No to Alliance of Sahel States

At a recent meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger in Bamako the capital of Mali, the idea of creating a confederation of the three states was recommended as a first step towards uniting them in a confederation. 

In their joint communiqué after the two-day meeting, the foreign ministers said they were ‘’Guided by the ambition to achieve a federation uniting Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger and recommended the creation of a confederation to Heads of State of the Alliance of Sahel States’’. The ministers further stated that such an alliance has ‘’great potential for peace, stability, diplomatic strength and economic development that a strengthened political alliance offers’’. 

In effect, these moves by the three states ruled by military juntas, rather than hearken to calls on them by regional and global institutions to restore their countries to civilian democratic rule, are instead planning to perpetuate military rule.  

Accordingly, this raises a number of questions. 

Are these countries planning to exit from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) to which they had belonged for the past 40 years? Are they planning to establish an axis of military dictatorships in the sub-region in conflict with the democratic countries of the area? What are the implications of these developments for the growth of democracy in these countries? Do they have the mandate of their citizens to embark on the course of action they are contemplating?  

These questions are necessary because the move by these countries does not just constitute a new and dangerous dimension to the current state of impasse between these countries, the ECOWAS and the democratic world, it is indeed a development that can be likened to a cancerous tumour which if not decisively handled, may affect the democratic gains recorded in the sub-region within the past couple of decades.  

It must be stated that the defiance demonstrated by these countries on the issue can be attributed to the stalemate between them and ECOWAS as well as the various international organisations that have called for restoration of democracy. The course embarked upon by these countries to set up a confederacy between them cannot stand because the move does not reflect the free wishes of the people of the countries in question through a democratic process. 

We see it like most people do as a desperate step by the military regimes of the three countries seeking to protect themselves from the possible reaction of the people against the truncation of their democratic rights. The lesson we have learnt with military regimes in Africa is that because they are not intrinsically democratic, they often turn against themselves in vicious power struggles, recycling instability in the process. 

As with military regimes in Africa, the military regimes in these three countries, having realised that they will soon wear out the initial euphoria that accompanied their coming, are now embarking on desperate efforts to dig in and remain in office against the wishes of the people. That is the context in which the military regimes in the countries are now operating.   

This is unacceptable, and they should be told in clear terms that not only will their actions in truncating democracy in their countries not be allowed to stand, but their attempts to set up a parallel and illegal body of non-democratic states in the region will be firmly resisted and eventually checkmated. 

To ECOWAS and Nigeria in particular, this calls for ramping up efforts at enforcing the will of the majority of the countries in the sub-region that clearly rejects the presence of undemocratic governments. It is clear that the initial sanctions placed on these countries and the option of dialogue extended to them on the need to reverse their course of action has not yielded positive results. Indeed, from the recent coup attempts in Sierra Leone and Guinea-Bissau, it would appear elements in the military of some West African and African countries are looking to follow the example of the juntas in the three countries in violently truncating democratic governments.  

What should also concern us is that these countries in their present course of action might seek to enter into defence alliance with certain foreign powers in order to protect and perpetuate themselves in power against the wishes of the people. This dangerous course of action will not only further stifle the democratic space in those countries, it will also have the effect of militarising the sub-region, turning it into a theatre of strategic competition between opposing global powers.  

For Nigeria, in addition to having to cope with the challenges to the democratic order posed by these three countries in the region, the danger of having an undemocratic government in neighbouring Niger cannot be overemphasised. As a country with which we share not just geographical borders but also a long history of linguistic and cultural ties, the potential for destabilization is real. 

It is a fact that our long border with Niger has become a haven for terrorists, bandits and other criminal elements operating freely. This no doubt is a consequence of the instability of the military regime in the country and their having to withdraw a large contingent of the country’s armed forces and deploy them in and around the capital, Niamey, in defence of the regime.  

In this regard, President Tinubu as the leader of Nigeria and in his capacity as Chairman of ECOWAS heads of state should up the ante in the ongoing efforts to restore democracy to the three countries. While the noble goal of uniting African countries is imperative, it should be within the context of democracy and the rule of law not under military dictatorships. It is therefore in Nigeria’s strategic interest to ensure that Niger along with Burkina Faso and Mali return to democratic order.