WEST Africa’s regional bloc, ECOWAS, under the leadership of Nigerian Pr
esident Bola Tinubu, has taken a firm stance in response to the military takeover in Niger. At a recent meeting, President Tinubu expressed that ECOWAS is committed to standing with the people of Niger and upholding the rule of law.
In a show of seriousness, the 15-nation bloc summoned its defence chi
efs to discuss potential actions, including the use of military force, if the ousted President Mohamed Bazoum is not reinstated within a one-week deadline. Economic and travel sanctions were previously employed against the coup plotters, but they have proven ineffective, prompting ECOWAS to consider stronger measures, according to a Western diplomat in Niamey, who wished to remain anonymous for security reasons.
However, the feasibility of ECOWAS’ military intervention remains uncertain, given the lack of regional coordination in providing security. Aneliese Bernard, director of Strategic Stabilisation Advisors, emphasised the absence of enough trust among ECOWAS members, hindering a coordinated response. ‘There’s not enough actual trust among ECOWAS members, and that lack of trust is what will break any type of coordinated response,’ Bernard said.
ECOWAS has not previously used military force to intervene and restore democracies in countries where military takeovers occurred. While the bloc has successfully employed diplomatic efforts in the past, such as in Gambia in 2017, this situation in Niger poses unique challenges.
The military in Niger, a landlocked nation reliant on its neighbouring countries for essential services, may not be able to withstand a joint ECOWAS force for long, according to Bacary Sambe, a conflict researcher with the Senegal-based Timbuktu Institut think tank. However, the success of any military intervention would depend on effective coordination among ECOWAS members and external bodies like the African Union.
Economic limitations also exist, and Kabir Adamu, the founder of Beacon Consulting, a security consulting firm in Abuja, suggests that Western support may be necessary to address logistical and financial challenges. ‘A military intervention would be a bit difficult, however, there are options in the Western world and France. In the case of the financial challenge, that can be addressed by support from other countries, likewise the technical challenge,’ Adamu said.
However, opposition from neighbouring military regimes could further complicate ECOWAS’ response. Mali and Burkina Faso, both governed by mutinous soldiers, have
threatened to consider ECOWAS intervention in Niger as a declaration of war against them. Guinea also rejected ECOWAS’s position and vowed no
t to participate in sanctions.
If ECOWAS decides to deploy a military force in Niger, it is likely to be larger than the multinational force deployed to remove Gambia’s President Yahya Jammeh from office. Nigeria, with West Africa’s largest armed force, has 230,000 personnel, though not all are frontline troops. Other remaining West African democracies also possess capable militaries, with Nigeria ranked fourth among the top 20 countries with the best military in Africa, according to Global Fire Power.
External influences from the West and Russia may further complicate the situation. The coup in Niger could potentially extend the reach of Russia’s private military group Wagner in West Africa, which has emerged as a preferred security partner in the region. Russia’s involvement could trigger geopolitical tensions, with interests from both the West and Crimea coming into play.
As the situation unfolds, ECOWAS faces multiple challenges, including regional coordination, economic constraints, and opposition from neighbouring military regimes. The involvement of external powers adds complexity to an already delicate situation in Niger.
(with AP)
