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 prehistory; it only outlines the information we find particularly significant. For further, current information on the situation in the Sahel, we recommend Al Jazeera or Africanews, with the latter being French-owned, so read with caution.
Europe votes, Europe looks.
Last elections in France and England have recently captured the global attention, especially that of the Western world.
In England, a pro-Israel, capitalist, pro-NATO, anti-union politician from the Labour Party is now in office, replacing a pro-Israel, capitalist, pro-NATO, anti-union politician from the Conservative “Tories” – quite exciting.
While Europe is preoccupied with choosing new representatives for its national capitalist interests, something significant is forming in West Africa.
The Sahel countries Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger officially joined together last Sunday (July 7th) to form a confederation.
Sahel Awakening: A Prehistory
On June 9, 1959, following the dissolution of the French colony Afrique-Occidentale française (French West Africa), which covered almost all of West Africa, the Union Douanière de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (West African Customs Union, UDAO/UDEAO) was established to continue safeguarding 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 allowed France to maintain quasi-colonial relations with the former colonies.
The colonial leaders were well aware of this trick, which is why many were replaced by French puppets, such as Omar Bongo (Gabon) or Hamani Diori (Niger).
The UDEAO was replaced in 1974 by the Communauté Économique de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (West African Economic Community, CEAO), which included Benin, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, and Senegal.
The CEAO continued to exist until 1994, although from 1975 it operated in parallel with the West African Economic and Monetary Union (UEMOA).
Now, it becomes important:
The ECOWAS was founded on May 28, 1975, with the signing of the Lagos Treaty, establishing it as the regional economic community for West Africa – a step comparable to the treaties founding 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 the founding of ECOWAS, several treaties have been adopted to implement legal frameworks and deepen economic integration among member states, including a common court and a supra-regional West African parliament – ECOWAS is thus both a West African NATO and EU.
Furthermore, ECOWAS aims, in the future, to establish the “ECO” as a common West African currency, for which the internal market needs to be expanded first.
When something happens on the African continent, especially in former colonies, it is clear: Western capital is interested.
This rule is confirmed by the case of ECOWAS.
ECOWAS: Instrument of Western Interests
ECOWAS is under significant influence of Western powers, especially the USA and France, which use ECOWAS as a control instrument over the West African market.
This support is manifested in repeated statements by the U.S. State Department, endorsing ECOWAS’s positions in various West African countries and actively strengthening 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.
By controlling the domestic economies of ECOWAS member states, European countries, led by France, can effectively enforce trade at minimal costs through credit mechanisms.
This keeps the affected states in ongoing dependency on France, with ECOWAS serving as a mediating tool.
France’s economic dominance is exemplified by its control over uranium trade with Niger, established through the creation of Société des mines de l’Aïr (Somaïr) and Cominak in 1968 and 1970, respectively – two Nigerien uranium companies in which Niger owns only 20%.
When Niger’s leader Diori questioned this, he was swiftly replaced by a more obedient dictator, Seyni Kountché, through a French-financed coup.
Niger holds the world’s largest uranium reserves but has received only about 12% of the value of the uranium extracted over 50 years – yet it is the 3rd poorest country in the world.
One-third of France’s power supply over these 50 years came from Nigerien uranium, and the French military, NATO’s second-largest, is completely dependent on Nigerien uranium.
The “African NATO”
As the new Malian military government under Assimi Goïta announced in May 2021 that it had overthrown the pro-French government of Ibrahim Boubacar Keïta and plans to nationalize large parts of Malian resources and expel Western military presence, ECOWAS threatened retaliation – with the United States backing them:
“We support ECOWAS’s decision to impose additional economic and financial sanctions to urge the transition government to keep its pledge to the Malian people to return their country to democracy (…) We also echo ECOWAS’s concern over the likely destabilizing impact of Russia-backed Wagner group forces in Mali.”
Of course, the Malian population was satisfied with the presence of foreign troops, who diligently ensured that Malian oil and copper could be stolen by the governments of the military juntas.
They are content with ranking 5th last among the world’s poorest populations – a title normalized by the West, but in reality imposed by foreign interests in pursuit of cheap raw materials.
Similarly, the claim that Western militaries are on the ground to protect Malians from Islamist terror is complete nonsense; this terror is a reaction to imperialist exploitation and the destruction of local material conditions – it’s like trying to put out a fire while setting it.
The assertion by ECOWAS and the US that they need to fight these coups because they are not democratically initiated is already questionable, especially since no military intervention has been considered against Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba (the original pro-American, pro-French coup leader of Burkina Faso).
Sahel Solidarity
The situation in the Sahel changed dramatically when, on July 28, 2023, the Nigerien government was also overthrown by Abdourahamane Tchiani and the anti-Western M62 movement.
ECOWAS responded with severe sanctions and a new level of open threats:
“If the authorities’ demands are not met within one week, [we will] take all necessary measures to restore constitutional order in the Republic of Niger”
In a gesture of solidarity, Burkina Faso and Mali, which had just received similar threats, assured they would stand firmly by Niger and offer military support in case of an invasion.
Early in 2024, on January 28th, the three Sahel countries announced their withdrawal from ECOWAS – the first nations in the organization’s history to do so.
Now, the Confederation
These three Sahel states have now made history.
They stand in the tradition of freedom fighters like Thomas Sankara (Burkina Faso), Kwame Nkrumah (Ghana), or Patrice Lumumba (DR Congo), who paid with their lives for their ambitions against imperialist exploitation of their countries and continent.
The reaction of ECOWAS is yet to come, but ECOWAS also knows that a military counterattack against the Sahel confederation cannot be won without extensive support from the West, especially since the populations of the Sahel states are firmly behind the coup governments.
Russia’s Role in the Sahel
What the West does not understand is Russia’s role in the Sahel;
“Russia flirts with Africa’s coup plotters,” writes Tagesschau.
The limited Western coverage of events in the Sahel revolves almost exclusively around Russia’s role.
Yet, the desire of the Sahel states to deepen cooperation with Russia is straightforward to understand:
Russia is a capitalist state, which is clear, but unlike France and the US, it has no history of colonization, political murders, or credit usury in Africa.
Many Africans’ memories of Russia on their continent are of support for anti-colonial and anti-imperialist actors since the Soviet Union.
Russia is not associated with any negative connotations in the Sahel, regardless of what Western bourgeois consciousness links to Russia.
The Sahel states were not involved in Cold War conflicts with Russia or the Soviet Union – unlike perceptions in Germany about France, which may be quite different from those in Niger.
Of course, Russia, as a capitalist state, does not act out of altruism but to serve its geopolitical interests in Africa, especially vis-à-vis the USA.
However, the Sahel states have requested support from Russia and Wagner.
Russia’s role is thus seen not only as military and economic but also as an ideological ally in the fight against neo-colonialism and for national sovereignty.
The support from Wagner and the positive relations with Russia are strategic steps to foster independence and stability in Sahel countries while pushing back Western influence.
Aligning with Russia is seen as necessary to secure material support against ECOWAS and others; after all, what other partners are available?
The fact that Russia, as a capitalist state, cannot pursue purely “good” intentions is clear.
Nevertheless, it is wrong to dismiss the revolutionary ambitions of the Sahel states under the assumption that “we” know better.
Our solidarity goes to Niger, Burkina Faso, and Mali in their struggle for independence against imperialist aggression, including through ECOWAS.
For the freedom of Africa.
