Sahel-Exit: The Sahel Confederation
Sahel-Exit: The Sahel Confederation
Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger are forming a historic anti-imperialist confederation.
Note: This article serves as an introduction to the events in the Sahel region, which we consider extremely important for interested readers.
This article is not a detailed explanation of the Sahel Confederation or its history, but only outlines the information we deem particularly significant. For further, current updates on the situation in the Sahel, we recommend Al Jazeera or Africanews, the latter of which is French-owned, so read with caution.
Europe votes, Europe looks to Europe.
The elections in France and the UK have recently drawn the attention of the global West.
In the UK, a pro-Israeli, capitalist, pro-NATO, anti-union politician from the Labour Party is now in office, replacing a pro-Israeli, capitalist, pro-NATO, anti-union Conservative “Tories” – quite exciting.
While Europe is preoccupied with selecting new representatives of national capitalist interests, something big is forming in West Africa.
The Sahel states Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger have officially joined together in a confederation as of last Sunday (July 7).
Sahel awakening, a background
On June 9, 1959, following the dissolution of the French colony Afrique-Occidentale française (French West Africa), which encompassed nearly all of West Africa, the Union Douanière de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (West African Customs Union, UDAO/UDEAO) was established. This entity was intended to secure the interests of French companies in West African resources even after the collapse of colonial institutions.
The dissolution of the colonies was only granted in exchange for agreements that would allow France to continue maintaining quasi-colonial relations with the former colonies.
Colonial independence movements’ leaders were naturally aware of this trick, which is why many were replaced by French puppets such as Omar Bongo (Gabon) or Hamani Diori (Niger).
In 1974, the UDEAO was replaced by the Communauté Économique de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (ECOWAS). This organization included Benin, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, and Senegal.
The CEAO continued to exist until 1994 but was parallel to ECOWAS from 1975 onward, which was established as a regional economic community with a broader scope.
It is now important to understand:
The ECOWAS was founded on May 28, 1975, with the signing of the Lagos Treaty, establishing a regional economic community for West Africa—comparable to the treaties that founded the European Economic Community.
In 1978, the Non-Aggression Pact was signed, followed by a joint defense agreement in 1981 through the ECOWAS Monitoring Group (ECOMOG).
Since its establishment, ECOWAS has followed with several treaties to implement legal frameworks and promote further economic integration among member states. It has established a common court and a supranational West African parliament—making ECOWAS a kind of West African NATO and EU combined.
Furthermore, ECOWAS aims, sooner or later, to establish the “ECO” as a common West African currency, which requires the development of a functioning internal market first.
Whenever something happens on the African continent—especially in former colonies—it is clear that Western capital is interested.
This rule is currently confirmed in the case of ECOWAS.
ECOWAS: Instrument of Western Interests
ECOWAS is under significant influence from Western powers, particularly the USA and France, which use ECOWAS as a control instrument over the West African market.
This support is manifested through repeated statements by the U.S. State Department endorsing ECOWAS’s position in various West African countries and actively seeking to strengthen American capital influence in the region.
The same applies to France, which secured its interests by participating in the founding of ECOWAS. Control over the CFA franc, tied to the euro, economically binds 14 African countries to Paris and prevents serious political and economic changes in these nations.
Through control over the domestic economies of ECOWAS member states by European states, France and its allies can enforce trade at almost zero cost via loans. This keeps these countries in a state of ongoing dependency on France, with ECOWAS acting as a mediating mechanism.
France’s economic dominance is exemplified by its control over uranium trade with Niger, where in 1968 and 1970, the Société des mines de l’Aïr (Somaïr) and Cominak were established—two Nigerien uranium companies in which Niger itself held only 20% shares.
When Niger’s pro-French puppet Diori questioned this, he was swiftly replaced by a more loyal dictator, Seyni Kountché, through a French-funded coup.
Niger possesses the world’s largest uranium deposits but has received only about 12% of the value of the uranium mined over 50 years—yet it is the third poorest country in the world.
One-third of France’s entire electricity supply during these 50 years came from Nigerien uranium, and the French military, the second-largest in NATO, is entirely dependent on Nigerien uranium.
“African NATO”
What the West does not understand is the role Russia plays in the Sahel;
“Russia is courting Africa’s coup leaders,” writes the Tagesschau.
The limited Western coverage on the events in the Sahel mainly revolves around Russia’s role.
However, the desire of the Sahel states to deepen cooperation with Russia is quite straightforward:
Russia is a capitalist state, which is clear, but unlike France and the United States, it has no history of colonization, political murders, or credit usury in Africa.
The memories many Africans have of Russia on their continent are of support for anti-colonial and anti-imperialist actors by the Soviet Union.
For the Sahel, Russia is associated with nothing negative—regardless of what Western bourgeois consciousness might associate with Russia.
The Sahel states were not involved in a Cold War with Russia or the Soviet Union—unlike how Germans might perceive France differently than Nigers do.
It is clear that Russia, as a capitalist state, is not in Africa to do good but to strengthen its geopolitical interests, especially against the USA.
However, the fact remains: the Sahel states have requested support from Russia and Wagner.
Russia’s role is thus perceived not only as a military and economic partner but also as an ideological supporter in the fight against neo-colonialism and for national sovereignty. Support for the Wagner group and positive relations with Russia are viewed as strategic steps to promote independence and stability in the Sahel and to push back Western influence.
Engagement with Russia is seen as necessary to secure material support against ECOWAS and similar entities—what other partners are available?
It is evident that Russia, as a capitalist state, cannot have purely “good” intentions.
Nevertheless, it is wrong—based on the assumption that “We” know better—to deny the Sahel states their revolutionary ambitions.
Our solidarity goes to Niger, Burkina Faso, and Mali in their fight for independence against imperialist aggression, including through ECOWAS.
For the freedom of Africa.