Grim omen as ECOWAS loses Burkina, Mali, Niger (5)

________________________________________________________________

Editor’s Note: After taking some time out, Dr Oyeleye returns to continue the series, now in its fifth part, on the subject of ECOWAS, its internal dynamics and politics, and its relationships with the West. 

________________________________________________________________

SURPRISES PROMISED by Captain Ibrahim Traore are unfolding in rather rapid successions. About a fortnight ago, the military leader of Burkina Faso retorted that the Western countries should not stampede his government into hurriedly holding democratic elections. It has become abundantly clear that those Western countries, particularly the US and France in this case, are not too keen about civilian or military leadership as long as their interest is well served. This has been proved historically and in contemporary times. The term democracy and that very system of government are increasingly being seen as falling far below the promised ideals. It is also becoming clear that such a system will have a hard time working well in Africa for a number of reasons. The fact that malleable leaders who are not well appreciated by their countrymen could be regarded as Western allies raises serious suspicion about the validity of and sincerity in such an alliance. For instance, Mohamed Bazoum, regarded as a Western ally in Niger has turned out to be loathed as evidenced in Niger people’s ecstasy after his ouster on July 26, 2023. Yet, France and the US wanted him back in office for reasons best known to them. In Côte d’Ivoire, France had no problem with Alassane Ouattara’s third term in office as a Western ally. His aberrant decision, which was a form of coup, was easily overlooked. Yet, the same France has issues with military coups in Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso. By way of a corollary, as long as the change of power from quasi-democracy to military regime in Chad favours France, it was nothing to talk about or raise a voice against. 

It therefore becomes imperative and germane to critically examine democracy in its wider ramifications and ask if it is indeed a cure-all medication or just a palliative to Africa’s economic, political and governance challenges. Or, are there viable alternative governance pathways other than democracy that can deliver the desirable results in Africa? In this context, Africans are expected to have a second look at the Western countries, especially their inconsistency in its application outside their own shores, particularly in Africa. Reports recently declassified have shown the US, through its Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), was involved in the toppling of Chile’s democratic government of Salvador Allende and replacing it with the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. It was also reportedly involved in the toppling of Patrice Lumumba’s democratic government and replacing it with that of the brutish megalomaniac called Mobutu Sese Seko. All through the long reign of Sese Seko, his government was not subjected to any visible Western interference. Does that mean he was an acceptable Western ally? Most recently, there were allegations that Barack Obama, as US president, was instrumental to the ousting of the government of Nigeria’s Goodluck Jonathan, and replacing it with the failed government of Muhammadu Buhari. The question to ask, therefore, is: what exactly are their interests in all these interference and meddling? 

Observations within the four countries currently under military leadership in West Africa in the past couple of months are providing a basis for asking questions about the sincerity of Western countries on claims about democratic governments within Africa. It is fast proving that, given a good opportunity for focused and determined leaders, the military junta could deliver more goods to African countries than the much-touted civilian governments. Some radically disruptive policies attributed to Assimi Goita of Mali, Ibrahim Traore of Burkina Faso and Abdourahamane Tchiani of Niger are reportedly already changing the faces of those countries as they seem to be succeeding where their civilian predecessors have failed. On the issue of insecurity, in particular, the mutual defence pact under the Alliance of Sahel States (AES),  created between Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso on September 16, 2023, was one of the initial giant strides toward self-liberation that ought to be applauded by the Western countries that should be happy for being relieved of the unsolicited burden bearing in the form of military support. The theoretical statement credited to President Emmanuel Macron, that African countries are incapable of defending themselves can now be tested empirically within the tri-state confederation over a period of time. It should thus be clearer in a matter of time whether or not those states are better able to protect their territorial integrity without help from outside. The success of this alliance will very likely alter the election time table for Mali and Niger, in which case a return to democratic rule may very likely be postponed. Indeed, what is the point of running a democratic government that does not provide the basic needs of the people in critical areas such as security, economy, food, electricity and transportation?

Acceptance of the military junta by the citizens in the countries presently under military leadership should send a clear message to those clamouring for a quick return to civilian rule. Perhaps it could be affirmed that those vested interests are more important to them than the welfare of the people of those countries. The Western media have played complementary roles in amplifying the messages of their politicians, regarding those Sahel States as problematic. To them, the insecurity challenges in those countries are intractable and will remain so without Western interference. This brings into focus the decisions recently announced by Niger and Burkina Faso military leaders. In Niger, the discovery of rip-off and underpayment by France on uranium sales is quite revealing. The same France that could do it unchallenged under President Bazoum has been exposed under the military leadership of Tchiani. In Burkina Faso, the handling of mining and mining products, hitherto done by the miners from the Western countries should henceforth be done by the Burkinabes. This becomes a new policy as  all foreign mining licences are cancelled. This includes removing all foreign companies that were involved in mining and exporting gold from Burkina Faso. In particular, the policy revokes French mining companies’ gold permits in Burkina Faso. Although Mali’s approach, earlier decided, was not as far-reaching as Burkina Faso’s, Mali nonetheless had on September 1, 2023, published a new mining code. This code entails a new mining protocol that would increase the state’s earnings from gold, allowing the state to take up to 30 percent stake in new mineral projects and collect more revenues from the mining industry. The question could therefore be asked if those democratic governments were daft, naive, ignorant, complicit or simply conniving, at the excesses of foreign miners in their homeland.

Although those countries have embarked upon unambiguous diplomatic relations turnaround, preferring rather to align with the East, it remains to be seen what tradeoff such alignment entails. It is obvious that Africa is once again becoming an East-West diplomatic battleground which must be discreetly and circumspectly managed. The presence of Wagner mercenaries instead of the US or French soldiers will have some yet-to-be-understood wider implications. But, judging from the experiences of Wagner’s involvement in the Central African Republic as well as in Sudan, Wagner’s presence can be unsettling. For diplomatic balancing, however, it seems like the presence of Wagner was calculated to keep the Western forces at bay. More surprises are therefore to be expected from the tri-state area that has voluntarily excluded itself from the ECOWAS and seems unimpressed with the ECOWAS backtracking on its earlier threats of sanctions even after the sanctions were lifted. Those who announced the retraction must have envisaged that the affected countries would have jumped at the belated offer after initially dismissing the withdrawal announcement made by the three military leaders. But now, with a major fracture within the ECOWAS, the chances of mending seem like getting rather dimmer. 

The people of West Africa are now faced with options that have existential consequences: to embrace purposeful military leadership that has direction and a determination to boost its people’s fortunes or to celebrate and remain stuck in the mire of a democracy that delivers no real dividend to the majority of its people and keeps them in penury. Bearing in mind that the states under military rule, like many other states in West Africa, are highly dependent on commodity exports, a real test of commitment to true economic and political independence resides in the dogged determination to take ownership of what belongs to them. In other words, the readiness or reluctance of the democratic governments in other states to team up, or cooperate, with the military leaders over reforms of commodity extraction and exports will further prove how committed they are towards the economic development of their countries. In essence, those leading the democratic governments of those countries should not see it as too odd to learn from the military leaders they seek to discredit. After all, the success of leadership is not strictly measured by the type of government but by the impact of the government on the people governed. In this case, those lame duck democratic governments have to be humble and sincere enough to recognise that their success is best measured in their positive impact on their people’s lives, not in the rhetorics, terminologies or benchmarks set by foreigners who essentially hide behind such mantras to exploit African countries.

• 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