Niger – 8: Guest Blogger Alexander Mercouris: Is a West African regional war, an ECOWAS invasion of Niger at hand?

____________________________________

(What follows below is a portion of an unofficial transcript – mine – of a portion of one of Alexander Mercouris’s most recent podcasts. The program its itself covers a number of subjects. The selection below, which begins 48 minutes and 30 seconds into the program, concerns Mercouri’s reflections on the possibility of a regional war erupting from a U.S.-French ‘green light” given to the Economic Community of West African States, ECOWAS, to invade Niger to overthrow the current military coup and restore Niger’s former president, Mohamed Bazoum, to power. ECOWAS, originally a West African trading association has morphed, with a little help from friends in Washington and Paris, into a military alliance, a proxy for Western interests in Africa as Ukraine is Europe, Israel in the Middle East. In the piece below, Mercouris explores the possible consequences of such a military intervention, one that could not happen without “a green light” from Washington and Paris. RJP) (1)

____________________________________

Perhaps it will all turn out “right”, or at least “right” from a Western viewpoint but even then, will it be “right” for the people of Niger … but that’s another matter. But what if it doesn’t? What if it all goes horribly wrong in the manner suggested here. If that is the case, what will result is not just another crisis in West Africa affecting the stability of Europe but the people who would have authored it in Paris and in Washington having refused to learn this lesson before will no doubt continue to refuse to learn this lesson again and probably their response will be to double down either in West Africa or somewhere else and to the same thing (or something like it) all over again!

It had appeared that an ECOWAS invasion of Niger had been called off a short time ago but it seems there has been massive pressure both within the ECOWAS countries and more than likely also coming from the United States and France upon ECOWAS to intervene. An ECOWAS force of 12,000 men has been assembled to intervene in Niger, to march on the capitol and presumably to restore the civilian president.

At the same time there have been increasing signs of troop movements from the current government of Niger’s allies in Burkina Faso and Mali; they seem to be preparing to deploy troops to Niger as well to provide a show of force. The Niger government is creating its own militia. There is word that they (the Nigerien leadership) demanded that the French ambassador quit Niger but the French government is refusing to let him leave.

All of this is deeply concerning …

The African Union has come out against an ECOWAS in Niger so it is far from being the case that most African support this intervention. A majority of them clearly do not.

West Africa is going to be split between those countries that support the intervention and those which do not. Niger is a very big country territorially speaking. It may not have a very strong military but will a 12,000 invading force be anywhere near enough to control a country of this size especially against a population which apparently supports the present military government, some of whom are prepared to take up arms to defend it.

This has the makings of a major disaster.

No doubt the ECOWAS force will finally reach the capitol and it is possible that the military leaders will be overthrown but past experience shows that after this happens that the real problems begin, that things start to get much worse and a spiral of violence begins to take over, a spiral of resistance (some would say), a conflict given how many countries are aligning one way or the other it’s going to be extremely difficult to contain in Niger.

Wouldn’t by now, we have learned this lesson that simple interventions in countries are really are never straightforward as their Western authors imagine, that they lead to all sorts of problems. If we have a major crisis in Niger, a crisis not just in Niger but across West Africa, it seems that the immediate beneficiaries will be the various jihadi groups that are fighting there which will become emboldened and will become strengthened as the various militaries of the countries involved, instead of fighting jihadi terrorism start increasingly to fight each other.

It has to be asked if a military intervention in Niger will do to the internal stability of some of these West African countries that might be engaged in the fighting. Example: Nigeria has had a complex history since it achieved independence; it has experienced many coups, a very bloody civil war, a jihadi insurgency in the North, – a military invasion of Niger in which Nigeria will play a vital role, could easily threaten its own long term stability by maneuvering it into a conflict of this kind.

In a similar manner, Senegal – a stronger and more stable country than Nigeria – but still, if a war takes place and expands across West Africa, one wonders whether Senegal can remain an island of stability as the conflict evolves. The same applies to other places – Ivory Coast (Côte d’Ivoire), and other countries that might find themselves getting drawn into this conflict.

The whole affairs seems completely unnecessary.

Obviously the Western powers are not happy with the coup in Niger but it is not at all obvious why this coup in and of itself can be said to affect the overall geopolitical position. No doubt, the coup regime if it consolidates itself will develop friendly relations with China and Russia but why see everything as a “zero sum game” Why assume that that will make Niger somehow hostile to France and especially to the United States? Wouldn’t Niger want to sell its uranium, lithium and other minerals anyway and eventually, once things had sorted themselves out it would return to its historic customers, France and the other Western states.

Once again, we see extraordinary risks being taken, risks with internal stability in the region, risks with the internal stability of some of the states involved, for little actual purpose or potential gain, with a very real risk that if a war, an armed conflict ignites, and spreads in the manner that it probably could, it will not just result in massive instability in West Africa but a humanitarian catastrophe as well, which will of course immediately impact through refugee flows and other social consequences the internal situation in Europe as well.

Why do Western policy makers just go on repeating the mistake time and again.

Of course there is the possibility that if and when the ECOWAS force goes into Niger that military regime will collapse, the civilian government aligned with the West will be restored and take its place, the country will continue peacefully with its normal life, the neighboring states, Mali, Burkina Faso, Chad will accept the outcome and their threats to intervene will be exposed as a bluff.

Perhaps it will all turn out “right”, or at least “right” from a Western viewpoint but even then, will it be “right” for the people of Niger … but that’s another matter. But what if it doesn’t? What if it all goes horribly wrong in the manner suggested here. If that is the case, what will result is not just another crisis in West Africa affecting the stability of Europe but the people who would have authored it in Paris and in Washington having refused to learn this lesson before will no doubt continue to refuse to learn this lesson again and probably their response will be to double down either in West Africa or somewhere else and to the same thing (or something like it) all over again!

After all, there has been this constant pattern of U.S. and Western interventions, regime change attempts, coups in all kinds of places and how this more than anything else has led to so much of the instability, chaos, misery, poverty and economic collapse that the world has experienced of late. Some have succeeded initially but even those have made the country far less stable (Ukraine comes to mind) that have led to all sorts of conflicts. The habit of meddling, interfering and launching these coups has become compulsive – one might also say – “addictive” and it’s an addiction that especially American leaders don’t seem able to kick.

Well, we may be seeing that all over again in Niger.

____________________________________

Footnote:

1. Alexander Mercouris is a Greek political commentator who lives in the United Kingdom. He produces his own podcasts but also contributes regularly, along with his colleague and friend Alex Christoforou, with a joint podcast called “The Duran“. Mercouris, is, to my mind, something of an enigma, but a very intelligent and thoughtful one especially where it comes to geopolitics on a global level. On the one hand, he and colleague Christoforou openly support – one might even say “cheer lead” for Donald Trump and other conservative – nay, rightwing – nationalists, both in the United States and especially in Europe. Their reporting in this manner is consistent. Yet when it comes to foreign policy, neither of them are what I would call lightweights. They know their stuff – indeed I am startled by the sophistication, accuracy  and  humanism of their foreign policy commentaries)