‘Coup’ or popular revolution in Africa’s Sahel?

John Catalinotto, managing editor of Workers, interviewed European journalist and writer Alex Anfruns regarding his book, “Niger: Just Another Coup or the Pan-African Revolution?” and the events of the past year in the Sahel.

John Catalinotto: You decided to write a book about the events in the African Sahel in the last year and the expulsion of French imperialism from the region. Why do you think it is so important?

Alex Anfruns: The coup d’état in Niger was the trigger that pushed me to write the book. It seemed to me that what was simplistically called “coupism” was becoming something quite different: The support of the people was determining its orientation and setting an original agenda.

But war propaganda insists on calling these leaders “coup leaders.” You could also interpret each “coup” as the culmination at the political level of a long process of struggle by the peoples of the Sahel in defense of their sovereignty and development. In that case, those leading the actions are instead great leaders of a historical process that could be called “the second and definitive Independence” of the African nations. Is that for foreign powers or for the African peoples to judge?

Unlike in the era of independence in Africa of the 1960s, we are not only witnessing the identification of the problems and challenges of neocolonialism, as Sekou Touré [Guinea], Modibo Keïta [Mali], Kwame Nkrumah [Ghana] or Mehdi Ben Barka [Morocco] did, but the nationalist governments of the Sahel are dismantling that system with sure and firm steps.

I felt it was urgent to tell the story of the struggle of the Nigerian people and the peoples of the Sahel, not only from a geopolitical perspective but also from a social perspective.

JC: You are of European and of Catalan origin. How did your interest in the struggles in Africa arise?

AA: In part my interest came from contact with the struggle of undocumented workers because I am convinced that European and African peoples are united by the same battle against capitalist exploitation. It is often forgotten that the European Union is above all a club tailor-made for the capitalists. In the EU, chauvinism is not only tolerated but widely encouraged in every nation. So stigmatizing the “foreigner” — or whoever is perceived as such — has become commonplace.

Even if he or she has lived there for one, two, three decades or a lifetime, he or she will still be called a “foreigner.” In France, for example, people speak of “second- or third-generation immigrants.”

Young Europeans of African origin are daily controlled by the police in public places, fueling resentment towards the system. Hatred is instilled against these young people, as if they were all potential criminals, ignoring that their parents helped liberate France from fascism. Those controlling ideas in Europe erase the Africans’ contribution to the construction of the nation.

Abuse and exploitation of any worker must be condemned by all workers.

Although classical colonialism was defeated, the colonial mentality has not yet disappeared. The response to that mental colonization is either submission or rebellion. Contrary to the nihilism propagated by the dominant ideology, which makes ideas — and not the capitalist economic system — responsible for all evils, there exist organizations that fight for honorable causes and channel rebellion towards progress and not reaction.

In the weekly demonstrations to defend the rights of undocumented workers in France, this slogan is chanted: “Première, deuxième, troisième génération … on s’en fout, on est chez nous!” i.e., “First, second, third generation … we don’t care, we’re from here!” (We are at home.)  

JC: Can you tell us about your career as a journalist? Where have you worked?

AA: Between 2014 and 2019, I worked as a journalist and editor-in-chief for a Belgian cooperative publication. After having translated and written about Palestine and the Middle East, I decided to focus my area of investigative journalism on Latin America. Together with the Cameroonian journalist Olivier Ndenkop, we published a monthly on the new dynamics of the African continent.

We were united by the conviction that many of the problems and challenges in Africa and Latin America were inseparable due to the intervention of neocolonial powers and local elites who betrayed the interests of the people.

The Burkinabe [Burkina Faso] popular insurrection of October 2014 was a clear warning that the peoples of the region were unwilling to continue under such neocolonial domination. That [Thomas] Sankara’s homeland succeeded in freeing itself from its oppressor, Blaise Compaoré, was no trivial event. We could see, at that time, that African youth were looking for the theory that would accompany and deepen their struggle.

Our publications linked the different struggles that were emerging. Among the issues we analyzed were the “Economic Partnership Agreements” (EPAs); the neocolonial currency, the CFA franc; but also Western destabilization strategies on the African continent. The common denominator was that the old system of European colonial domination was being renewed through new neocolonial mechanisms. Through many of these struggles, youths were developing an awareness of the need to turn the page on the system that had prevailed since the nominal independence [of the 1960s].

It should be remembered that the role of the French army had been clearly questioned for years. At the end of 2021, protests targeted a French military detachment in Tera, Niger. Acting as a perfect colonial tool, the army fired on the demonstrators blocking its path, resulting in the death of two innocent people. Earlier, dozens of civilians in Mali had been killed in “mistaken” bombings.

These attacks were perceived as against all the peoples of the Sahel. One could think that it was an occupying army, whose mission was not to help the local population, but to protect foreign interests. … This suspicion grew in crescendo, until it was formalized in the accusation made by the Malian government before the United Nations Security Council.

According to the nationalist governments of the Sahel, the Western powers have not helped to combat terrorism but rather have fed it. Contrary to those who ridicule this as a demagogic discourse, I believe it should be listened to. There has been too much interference: An African mission should take on the task of a commission of inquiry to analyze the objectives and the balance of the Western military presence in the region and draw conclusions independently.

JC: As a journalist, you specialized in analyzing war propaganda. What implications have the wars had on the recent transformation of the Sahel?

AA: People have the right to know the truth about the motives for wars, which are always for economic and strategic reasons, even if cultural and ideological factors are often used as a propaganda argument. The NATO invasion of Libya [2011], with its destabilizing consequences in the Sahel, but also the Western support for extremists in Syria — which has now been brought out in the open — left no doubt about the doubletalk and hypocrisy of the Western powers.

In my book “Niger: Just Another Coup or the Pan-African Revolution?” I analyze many of the contradictions of the French military strategy in Mali, which is the country where the process began that has culminated in the creation of the Alliance and then the Confederation of Sahel States.

There is a typically Eurocentric and arrogant gaze that infantilizes African peoples. However, the Africans’ awareness of their challenges is complete. Their understanding and lucidity of geopolitical issues is of great maturity, greater than many believe. And their demand for the expulsion of foreign troops and the defense of national sovereignty do not stop there, but are posed as a requisite for the defense of a true popular sovereignty.

JC: Are there ideological frameworks within the armies leading the Confederation of Sahel States?

AA: The vision defended by the armies is the defense of the nation and the values of the Republic.

We must realize that these are countries that are still facing the complex problem of terrorism, but they have taken a giant step forward by identifying the dead end to which the policies of previous governments were leading. Moreover, their practical struggle against neocolonialism is nourished by the ideas of anti-colonial fighters in defense of the peoples of the Sahel; their contact with the people helps them to better understand their aspirations, which are rooted in historical struggles.

In Niger, for example, a decree by President Abdourahamane Tchiani has supported the creation of a committee of historians to deepen research and the dissemination of knowledge about the anti-colonial history that has been hidden. Testimonies are being recovered and honors are being paid to figures such as Sarraounia Mangou, as well as to the protagonists of battles against the colonial invader at the beginning of the 20th century.

Through modern means of communication, the people are being told of the exploits of those who rebelled against oppression. Other fighters like Burkina Faso’s historic leader Thomas Sankara or Niger’s late opposition leader Djibo Bakary — officially relegated to oblivion for decades but kept in the hearts and memories of the people — can now be better known thanks to popular education. Although their struggles ended in temporary defeats, their lives are now being transformed into a source of example and inspiration for African youth.

JC: At present we may believe that French imperialism is not strong enough to regain control of the Sahel. But might U.S. imperialism not replace France in this part of the world?

AA: To begin with, it should be noted that there has not only been a denunciation of France’s role in the Sahel but also of U.S., German or other foreign troops. So they have had no choice but to go home. In fact, the revolutionary governments of the Sahel are well aware that the European powers have been playing a complementary role in the region, under the pretext of defense, the doctrine of the “fight against terrorism” and “security” relating to the phenomenon of migration.

There was a mechanism aimed at preserving a supposed “European security” by financing African governments that criminalized populations fleeing armed conflicts. The Western approach to these issues has been denounced and completely delegitimized on the streets of African countries.

It is often forgotten that, not so long ago, the people of Europe also took to the streets in their millions to denounce the fallacy of the “war on terror” of [former U.S. President] George W. Bush, [former British Prime Minister], Tony Blair and [former Prime Minister of Spain] José María Aznar. Today, in the face of the genocide in Palestine, the peoples of the world reject the propaganda that identifies the Palestinians as terrorists and instead denounce Zionism as a colonial policy of state terrorism.

Likewise, the governments of the Sahel cannot ignore the fact that the United States has similar interests and approach to those of the European Union. The aggression against Libya and NATO’s participation in the aggression against Russia in the Ukrainian war leave no doubt about the complementarity and shared strategy of Western imperialism.

The Ukrainian ambassador to Senegal was summoned by the government after statements in support of terrorists who shed Russian and Malian blood in Mali during a border battle in the Kidal region caused a scandal. So the neo-fascist regime in Ukraine is perceived as an enemy of the peoples of the Sahel and of humanity, just like the NATO member governments that support the genocide in Gaza.

On the other hand, the expulsion of the troops and the closure of the U.S. military bases came after the U.S. representative made demands to [Niger’s National Council for the Safeguard of the Homeland (NCSH — the military board ruling Niger)] authorities. They wanted Niger to have no sovereign relations with countries of the Global South such as Iran. That arrogant and neocolonial attitude got the response it deserved.

However, while the U.S. is likely to try to instrumentalize sectors of the Sahelian population through NGOs or social networks, such attempts are doomed to failure for the simple reason that the Nigerien people show unwavering support for the Tchiani government. The measures adopted by the NCSH government, such as accountability and funding of NGO activities, are crucial to preserve sovereignty on its territory and to defend itself against attempts to interfere in the context of the “hybrid war.”

JC: How do you analyze the reactions in other countries of the region, for example in Senegal?

AA: The context in which my book on Niger was written was that of the shootings against the Senegalese civilian population who were demonstrating daily against the dictator Macky Sall who, for Western leaders like French President Emmanuel Macron, was a great “democratic” friend. In that context of growing mobilizations, it was obvious to anyone who knew a little about the Senegalese youth that the Sall regime could not last more than a few months.

No measure of criminalization of the opposition, whether by violence against the demonstrating youth or by the imprisonment of the PASTEF leaders, could stop its victory in the presidential elections of 2024. The attempt to postpone them by Sall was unsuccessful, and finally Ousmane Sonko and Bassirou Diomaye Faye won the election. [Sonko founded PASTEF in 2014.]

It is important to realize that the vision of defense of sovereignty expressed by Sonko is not a demagogic discourse but a matter of principle. Therefore, there are coincidences in the program of action advocated by the Sahelian and Senegalese governments. However, a victory limited to the ballot box prevented PASTEF from advancing Sonko’s program in the same way as a military transitional government allows.

Senegal’s political tradition, as well as the effects of the history of colonialism in coastal and inland countries, is also not the same. The recent landslide victory in the legislative elections has strengthened PASTEF, and this has allowed it to make clear some of its priorities counting on the necessary support.

The announcement of the decision to withdraw the French troops, which came at the same time as that of Chad, shows that the dynamics of the Sahel governments is not the product of a vulgar “coup d’état” in which some leaders do as they please, but responds to the popular will of the Africans, who have correctly analyzed who their historical enemies are and are defending their right to a dignified life for their children. That governments respect the will of their peoples is good news.

The Confederation of Sahel States represents an unstoppable dynamic, which is only in its initial phase. Those who judge these governments in haste are wrong, for the Pan-African revolution is only just beginning.

In Niger, the NCSH is adopting several social measures, such as reducing the cost of cement for construction, access to health or food. Popular support under the terrible suffering of the blockade and illegal sanctions in the first six months was key to the NCSH’s victory.

And other measures taken recently, such as the cancellation of the contract for the exploitation of the Imouraren mine by the French company Orano, which historically exercised the monopoly of uranium extraction in Niger, are the demonstration of the firm will of the NCSH government that the people benefit from the national resources, as President Tchiani has expressed on several occasions.

That, moreover, this political process of national popular revolution is taking place in three countries such as Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger allows the ideas of revolutionary Pan-Africanism to spread far beyond, even to countries with a recent history very marked by the ravages of neo-colonialism, in which the peoples also demand a historical turnaround. Today, the Confederation of Sahel States is clearly the vanguard of the Pan-African Revolution.