Niger, the West and democracy’s shifting goalposts in Africa

SUBLIME DESCRIPTION of democracy can sometimes be misleading. Those countries purporting to export democracy all over the world have run into crises of some sorts over the past one or two decades. They have exposed their hypocrisy and double standards that easily offend the sensibility of many in other parts of the world and make those people think they are better off without democracy. They are getting upset at the spinning of narratives that sound altruistic when, in fact, these democracy vendors are secretly worried that their strategic interests are at stake. The Western countries don’t walk the talk in the strict sense of the word in the sense that they are comfortable with changing narratives elsewhere as long as their interests are protected. The United States and France are under consideration here.

The US, in their veiled pursuit of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), got stuck in Iraq and ended up planting ‘democracy’ there after wasting the lives of many Iraqi citizens and US soldiers. That was not the first time the US would get stuck in a war outside its shores. The Vietnam experience happened much earlier. And there are a number of others thereafter. France has had its own experiences in different ways. Since the wave of independence all over Africa in the early 1960s, both the US and France have been involved in masterminding coups and violent overthrow of democratically elected governments while — back home — they claimed to be operating democracy. In the North of Africa, France has taken the wrong sides in some domestic crises in the recent past and looks set to do the same now.

In Niger, both the US and France are moving in the predictable direction trying to reinstate democracy by their own description. The way they are both going about it raises some suspicion about the right motive. How and why is Niger so important to the US and France that both are so obsessed with the idea of removing the coup plotters and reinstating the deposed President Mohamed Bazoum when the same US and France had looked the other way in many instances of what they called undemocratic takeover of governments? It is obvious that the US and France are motivated by anything else other than protection of democracy. Otherwise, why did France not raise an eyebrow at Chad when Idris Déby Itno’s quasi-democracy ended in 2021 and Macron personally attended the handover of power ceremony to Mahamat, the son of Idris Déby who is a soldier? Or why did Macron not distance himself and France from Alassane Ouattara in his third term bid as president of Côte d’Ivoire? Or, why did Macron have to visit the despotic Rwandan President Paul Kagame without firmly telling the latter to relinquish power after he had spent 21 years then in 2021.

In August 2020, deadly violence erupted in Ivory Coast, which led to the death of at least two people after Ouattara’s controversial third-term bid was announced. But the Western countries’ hypocrisy was soon going to obliterate all of those crises as Ouattara has been described as a long-time favourite of European leaders. He was reportedly only “slightly less popular” internationally, shortly after his re-election, giving the example of French President Emmanuel Macron’s soft expressions of concern over the 2020 presidential vote. Macron was accused of meddling in that controversial third-term election. But everything returned to normal in Côte d’Ivoire. But that did not just happen in a vacuum. The idea sold to persuade the people of Côte d’Ivoire to accept Ouattara’s declared third term victory was that political contests should be decided through the democratic system, not in the streets or on the battlefields. The same Ouattara would now be one of the leading voices drumming up attacks on the military junta that took over power in Niger on July 26, 2023. What an ostrich game! It is clear that France’s diplomacy and trade in the region had to be protected, especially where France competes with old rivals on the international stage such as the UK and newer ones on stage, including China, Russia and Turkey. Ouattara planned and executed an institutional coup and got away with it. So, what moral qualification has he to lead a charge against perpetrators of military coup in Niger?

There are many cases of takeover of power through military coup, institutional coup or constitutional coup in West and Central Africa, but the US looked the other way. So, why is the US particularly keen on the Niger coup? What interest is the US trying to protect? Could it be because of the potential diplomatic, military and trade face-offs between the US and Russia on Niger? Some pundits opine that the uranium in Niger is a major reason the US is trying to get involved in the post-coup pressure on the military junta. It sounds probable, especially when examined against the backdrop of the US recent policy of decoupling or de-risking which can be applied either to China on trade competition or to Russia on the invasion of Ukraine. Attempts by the US to diversify its uranium supply source since the Ukraine invasion began may have prompted the former to begin to look towards Niger as a viable alternative. The same uranium has been said to be a source of supply of nearly a third of the electricity consumed in Niger. This is notwithstanding the fact that Niger depends on neighbouring Nigeria for about half of its electricity from hydroelectric power.

And, to further buttress the theory of interest in Niger’s mineral resources — not limited to uranium — the US and other countries are already armed with the big data on Africa’s resources in the sub-soil. The US Geological Survey is undoubtedly a repertoire of data on Africa, the same way as France is. Beyond Niger, how many people reckon with the Greek gifts of scholarships given to Africans in Europe and North America on specific research works in various fields, particularly in geology and allied disciplines such that a lot of information is gained at a little cost? With the energy transition gathering pace, Africa will be a ‘hot cake’ to many Western countries trying to outdo each other in the rat race and quest for the mineral resources to power their world through renewable energy. And Africa has them in abundance. As a subterfuge, therefore, the US and France use subtle means of lulling many African countries to insensitivity and complacency through foreign aid and military support. And that is precisely what the military leaders in Niger seem to be intent on discontinuing.

But those that see their geo-strategic interests as very likely to be jeopardised had quickly framed the Niger event as a threat to democracy, a term they thought would appeal to Nigeriens and the global community. In their spirited attempts to be politically correct, the ECOWAS leaders, many of which have violated the democratic ideals, have been trying to shore up their political credentials with their democratic rhetoric by threatening to use force to reinstate the deposed President Bazoum. France, which was soft on Ouattara’s third term in Côte d’Ivoire and mute on Mahamat Deby in Chad, suddenly saw the Niger case as different and must launch a military attack on the coup planners. The US, using the ECOWAS leaders as proxies, would also try to sidestep the decision of Nigeria’s legislature that refused to approve a military intervention option against Niger. Meanwhile, like Ouattara, Bazoum has been described as a Western ally. Not surprising therefore, the US and France have been ignoring the jubilant Nigerien crowds that came out to celebrate the success of the coup, denouncing France while welcoming Russia.

The tectonic shift in the political landscape in Niger has therefore shown that France and the US are losing out as the people are also fed up with them, with some preferring to describe them as armies of occupation. The ECOWAS that is being drawn into the war of attrition against Niger is populated by discredited individuals who have manipulated people’s desire one way or another to either get into office or remain there. Macky Sall of Senegal has been up against his political opponent, Ousmane Sonko, banning him and his political party ahead of 2024 elections. Two neighbouring francophone countries which could geographically be treated as West Africa even though they are geopolitically in Central Africa are Chad and Cameroon. While Macron saw nothing wrong in the transfer of ‘democratic’ office from the slain Deby Itno to his military son and did not protest against Paul Biya while celebrating his 40th years anniversary in France as Cameroon’s President, it was after the coup that France suddenly realised that Niger was doing the wrong thing. The US and France have therefore proved beyond reasonable doubt that, outside their own national territories, their measure of what constitutes democracy is subjective, variable and uses rubber yardstick.

With the shifting of their goal posts, both the US and France have resolved to use force to eject the military leaders either directly as France has been accused of doing or indirectly as the US has allegedly decided to do through the ECOWAS. A field may thus be open for the free rein of terrorist activities, destabilising Niger and Nigeria as there will be collateral damages on both sides. While the interest of the US and France might well be protected, Niger might be plunged into protracted war with Nigeria in the main and other countries apart from Nigeria, are at a distance as only Benin Republic is another country that shares political border with Niger among those disposed to attacking it. Territories and borders with Mali and Burkina Faso are obviously no-go areas.

In reality, there have been talks about how the Western countries have been plundering Africa to feather their own nests. Although other countries such as  Russia and China are already making inroads into what used to be strongholds of the West, African countries are generally advised to hedge their bets carefully. In particular, African countries are advised to avoid whatever might lead to proxy wars between the West and the East on African soil. Truly, it is time African countries began to take control of their resources and decide who they do business with. Outsiders are not expected to continue to force themselves on Africans or continue to cream off commodities of African countries in the raw forms while preventing the same countries from participating in the advantageous segments of the global value chain. The conversation that the Niger coup has started will very likely open the minds of Africans beyond just the coup or pretentious democracy. Africans may indeed have been awakened to realise that the time has come for the perennial exploiters to be stopped forthwith and possibly permanently. The democratic rhetorics in Niger could be nothing but mere subterfuge in the end as those purporting to be — or are posturing as — champions of democracy have proved sufficiently that their claims cannot be trusted. They defend democracy in Africa when their own interests are secure and they tactically ignore antidemocratic leaders who are their allies. There is a limit to double standards.

• business a.m. commits to publishing a diversity of views, opinions and comments. It, therefore, welcomes your reaction to this and any of our articles via email: comment@businessamlive.com