Ultimatum to the coup leaders in Niger

The future of Niger, a key country in the unstable Sahel, is up in the air.

Oliver Thansan
Oliver Thansan
29 July 2023 Saturday 22:21
3 Reads
Ultimatum to the coup leaders in Niger

The future of Niger, a key country in the unstable Sahel, is up in the air. International pressure, including from neighboring states, continued to mount yesterday on the coup junta that took power last Wednesday. Given the global context and the geopolitical interests at stake, the Western foreign ministries have mobilized to try to prevent Niger from also falling under Russian orbit, as has already happened in Mali and the Central African Republic.

Meeting in Abuja, the capital of Nigeria, the leaders of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) issued a harsh ultimatum to General Abdourahamane Tchiani, the current strongman in Niamey, to release President Mohamed Bazoum and proceed to the “complete return to the constitutional order”. If these demands are not met within a week, ECOWAS "will take all necessary measures", which "may include the use of force".

The total firmness against the coup plotters was already expressed in previous days by the African Union, the European Union, the UN, the United States and France, a former colonial power.

It remains to be seen how this unanimous opposition will influence the coup plotters, whose control of the situation has been considered fragile since the start of the coup. Tchiani, who led the presidential guard (with 700 troops) since 2011, did not generate a very solid consensus among the generals of the rest of the Armed Forces. As details become known, the reason for the coup could be very prosaic: Tchiani anticipated his probable dismissal. This general had accumulated much power and a considerable fortune during the years that he led the presidential guard.

The Nigerian board adopted, already on Saturday, a defensive and conspiracy stance, anticipating eventual scenarios. The coup leaders denounced that the Abuja summit had the objective of "validating a plan of aggression against Niger", which would materialize in "an imminent military intervention in Niamey in collaboration with countries that are not members of the organization and some Western countries", they said. a statement read on state television.

In the midst of this tense atmosphere, a demonstration took place in front of the French embassy in which slogans were chanted against the old metropolis, in favor of Russia and Vladimir Putin, while waving Russian flags. It was difficult to discern whether it was a spontaneous or orchestrated riot. It is possible that the coup leaders wave the ghost of Russia as a blackmail strategy against those who work to make the coup fail. The situation continues to be confused and volatile.

France, which maintains 1,500 soldiers, Mirage fighter-bombers and Reaper drones involved in the anti-jihadist fight in Niger, reacted to the demonstration in front of its diplomatic headquarters. The Élysée made it clear that Paris will reply “immediately and inflexibly” in the event of an attack against the French residents in Niger. Macron "will not tolerate any attack against France and its interests." The Ministry of Foreign Affairs recalled that "the Nigerien forces have the obligation to guarantee the security of our diplomatic facilities."

The latest events in Niger have been greeted with great concern and little concealed frustration in Paris for what they mean as a new confirmation of the fiasco of French policy in the Sahel over the last ten years. Even if the blow was finally reversed, the feeling of precariousness and uncertainty regarding the future would remain.

Niger, with an area of ​​more than 1.2 million square kilometers – more than double that of mainland France – and 25 million inhabitants, was an integrated colony in French West Africa. It obtained its independence in 1960. Several factors contribute to the strategic value of the country: a point of contact between sub-Saharan Africa and the Maghreb, a place of passage for migratory flows and the holder of large uranium deposits.

After the French withdrawal from Mali and Burkina Faso, faced with the hostility of the coup juntas in both countries and public opinion – manipulated by Russian propaganda – that gave free rein to anti-French resentment, Paris concentrated its soldiers in Niger, which It seemed the most reliable country and that it also hosted –until today- US troops and other European countries.

By chance the news of the coup in Niamey coincided with Macron's tour of the Pacific. The French president was claiming influence in that part of the world, against giants like China and the United States, when Paris once again suffered a humiliating setback in the part of Africa that was, for more than a century, his true backyard, first under the colonial form and then with methods of political, economic and military tutelage.

The military intervention in the Sahel, in 2013, was decided by the then president François Hollande to save the Government of Mali in the face of the advance of the Islamist guerrillas on the capital, Bamako. Operation Serval – later renamed Barjan – was initially successful, but then bogged down. Barjan ended up becoming a kind of Afghanistan for France, which invested huge resources in an almost wasted effort. With 5,000 soldiers it was impossible to control a huge space, bigger than the EU, and transform countries eaten away by corruption, drug and human trafficking, tribal fights and radical Islamism. The French military leaders themselves recognized that they had been assigned an impossible mission. Finally Macron decided to put an end to Barjan, last year, although he maintained a contingent in Niger for specific operations. The future of that base is currently unknown.

The French press has not spared self-criticism. Le Figaro warned in an editorial that the domino theory – of countries that could fall under the Soviet orbit – that so obsessed the West during the cold war is materializing in the Sahel. Le Monde, for its part, questioned Paris' policy in Africa and argued that "the priority given to security, without taking sufficiently into account the standard of living of the affected populations, shows its limits."