On March 30-31, 2010, the Institute of Africa of the Russian Academy of Sciences hosted the international scientific conference "50 Years of the Year of Africa. The Fate of National Liberation Movements: A View from Africa, Russia and Western Europe". This is the second joint event (the first was held in June 2009). The conference was attended by prominent scientists and politicians from Africa (Angola, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Zimbabwe), Europe (Germany, Great Britain), as well as from Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kazan and Yaroslavl, representatives of the Russian Foreign Ministry and an African dip-

lomatics building in Moscow, postgraduates and students of Russian universities. There are more than 50 people in total.

The conference was moderated by A. Y. Urnov (Institute of Africa of the Russian Academy of Sciences) and B. Amatila (Namibia).

The main objectives of the conference were to study and discuss a wide range of issues related to the history of the national liberation movement of African countries, including: the influence of the past of political parties that emerged on the basis of national political movements on their organizational structure, ideology and politics; to determine the degree of influence of the relations of the USSR/The current state of these parties and their potential as progressive political organizations; determining the role of these parties in the international arena, including in the process of African integration; determining the state and prospects of relations between Russia and African countries; forecasting the further evolution of these parties; familiarizing academic and student youth with the history of political movements in African countries Africa and their connection with Russia.

The conference was opened by the Director of the Institute of African Studies, Corresponding Member. RAS A. M. Vasiliev. He emphasized that the Year of Africa is a significant historical event. 50 years ago, at the XV UN General Assembly in 1960, at the initiative of the Soviet Union, a resolution "On granting independence to colonial countries and peoples"was adopted. Over the past half-century, the African continent has gone through many trials. Tectonic changes have taken place in Africa. We are talking about national liberation movements that have developed in various forms on the continent.

The Soviet Union supported the peoples ' liberation movement. Unfortunately, the archives are still classified, which prevents historians from giving an objective picture of the past days. If we talk about the transformation of national liberation movements, this is a special conversation. The slogans and tasks that were set 50 years ago now sound new. The world is changing very quickly and sets other challenges. The slow development of Africa at the beginning of the new century gave rise to a galaxy of pessimists about the fate of the continent. The Africa Institute, on the contrary, is dominated by realists who, while recognizing Africa's problems, believe that it has made a huge step forward and is in the same direction of global development. This suggests that Africa is forming its own political elite, which will be able to find solutions to problems, of course, in cooperation with the international community.

P. Linke (Germany, head of the Russian branch of the FRL) spoke about the work of the FRL in African and European countries, the prospects and tasks of the Fund. At the same time, the head of the FRL highly appreciated the international scientific conference held in 2009 jointly with the Institute of Africa of the Russian Academy of Sciences on the topic:: "The impact of the global crisis on Africa and the impact of crisis processes in Africa on the countries of the" North"", which gave food for thought on a wide range of issues. P. Linke focused on the analysis of the current development of African states, also recalled the historical heritage of Africa and the interaction of the continent's countries with European countries. The cooperation of the socialist countries with independent Africa was multifaceted, including ties in the scientific and military spheres, economy, trade and culture. What is the current assessment of this cooperation in the 1960s? Maybe it was in vain? We must try to answer this question.

Today, there are many centers in the United States, the European Union, China and Russia that show interest in Africa, but this interest applies only to the economic sphere. This is clearly not enough to build long-term relationships. The aim of the conference is to preserve knowledge about Soviet-African relations, including the experience of other socialist countries.

This year marks 50 years since the world began to celebrate the anniversary of Africa. What has changed during this time? The African continent continues to be associated for European and Asian countries with the image of a"black hole". The prevailing opinion is that there is nothing worthy of attention there, except for minerals, that there is devastation, AIDS, and irrevocably degraded "human capital". Is this really the case? I am deeply convinced that this is not the case. African intellectual heritage can and should be reflected in a new way in public and political discussions in the West. It was widely discussed after the Second World War. Now the legacy of African figures (J. Nyerere, K. Nkrumah, L. Senghor) is undeservedly forgotten and it is time to revisit it. Africa is more than gold, oil, diamonds and timber. The time has come to discover its intellectual wealth, which corresponds not only to African, but also to Western and Russian interests, and in general to universal ones.

B. Langa (Ambassador of South Africa to Moscow) focused on some aspects of cooperation between South Africa and Russia. The head of the diplomatic mission noted three stages in the development of relations between the two countries: Soviet, transitional and post-Yeltsin. During the Soviet period, support for national liberation movements was a cornerstone of the Soviet Union's foreign policy. Africans viewed the Soviet Union as an important ally in the struggle for their liberation. Then the motivation was ideological against the background of the Cold War. Africans looked to the Soviet Union as a country that supported their struggle under the new economic order. Since there was no private sector in the Soviet Union, economic ties developed within the framework of state relations. As a rule, this was in the nature of state aid. After the collapse of the USSR, many projects did not survive. Today, Russia's departure from Africa is seen as undesirable there. Russia is accused of abandoning its friends.

Paradoxically, today African countries are more closely linked to their former colonizers than to Russia. It turns out that Russia is a newcomer to the continent compared to the former metropolises. The banking and economic sectors are managed by Western capital. Nevertheless, new conditions are opening up for cooperation between Russia and the African continent. It is important to note the emergence of the private sector in Russia, although Russian entrepreneurs do not yet have the necessary experience and operate through Western companies. But this problem can be solved. African countries intend to develop cooperation with Russia, especially in the field of science and technology, which has already been reflected in many projects. To do this, we need to develop common positions. Potential development is possible if both sides are clearly motivated.

V. G. Shubin (Institute of Africa) presented the report: "The fate of the national liberation movements in Africa. Achievements and challenges". The presentation focused on national liberation movements in southern Africa, including the South African African National Congress (ANC), the People's Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA), the South West African People's Organization (SWAPO-Namibia), the Mozambique Liberation Front (FRELIMO), the Zimbabwe African People's Union (ZAPU) and the Zimbabwe African National Union (To ZANU). The speaker spoke about the general and special features of these movements, traced the stages of their formation and development. Speaking about the support of these movements by the Soviet Union, he noted, in particular, that at that time there was no question of their ideological loyalty and loyalty. Among other factors, such as geopolitical and ideological, the moral factor played an important role. The efforts of the Soviet people were aimed at helping and supporting the weak, oppressed peoples.

S. Vieira (Mozambique) focused on the main stages of the development of the national liberation movement of Mozambique (FRELIMO), with which he went through its entire history. Of the 40 years of the movement's existence, 28 were spent on wars that killed many people and left the country in ruins. S. Vieira shared his memories of his stay in the Soviet Union during the time of Mikhail Gorbachev, and the consequences of the collapse of the USSR for Africa.

R. Satner (South Africa) presented his concept of the history of relations between African countries and the Soviet Union. He believes that the history of relations between Russia/The Soviet Union and South Africa should be studied more carefully. Africa would never have been free without the support of the Soviet Union. But no one thought about how much this support cost the Soviet Union. In addition to military aid, the Soviet Union taught Africans not only Marxism-Leninism, but also engineering and foreign languages. The time has come to really analyze the Soviet contribution.

A. B. Mezyaev (Kazan) spoke about the APK from the point of view of international legislation. In international law, the legal basis of a national liberation movement is the basic principles of international law, which were first enshrined in the UN Charter and then developed in the documents of the UN General Assembly. Thus, UN General Assembly Resolution 2649 (1970) for the first time confirmed the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for liberation, and by any means. A certain set of international treaties regulating the status of national liberation movements has been formed in international law. Over time, new mechanisms have emerged in international law, such as the International Criminal Court (ICC). Many Africans use it against internal opposition movements, which is not always true. For example, the case of Thomas Lubanga in the DRC, the leader of the patriotic forces for the liberation of the Congo, does not meet the jurisdiction of the ICC due to non-compliance with the principle,

when the state "cannot and does not want" to hold a particular person accountable. Unfortunately, there has long been a certain regression in modern international law, and there is simply no one to put important issues on the agenda regarding Africa.

According to V. N. Fedotov (Russian Foreign Ministry), the ICC is not always objective, although it is necessary to cooperate with it on those positions where the approaches coincide. Speaking about the history of Russian-African relations, V. N. Fedotov highlighted the Soviet Union's initiative to adopt the Declaration on Granting Colonial Countries and Peoples Independence, approved at the XV session of the UN General Assembly in 1960, and the 1963 Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The Soviet Union/Russia in relation to Africa has never acted as a colonizer, did not participate in the slave trade and predatory exploitation of natural and human resources. On the contrary, our country was at the origin of the national liberation movements, provided them with all sorts of practical assistance, and solidarity was an additional lever that, combined with the struggle of the African peoples themselves, made it possible to finally dismantle the system of colonialism.

Today, Russia and most African countries support each other in the UN. Most of the Russian initiatives are being promoted thanks to the votes of the African group of countries.

E. N. Korendyasov (Institute of Africa) noted that before assessing Russian-African relations, one should know the past well. The pan-African attitude of the 1960s towards a socialist orientation was not created by Moscow. None of the parties had the slogan "We are building capitalism" in their program, but the Africans had their own understanding of socialism. It was associated primarily with justice and equality. Over time, the national liberation movements transformed and changed their tactics. In times of a market economy, they have found themselves in a difficult position, as the dominant neoliberalism contradicts African traditions. How do Africans fit into the 21st century? How to move from the trajectory of survival to the trajectory of development? It is impossible to contrast African traditions with modernity. Apparently, the solution will have to be found in their synthesis, and for each country separately.

A. Hofmann (Germany) expressed his vision of the problems associated with the 50-year history of Africa. In the 1960s, it was difficult to navigate the path of development. But in any case, African countries could not copy the model of developed countries due to the lack of necessary vital resources. Why is it that today, seeing Africa's poverty and its problems, no one has yet adjusted the development model? International organizations now offer many different figures for analysis, but it is difficult to draw proper conclusions based on them. The development of Africa implies a change in the whole way of life of Africans.

N. D. Kosukhin (Institute of Africa) supported P. Linke's idea that it is necessary to return to the problems of the theoretical heritage of African thinkers, including L. Senghor's Negativity, the African Renaissance, and traditional African culture. He expressed regret that the Peoples ' Friendship University ceased to bear the name of P. Lumumba. The scientist also continued the idea expressed by V. G. Shubin about the emergence of various socio-political organizations on an ethnic basis during the national liberation struggle. The development of party building was associated with the creation of a bloc of certain political forces that could oppose colonial rule. Under these conditions, front parties were created, and their leaders tried to involve all political, social, religious and ethnic forces. This historical genetics stretches back to recent times, when multiparty relations are conditioned by ethnic and religious relations.

T. L. Deutsch (Institute of Africa) cited the facts of the confrontation between the Soviet Union and China and showed how this affected our country's relations with African countries. Beijing's attitude toward the relevant parties depended primarily on the Soviet Union's attitude toward them. If any movement was considered pro-Soviet, then Chinese interest in it waned. On the contrary, those leaders or organizations that opposed the USSR received support. Another thing is the relations between China and the United States, which turned out to be "in the same boat" and, accordingly, acted as a united front. A. Y. Cheskis (a student of RSUH) presented an analysis of the policies of two South African presidents-T. Mbeki and J. R. R. Tolkien. Zuma, as well as their position in the ANC. G. M. Sidorova (Institute of Africa) devoted her presentation to the establishment of political parties in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Political parties in the Democratic Republic of the Congo are a complex structure formed under the influence of political, ethnic and religious factors in different historical periods. The establishment of a multi-party system in the DRC was promoted by the principle of political pluralism laid down in the Law on Parties of 2004.

political parties was the end of the DRC civil war (1997-2003). As a result of reconciliation between the warring parties, armed opposition groups were transformed into leading political parties. During the 2006 presidential elections, so-called new-old politicians appeared in the forefront, most of whom held important positions in the power structures of the Mobutu regime or during the presidency of Father J. Kabila-L.-D. Kabyles. The undisputed leader is the "Presidential Majority Alliance", which unites those loyal to Zh. Kabila parties, among which the dominant "People's Party for Reconstruction and Democracy".

When asked by P. Linke what is the difference between parties in African countries and what is the main principle of their existence, G. M. Sidorova replied that the main sign of a successful party is considered to be the successful implementation of its political program.

According to V. G. Shubin, it is necessary to study archival materials more thoroughly in order to clarify the essence of some issues, for example, the true attitude of A. Gizenga to P. Lumumba. S. Vieira touched upon the topic of nationalism and international law. He believes that the ICC is still dealing only with issues related to Yugoslavia or the DRC, and the problems of other African countries are still beyond its scope. R. Satner, continuing the topic of nationalism, noted that the concept of nationalism should not deny national identity. B. Amatila and Zh. Mazarir (Zimbabwe).

M. L. Vishnevsky (Institute of Africa), in his report "US policy in Africa and the National Liberation Movement: Stages of development", noted that in accordance with the strategy of J. R. R. Tolkien, The United States created conditions and prerequisites for the consolidation of capitalism in developing countries. This was seen by the Kennedy administration as a key to strengthening the" global leadership " of the United States.

N. A. Dobronravin (St. Petersburg State University) assessed the national liberation movements from the point of view of nationalist tendencies. In general, as practice has shown, the main actors in history are not always the national liberation movement of the country, but rather nationalist groups. He demonstrated his thesis on the examples of Western Sahara, Sudan, Eritrea, and Somalia.

A.D. Savateev (Institute of Africa) noted that the main problem of the liberated African States was the problem of further development, and not so much economic, but choosing their own path, which can be based on the traditions of solidarity and mutual assistance. This is what can give a boost to the development of Africa.

L. Y. Prokopenko (Institute of Africa) in her report "The role of political elites in the process of modernization in Southern Africa" focused on the role of political elites, both ruling and opposition, in the process of modernization of modern political institutions. She believes that in the African reality it is important to maintain political stability as a condition for the development of the continent as a whole. A. da Silva Giulio (Angola) spoke about the national liberation movement in Angola and cooperation with the Soviet Union/N. Vinokurov (Institute of Africa) gave a detailed account of the activities of such DRC political leaders as P. Lumumba, A. Gizenga and L.-D. Kabila.

Zh. Mazarire noted that the struggle in Zimbabwe is connected not only with national liberation movements, but also with trade unions and nationalist organizations. The fact is that in the 1950s and 1960s, nationalist movements were financed from outside, in particular by the US State Department. The Americans sought to attract such organizations to their side in order to use them to prevent the political influence of the Soviet Union. In this regard, contradictions between trade unions and nationalist movements began. Mazarire was contradictory and did not agree with some facts. S. Vieira also commented on some points of his speeches and made clarifications.

A.D. Khamatshin's speech (RSUH student) was devoted to the crisis in Zimbabwe, the country's modern development, the success of the coalition government, reducing inflation and solving social problems. The topic of the speech of E. E. Tupitsyna (a student of the P. G. Demidov Yar. State University) is the national liberation movement in Ghana, the role of the Ghanaian political leader Kwame Nkrumah - the evolution of his worldview and philosophical views. A. A. Tokarev (Institute of Africa), based on his own experience as a military translator, spoke about the military-political cooperation of the USSR with the former Portuguese colonies in Africa. 2010 marks the 35th anniversary of the liberation of four African countries from colonial rule: Mozambique, Cape Verde, Sao Tome and Principe and Angola. The question of military cooperation is always yours-

there was a high level of interest, but at the same time it was quite closed. The speaker noted the military and political support provided by the Soviet Union to these countries during their armed struggle for independence, as well as the political support provided by the USSR through international organizations and the Committee of Youth Organizations. During the presentation, a number of publications on this topic, which appeared in Portuguese in the 1960s, were commented on.

V. N. Tetekin (Institute of Africa) touched upon the history of the ANC transformation, democratic trends in South Africa, and shared his impressions of a recent trip to this country. Yu. S. Skubko (Institute of Africa) considered an important aspect of modern South African politics in the report " The policy of liberal modernization of the ANC government in South Africa and its possible changes under the new government the country's leadership". He focused on the problem of the global crisis, which debunked many illusions about liberal modernization, including in the United States. He noted that the administration of J. Zuma does not yet have a sufficiently clear macroeconomic strategy. At the same time, he stressed that it is quite possible to strengthen the elements of state planning and regulation in South Africa. V. V. Kruchinsky (RSUH student) used a slide fund of satirical cartoons, so-called cartoon photos. He showed the attitude of various political figures to the satirical caricature, including N. Mandela, who reacted painfully to such posters, and T. Mbeki, who, on the contrary, did not pay attention to it. Archangelskaya (Institute of Africa) spoke about the foreign policy of the current government of South Africa and the relations of the ANC with the Soviet Union. L. P. Kalinina (Institute of Africa) noted the peculiarities of party building in the Republic of Guinea, determined the place of parties in the socio-political system of the country.

B. Amatila. Moderator's closing remarks: "We tried to understand what happened 50 years ago. Did the Soviet Union need help? In the 1960s, when Congo became an independent country, P. Lumumba believed that the Soviet Union should be asked for help. And the Soviet Union did support the Congo. In Namibia, assistance was not limited to training. Our country sent specialists to study in the USSR. The Soviet Union, like Russia now, was a permanent member of the UN Security Council. I believe that the Soviet Union's assistance was justified."

During the conference, we successfully discussed other topics, including the transformation of national liberation movements into parties, their evolution and prospects, as well as the role of ruling parties in the democratic process. This is especially important in the context of an economic crisis, when certain adjustments have to be made.

A. Y. Urnov. Moderator's closing remarks: "I think the conference turned out to be interesting. We thank the speakers for their appreciation of the Soviet Union's support for African countries, but most importantly, it was a victory for the colonial countries themselves. We are returning to Africa and hope that Russian-African relations will develop successfully. Thank you to the guests from Africa - they are an invaluable source for our scientific work."

Permanent link to this publication: