the foreign exchange reserves lodged in France with its money still being printed by the Bank of France and in France (Timcke, 2021). In addition, this last colonial currency on the African continent is not convertible on the international foreign market, making it compulsory for all international trade to be made via the French treasury. With the now growing local complaints across West Africa and the perceived benefits of having its own monetary policy, coupled with the advertised political will of the current French government to support monetary independence, there is a chance for possible financial independence in the future (Keita, 2021).
Following the above dependencies on France, it is hard to argue for a smooth change in international relations between France and its ex-African colonies in the near future although this change remains possible through the use of an efficient
diplomacy effort on a level playing field. However, the growing interest in Africa from powerful nations such as China and Russia seems to multiply the options for breaking free from the imperial knots with France. It could be argued that the current crisis in Ukraine might have amplified this latter option, due in part to the perceived weakening of the Françafrique and the initiatives of cores such as China and Russia to acquire new peripheries (Grady, 2022).
Section II: Country appropriation: Ukraine
Immanuel Wallerstein’s world system theory posits a three-level hierarchy in world politics, namely core, semi-periphery and periphery. This classification is based on a country’s economic power and influence. Here, the semi-periphery suggests a country sitting between the most industrialised nations and the least developed countries, both economically and politically (Wallerstein, 2004). Ukraine represents a particularly intricate case due to various factors including its geo-political situation, natural resources, global security and global political ideology impacts. These factors place Ukraine at the centre of global attention and somehow coveted for the sole purpose of global security as seen in the current Russian invasion of Ukraine (European Council, 2022). This case confirms that the core-periphery relationship factually defines the current direction of world politics, and this trend is likely to be the same in the future.
1. From dependency to the concept of Security
The story of Ukraine is undoubtedly complex with a series of dramatic adventures with Russia dating from the period pre-USSR and post-USSR (United Socialist Soviet Republic). Ukraine’s independence in 1991 emerged from war, chaos, and famine despite multiple efforts and attempts in gaining its independence from Russia, the core. This independence became possible following the disintegration and dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991 (National Geographic, 2022). Since then and following years of heavy investments in agriculture and farming, Ukraine slowly became the breadbasket of Europe and the rest of the world with raw products exports valued at over $52 billion USD in 2020 and ranking among the top 50 global exporters in the world (Centre for Collective Learning, 2022). This was made possible through its political reform post-independence focused on democratic governance and capitalist statecraft with a radical shift away from Russia. With its new strategic regional position in the East, coupled with the growing appeal to join western organisations such as the NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) and the EU (European Union), Russia launched the re-conquest for Ukraine in 2022 as Russian president states that “Ukrainians and Russians were one people, a single whole. Ukraine is ancient Russian soil...” (BBC News, 2022). In this, it can be deduced that past colonialism justifies modern-day expansionism, which appears as a fallacy in the post-Westphalian world order. However, the current evolution of the situation in Ukraine clearly reveals that world politics is currently defined by the core-periphery relationship.
Answering the question of the trajectory of world politics today really lies in an understanding of the imperial era and external environmental factors both controllable and uncontrollable. Thus, the idea of core, periphery and now semi-periphery seems to be profoundly rooted in the political and social history of the world. Here, the dependency theory of development is a useful tool to understand the dependency of the entire world on some key countries such as Ukraine. It could be argued that Russia needs to take back control of peripheral Ukraine for its own fortification and security, as much as the rest of the world needs Ukraine in order to maintain a continuous flow and control over its exports which are essential for the rest of the world. In fact, this leads to the idea and concept of global security in all its forms. The neo-realist conception of global security posits that security and insecurity are the results of current world politics and the current international system (Buzan B., 1991).
With this in mind, it can be said that the current situation between Ukraine and its ex-Russian core defines world politics today and is likely to be the same for the years ahead. However, it is fair to highlight the geopolitical implications of the relationship and war between these two countries purely based on global political ideology between East and West and global economic power. The geopolitical implications are also portrayed through the levels of support that Ukraine receives from Western partners and the increase of national defence budgets in most cores across the West including Germany (Financial Times, 2022).
2. A change to the status quo in world politics
As seen in the evolution of Ukraine, the concept of political voice and nationalism played a great role in what can be called the Ukrainian revolution and resistance in the current war against Russia, its ex-core. Irrespective of the outcome of the 2022 war and crisis in Ukraine, it can be argued that separation from a core or an imperial power can be achieved based on the level of nationalistic sentiment and national consciousness of the preservation of a nation’s natural and political assets. But separation from the core does not necessarily mean an end of international relations between the two entities, nor does it suggest that no impact would be made to the nature of world politics. In fact, a least-developed nation would always be needed by a core in order to maintain the flow of resources or raw materials enabling the core to prosper further (Klink, 1990). This fact is illustrated through the dependency theory of development. This global structural imbalance appears essential for a functioning capitalist world. However, as more and more nations prioritise their national sovereignty, this naturally creates room for a review of the power imbalance among cores, semi-peripheries, and peripheries.
Furthermore, it is worth noting that nations evolve through local development, local political paradigms, and external factors such as globalisation. As a result, it is possible for a periphery to become a semi-periphery and even a core with greater regional and global influence. This is portrayed through the somehow challenging evolution of Ukraine over the past centuries. But it must be highlighted that the interconnected world of today and its majorly market-driven economy leave less room for the abandonment of core-periphery relationships across the globe and world politics. Instead, a shift in relational power is more plausible in the future, with a knock-on effect on the definition of international relations, power distribution and global politics.
Conclusion
The cases of Françafrique and Ukraine are two distinct complex and empirical illustrations that demonstrate the far-reaching legacy of imperialism marked by relationships between cores and peripheries. With Françafrique, the challenges to untie the imperial knots with France remain highly strong and complex with a political elite in ex-French colonies not necessarily leading to a drastic change in the relational power despite their political independence. But, the growing interest of global powers towards Africa suggests a possible change in the structural politics across the ex-French colonies and some cumulative effects across the rest of the continent.
The current war in Ukraine also exemplifies the extent to which the core-periphery relationship defines world politics today and in the future. Although in this live and evolving case study, there is an opportunity to explore a more global scope and global impact of core-periphery relationships and the various aspects of dependency theory. Here, it has been established that there are local to global security implications of these relationships and how they possibly affect the trajectory of world politics, geopolitics, and the confrontation of global political ideologies.
Overall, both case studies suggest that core-periphery relationships define world politics today with the possibility of being the same in the future mainly due to structural capitalism which is seen as essential to fuel economic growth and maintain a global political power (Heller, 2011). However, the two scenarios suggest that the rise of political voices and nationalism remain essential triggers for a review or change of power relations between the core and peripheries. In addition to these national triggers, the peripheries ought to use ingenuity; that is either through diplomacy and self-development or induce a power balance at all costs whenever sovereignty is violated.
Research paper submitted to the School of Politics and International Relations of QMUL, August 2022.
