By Alexander Ekemenah, Chief Analyst NextMoney

Executive Summary

1. The threshold of a likely war between Niger Republic and ECOWAS has already been lowered as peaceful negotiation is increasingly taking centre stage which should have been the first strategic option before anything else rather than armed-fist response or sabre-rattling of war against Niger Republic.

2. As shown below in this article, the Western powers especially the US,  France and United Kingdom, have no moral loci to dictate to African countries how to run their Governments or manage their affairs since they (the Western powers) are majorly responsible for running African countries aground to their current decrepit states in the first instance, through slavery, colonization and modern neocolonialism, in their Manichean quest for the abundant African human and natural resources while planting their political stooges here and there as participis criminis (criminal accomplices) in keeping Africa in perpetual state of backwardness.

3. The same goes for the so-called Eastern powers: the former Soviet Union, Russian Federation or China and/or their non-state actors such as Wagner Military Company of Russia. None of them has shown better performance record in betterment of Africa countries, superior knowledge in management of complex  situation – except looting, brute force and their collateral consequences.

4. Particularly noticeable is the slowly waning hitherto stupefying power that France has exerted on its former colonies. The sun is gradually setting on French modern Empire as one country after the other spits in the face of Paris and walks away – most probable never to return.

5. Nigerian intendment to play a leading role in the resolution of the Nigerien crisis through force of arms has failed miserably due to multiple reasons clearly set out in this article. But the tragedy now is that the original intendment of war against Niger Republic has not only backfired but Nigeria is no longer in the lead to peacefully resolve the situation in Niger Republic. Nigeria has lost at both ends of the strategic spectrum. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has clearly and indisputably lost his moral locus or compass both at home and abroad for his impudent brinkmanship and sabre-rattling at a neighbouring country that has been at peace with Nigeria since independence. Nigerians have rightly called upon him to put his house (Nigeria) in order first before venturing into war if that is necessary at all. Nigeriens who are mostly Moslems have probably rightly demonstrated against him and his war-like interference in their internal affairs – instead of helping to resolve the crisis situation. This demonstration has inevitably left its infectious impact and indelible mark on Moslems in Nigeria especially in northern part of Nigeria who felt betrayed by his raw brinkmanship and who are most likely going to abandon him in the political lurch in the foreseeable future for his reckless, ill-advised foreign policy adventures. It’s usually the ways cookies crumble.

Introduction

As a self-enrolled student of Geopolitics Modern Warfare, Security and Intelligence Analysis, the brewing crisis in Niger Republic caught and especially captivated my attention because of the possibility of the crisis leading to war between Niger Republic on the one hand and ECOWAS on the other hand (though a complete unnecessary war if not totally irresponsible).

Since 2013, I have been tracking military coups in Africa (Egypt, Zimbabwe, Chad, Mali, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Sudan and now Niger. While there were no recent coups in DRC and Ethiopia, I looked deeply at the crisis rocking those countries in context of political instability and role of external forces in them.

So it is for these reasons that I can modestly claim to have a fair measure of self-confidence when I write about the events in these countries as a result of cold study of objective reality and not per chance a mere flight into fanciful or phantasmagoric world.

Now to the matter at hand. 

The Wary Transgressor

The Nigerian entire blogosphere and/or informational space is discernibly treading very carefully to avoid being tainted by the bacillus of this deranged invasion plan against Niger Republic. 

The informational space is avoiding providing armor of justifications to Tinubu’s Government to go and lead the invasion. The poor Nigeriens have not offended Nigerians in any way for us to respond in anger to what is going on in Niger Republic. Neither the khaki boys.

In actual fact, the community of columnists, analysts and the intelligentsia in general, even though it has not come down heavily on Tinubu’s Government for variety of reasons for the ill-advised attempt to lead Nigeria and ECOWAS into war with Niger Republic, they all wondering what manner of sudden jingoist madness that have come to seize Aso Rock and other presidential palaces across the ECOWAS countries – for whatever pot of mess the US and France might have promised him and his ECOWAS co-travellers.

Thus if Tinubu’s Government has been smart, sensitive and sensible enough, it could have used the opportunity of the growing domestic opposition to this invasion plan to back off the invasion completely right now.

Alas, anybody with fair amount of behavioral scientific knowledge would know that the foolhardy often lead themselves to self-destruction because of their inveterate stiff-necked stubborn “I know what I am doing” or  “I know it better than you do” attitude!

As at the time of writing here, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has written to the Nigerian Senate seeking approval for war against Niger Republic, according to media reports on August 4, 2023. 

The Senate has, however, responded. In a swift manner akin to a vicious kick in the groin/blow below the belt or slap to the face, the Senate outrightly and unanimously rejected the request for approval to go to war with Niger Republic. Dreams of war shattered! End of story.

But let President Tinubu pause at this moment and take proper situational assessment of the geopolitical environment. He’s definitely being led into a trap by external forces notably the US and France.

The US and France are very good at playing this geopolitical “game of thrones” over the centuries (with varied outcomes and degree of collateral damages) ever before President Tinubu was ever born into this world at all.

The first black nation to gain independence was Haiti as far back 1804. The Haitian Revolution (1791-1804) saw the Haitian slaves rose up in fury led by Touissant L’Ouverture in one of the most heroic manner the world has ever seen to launch a revolution (fight for freedom) against the combined colonial forces of the British and the French (see for instance, the account of Touissant L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution by the famous historian, CLR James). It was a war of independence fought by these black slaves ever before Nigeria came into existence at all as a Nation-State on January I, 1914.

Haiti would become the second country in the Western hemisphere to gain independence after the US in 1783. Because of the flip-flop policy of the United States at the time, the US could not officially recognize Haiti as an independent nation until 1862. 

The US probably could not just imagine a bunch of black slaves rising up like Martian or Promethean warriors putting up a heroic fight for their freedom. The event went beyond their scope of imagination.  

Till date, France never duly acknowledge the place and role of Touissant L’Ouverture in the history of the Haitian Revolution – but regard him as a criminal or troublemaker. L’Ouverture died in prison after he was tricked, arrested and detained by the French Army.

Thus we can see the legendary ingrained animosity of the white guys, their ambivalence or overt hatred for any form of genuine black independence. 

Let us consider what Germany under Kaiser Wilhelm II did in what is today known as Namibia even before the advent of  Adolf Hitler-led Nazis: the first genocide or holocaust committed by the German Imperial Army against innocent people of Namibia to create room for German Lebensraum. 

The Hereros and Namaquas of Namibia were slaughtered in thousands  in a deliberate policy and campaign of ethnic cleansing, collective punishment through genocidal massacre, starvation, concentration campss, human experimentation, extermination through forced labour. 

This took place from January 1904 to 1908. 24,000 – 100,000 Hereros were killed while 10,000 Namaquas were killed, killings perpetrated by Lt General Lorther von Trotha and the German colonial forces. 

In May 2021, the German Government, after decades, finally agreed to pay Euro 1.1 billion in compensation to be spread over 30 years to fund projects in communities that were impacted by the genocide.

It is noteworthy to point out at this junction that despite what Adolf Hitler and his henchmen did and the horror caused by them, the US quickly initiated, established and bankrolled Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe and Germany in particular

Ditto Japan.

Yet, despite the horror of slavery, colonialism and neocolonialism in Africa caused by the European powers including the United States, there was no restitution, no reparation or compensation for Africa. If you dare to mention reparation to their ears, they are ready to kill you. 

Liberia and Sierra Leone, both countries established by the United States remained backward and relatively unstable still date. Both of them have gone excruciating paroxysms of civil wars that left devastation in its wake at one time or the other in recent decades.

On May 7, 1954, the French-held garrison in Diem Bien Phu in Vietnam fell after a four-month siege led by the Vietnamese nationalist Ho Chi Minh. After the fall of Diem Bien Phu, the French fled from that region with its tail behind its hinds after nearly a century of dominion in that region.

After the French came the Americans. 

On March 8, 1965, 3,500 US Marines landed onshore at Da Nang in the first wave of the US combat troops into South Vietnam adding to the already existing 25,000 troops there. 

The US Government deployment of ground forces to Da Nang was done without consultation with the South Vietnamese Government then. 

Thus begin the 20-year bloody war between the US and Vietnam. The US was forced to flee Vietnam after losing 58,279 troops in 1973. 

The Vietnam War burnt deeply into the psyche or soul of America that is just being recently healed.

On August 19, 1953, the US CIA orchestrated a coup against the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh of Iran in favour of strengthening the monarchical rule of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi under the codename: Operation Ajax – in collaboration with the British and the Iranian clergy.

This singular act of international lawlessness set off a chain reaction to what the US is still encountering with Iran till date. 

After the overthrow of Mosaddegh, the US imposed Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi on Iran who reigned for twenty five years. When Iranians grew tired of him, they got him deposed in the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Things rapidly went downhill from there. But one of the most significant events of the period was the refusal of the US to accept the Shah into exile in the US and the Shah was forced to be be on the move from one place to the other until he finally arrived Egypt where he died. The lesson is clear and simple: the US uses and dumps its stooges!

Recall the Iranian Revolution of 1979, the return of Sheik Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini as the Supreme Leader of Iran from exile in France, the burning down of US Embassy in Tehran, the hostage crisis and the failed attempt to rescue them by the US Delta Force, etc.

Iran and Iraq went for each other’s jugular. The War lasted for almost a decade, from September 22, 1980 to  August 29, 1988. 

Later the US and its allies forces went for the jugular of Saddam Hussein of Iraq in the First Iraq War (Gulf War) after Iraq peremptorily invaded Kuwait from August 2, 1990 to  February 23,199.. 

The Second Iraqi War (Operation Desert Storm) followed suit from March 20, 2003 led by the US forces joined by the UK, Australia and Poland.

The war ended on December 28, 2011 after 8 years, 8 months and 29 days.

Saddam Hussein was later captured, tried, sentenced to death and executed in 2006 . Till date, democracy is yet to be fully established in Iraq.

In January 1961, the US Government through the CIA organized to kill the first democratically elected Prime Minister of Democratic Republic of Congo, Patrice Lumumba, in a very gory manner. (read Chief of Station, Congo, Fighting the Cold War in a Hot Zone by Larry Devlin).

Recall what the Belgians have done in the Congo earlier as the colonial master: killing, looting, raping of women, despoliation of the environment, destruction, playing of one ethnic group against the other.

It was not until few years back that Belgium reluctantly but finally owned up and admitted to all manners of heinous crimes they committed in the Congo, apologizing for their atrocities and crimes against humanity.

DRC is yet to redeem itself from its sordid past collectively inflicted upon it by the Belgian colonial masters, the US and Emperor Mobutu Sese Seko and that young man , Joseph Kabila.

On September 11, 1973, the US Government aided and abetted General Augusto Pinochet to seize power from the democratically elected President Salvador Allende who was alleged to be tilting towards the Left/Socialism. US involvement in Chile, of course, dated back to the War of Chilean Independence (1812-1826). Chile was literally a private estate of the United States. As a result of the 1973 coup, thousands of Chileans were killed or made to disappear under the watch of Augusto Pinochet and his American paymasters 

In April 1982, the United Kingdom went after the jugular of General Leopoldo Galtieri of Argentina over Falklands Island. General Galtieri lost power and the Falklands Island is still under the imperial domination of the United Kingdom (or British Empire) till date.

The US invaded Grenada with a coalition of six Caribbean nations at dawn of October 25, 1983. Grenada lies 100 miles (160 km) north of Venezuela. Codenamed Operation Urgent Fury by the US military, the war ended few days later with military occupation of the country after throwing out the khaki boys led by one Col. Dessi Bourters.

The US Government also went after General Manuel Antonio Noriega of Panama in mid-December 1989, had him seized and bundled to the US where he eventually died a miserable death. The war, codenamed Operation Just Cause, lasted 1 month, 1 week and 4 days.

To fast-forward, the US supported General Abdelfattah el-Sisi to overthrow the democratically elected President Mohammed Morsi on July 3, 2013 because it was alleged that Morsi was tilting towards Islamism under the aegis of Muslim Brotherhood. Morsi was left to die miserably in detention for lack of medical attention under the watch of both the US and el-Sisi.

These are matters of historical records (not manufactured) to the eternal shame of the United States, France and other Western powers, the so-called citadels of democracy and the most powerful military coalition in the world.

So the US and France, among other Western powers, have much blood on their hands from the past histories of invasion of other hapless countries till date. 

They cannot come to grandstand Niger Republic about its strictly internal affairs of regime change and push other West African countries into war path with Niger Republic. 

US, France and other European allies cannot claim to have more superior knowledge (except firearms) about how to run a democracy when they have earlier supported African dictators and plundered our continent.

We know, for instance, what France’s Emmanuel Macron has received from the French people in recent times in form of earth-shaking violent street protests against his unrepentant right-wing policies. He has no moral locus to claim to know what is good for the Nigeriens than the Nigeriens themselves.

Any analyst that has been following the evolution of French foreign policy in recent decades and its internal politics would no doubt agree that Emmanuel Macron has been moving or reeling from one crisis to the other – and if care is not taken he may be consumed in a much bigger conflagration that may yet assail France.

The above is to let President Tinubu and his ECOWAS colleagues know that there is nothing they are going to do in Niger Republic that is new or spectacular. Nothing at all except to go and add to the list of infamies that have already been committed by the global superpowers in various degree in this type of situation.

A Litmus Test for Foreign Policy.

The Nigerien crisis presents a litmus test for Nigerian foreign policy in a very profound or fundamental manner never seen before in the sense that, for the first time in the history of Nigeria’s foreign policy, it was predicated on actual declaration of intention to go to war with Niger Republic (a next-door neighbouring country) if the military leaders there do not revert back to status quo ante by restoring the overthrown civilian leaders there. Such is the foundation of the current Nigerian foreign policy towards the brewing Nigerien crisis. 

It is profound or fundamental because it runs contrary to the hitherto claimed “big brother” neighborliness that Nigeria has maintained with its neighbours since independence. Nigeria has never threatened to go to war with its neighbours. Nigeria has even studiously avoided such threats even when they are provocatively visible from some of our neighbours egged on by certain well-known foreign powers that are now trying to be Nigeria’s best friends at this point in time.

Unfortunately, it was a very resounding policy failure that has never been witnessed before.

First and foremost, it was a failure of calamitous proportion because it was based on wrong premise that runs against the whole gamut of Nigeria’s foreign policy objectives and thrusts (which are partly codified in the 1999 Nigerian Constitution as amended) that Nigeria has been parroting and practicing for the past twenty four years or so. What really unhinged the nuts and bolts to cause Nigeria a volte-face in its established foreign policy? 

Second and equally important as the first is the incontrovertible fact that the Nigerian foreign policy ship was completely rudderless at the time the Nigerien crisis broke out. The Nigerian foreign policy ship has no captain i.e. a Minister in charge of the Foreign Affairs Ministry to articulate the Nigerian foreign policy on the Nigerien crisis and to channel all discussions towards the main goal of invading Niger Republic or peaceful resolution of the conflict as the case may be. 

Nigeria in particular wanted to go to war without a formal set of foreign policy objectives and thrusts as adjunct to what exists in the 1999 Nigerian Constitution as amended articulated by the new administration – in short its foreign policy mission and/or vision.

There is no known Foreign Affairs Minister at least as at August 7, 2023, at the rise and fall of the jingoist pronouncements by President Tinubu. The critical question is: who, within the existing coterie of inner advisers to the President, is actually pulling the strings or calling the shots? Or is it the President himself?

This is one era in which Nigerian foreign policy is not just seen to be in abeyance and/or in a state of flux, but indeed in a state of farce defined by the inability of the President and his coterie of advisers to articulate a convincing set of foreign policy objectives and thrusts around which a war (invasion of an alleged foreign enemy) can be constructed. 

This is crucial because it defines or describes the seriousness or lack of it by the foreign policy establishment, of which the Minister is a key figure and plays a great role. Foreign policy formulation is not a marketplace for thuggery  or assertion of brute force. It is an intellectual space of which the ambience is fundamentally different from normal corporate boardroom setting. It is a space or confluence where many factors converge to produce alternate strategic templates of actions or menu list from which the President as the Commander-in-Chief can choose.  Nigeria did not have such a figure at the height of this raw brinkmanship by the President, a laughable but highly pathetic situation.

Thus the Nigerian foreign policy ship was simply lurching hither and thither by the storming waves with no safe anchorage or safe harbor in sight. Any analyst worth his/her salt would not have failed to notice the huge lacuna that constitute this great irony about the parlous state of Nigerian modern statecraft. It was indeed an irony, a rueful one for that matter.

The Nigerien crisis exposes the soft underbelly, with all its diseased entrails, of the Nigerian foreign policy firmament.

Third, as a result of this visibly rudderless foreign policy ship, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was inadvertently thrusted into the centre of the entire crisis of infernal dimension. And he did not acquit himself well at all. Instead of being circumspect in such a perilous situation, he plunged headlong into it and exposed himself as a straw in the windstorm, being blown hither and thither. His intellectual vacuity was utterly and literally exposed to foreign policy gurus or mandarins here and abroad to see in a very miserable manner.

But that should not surprise anybody at all. You cannot give what you don’t have. It is as simple as that.

The Nigerian blogosphere and informational space/social media is full of derisions for the President who apparently presented himself as an “Area Boy” angered by his neighbour and decided to carry cutlass to go and fight his neighbour – instead of following a decent due process of civil procedure or negotiation, first and foremost, rather than show of brute force that can only escalate the already febrile situation.

It is pitiful to see Tinubu’s missteps displayed in this egregious manner. It is a clear case study of the abysmal level to which serious issues of life-and-dearh of people are seen and taken as collateral damages as a result of misguided actions, of governance and modern statecraft have fallen or been reduced in the country as we fumble, stumble and forage for a better governance space and ambience governed by rule of law and headed by a leadership that knows its onions! 

In less than three months in power, President Tinubu and his advisers have showcased themselves as a bunch of illiterates in modern statecraft (apology for the strong adjectival terminologies). They are a walking disaster, if not already a disaster to themselves and dangers to their immediate environment. Too bad!

Fourth, President Tinubu has not learnt any lesson at all from the mess he has created by himself because of either lack of proper advice or guidance or essentially because of his intellectual deficit in foreign policy matter or both.

The strategic  issue at stake now is not that of filial kinship between northern Nigerian population and that of Niger Republic as some columnists have pointed out, no matter how germane that might have been to the uninitiated in foreign policy formulation. 

Such is actually secondary but which should have been taken into serious consideration before making the momentous declaration of intention to go to war with a country whose majority of its population is Moslem. 

Launching an attack on such a country from Nigeria whose population is also considerably Moslem is a direct invitation to religious war. 

I’ve noted this in my last write-up.

Tinubu Administration would not survive  to see the victory of such a war.

But Tinubu’s first misstep, and fundamentally-flawed misstep for that matter, stems not from his lack of consideration of the ethnic-religious consanguinity or sensitivity between Nigeria and Niger Republic but from geo-strategic level where he failed to assess accurately the balance of forces within the immediate geopolitical environment, for instance, where Niger is already buffered by military regimes in Mali, Chad, Burkina Faso and Guinea. 

Nobody in his right mind would or should ignore what would be the reactions of these military-led countries to an invasion of Niger Republic, the new entrant into that political-military realm. Would they leave their fellow comrades to be ravaged by the invasion when the thinking in their heads would be that they may become the next target?

Fifth. The invasion threat is coming at a time when, for instance, the existing Nigeria’s National Security Strategy (2019 Nigeria’s National Security Strategy) can be said to have fallen into disuse. It is of no more relevance in the situational context of what is unfolding in Niger Republic now and in the entire West African subregion.

This is a very powerful internal dynamic that shapes a nation’s external security outlook. This dynamic is conspicuously missing in the equations or calculus of our intended invasion of Niger Republic.

It’s not for nothing that nobody makes any reference to those “tissue papers” in the existing discourse over the crisis in Niger Republic. In short, the Nigerien crisis does not fall neatly at all into Nigeria’s defined national security interests or framework upon which a proactive policy could have been crafted around. The mouthful cliche: “No to military coup” is not in any way defined within any known national security interest. It is just more like a cry of a baby deprived of its mother’s breast milk!

Unknowingly, this document has done much harm to the nation’s security environment in its gross inability to serve as a guide or as an indicator/identifier of any new security threat such as military coups and return of military intervention in the political space in Africa.

To be fair, however, to the last administration that authored this document itself, it never take the document seriously enough at all at least not by way of making reference to it in public speeches in all our internal security travails. Former President Muhammadu Buhari gladly abandoned the document to gather dust on the shelf while welcoming with open arms the new khaki boys to Aso Rock led by General Mahamat Deby Itno from Chad in 2021.

Through this document, it can be seen how the fundamental but sudden change in threat perception from the last administration to the present has taken place.

While the last administration may be argued to be understandably indifferent to this nation’s immediate geopolitical environment, the current administration is not but sensitive to it as manifested in the “nasty” (wild and furious) reaction to regime change through military putsch in Niger Republic. While the former administration was well noted for building economic bridges with Niger Republic, the current administration is probably not interested in such an approach of economic diplomacy at all. President Tinubu is more interested in burning the bridges. He is ready to send soldiers, armored tanks and warplanes to Niger Republic to dislodge the new khaki boys in charge of the country there from power because they are perceived rightly or wrongly to be a threat to his stay in power in Nigeria.

That document expires next year 2024.

I do not support military intervention at all. We have seen them before. They are as worse as the civilians they are throwing out. 

While I stand against all military coups, it is, however, important to understand why they happen at all before condemning them. We should look at each specific case strictly on their merits within the context of the general socioeconomic and ecosystem, especially the political trend, security and intelligence – all within the doctrine of necessity. We must look at the triggers, the drivers and the general dynamics with the vulnerable, uncertain, complex and ambiguous environment in which these coups take place before pronouncing final judgement on them.

But there is never an action without a reaction, Vice versa.

As a big man responded to my last write-up titled Update on Niger Coup: Watch and Pray: “I’m not sure there’s anything to pray about Alex.  

“If our political class had been less corrupt and selfish, it would have nothing to fear. 

“Unfortunately, as you have chronicled so well in your magazine, the opposite is the case. So, there are consequences to be expected, including the risk of encouraging the military’s misbehavior a la Sudan, Niger or Mali to name but a few. 

“I don’t condone such actions; the results are usually catastrophic. But, the Laws are what they are and we disobey them at our own risk.”

A woman also unexpectedly responded: “The greatest mistake Tinubu will make as ECOWAS (Chairman) is to put boots on the ground in Niger.

“The ramifications of this coup could go beyond what is obvious on the surface.”

Drumbeats of War

The likelihood of war is already receding by the time this piece is being closed for review and sent to the press – although the risks are very high if further missteps should happen such as the grandiloquent threat by the Nigerian President, Bola Tinubu.

The caveat emptor in the whole scenario is the counter-threat by Mali and Burkina Faso that they would be forced to come to the aid of Niger Republic if the latter should be attacked. This counter-attack got ECOWAS cold feet in its earlier threat to invade Niger Republic if the khaki boys refused to restore former President Muhammad Bazzoum to power within seven days which has already expired by Monday August 7, 2023.

The counter-threat by Mali and Burkina Faso changed the calculus of ECOWAS and its Western backers. It raised the stakes to new pedestal of risks.

The coup definitely caught the Western powers especially the US and France by utter surprise. They were not expecting it at all.

They were confused and left with no choice but to threaten fire and brimstones on the new  military leaders and grandstand  them – but at the end of the day to no avail.

James Barnett, writing for Hudson Institute was of the view that: “Washington needs a policy to respond to the prospect of a multi-sided regional war in a region of strategic significance. Those seeking to reverse the trend of coups have no silver bullets, but it may not yet be too late to find a compromise in the truest sense of the word: a political resolution that leave no party so angry that it might destabilize West Africa in response” (James Barnett: “The Risk of a West African War”, August 4, 2023, Hudson Institute (https://www.hudson.org/democracy/risk-west-africa-war-niger-coup-ecowas-nigeria-james-barnett) 

 Barnett further wrote: “Any ECOWAS intervention is fraught with immense risks. First, it is unlikely Bazoum would regain the same degree of legitimacy he enjoyed before the coup if foreign guns put him back in power. More to the point, Bazoum might not even survive the intervention, since he remains a hostage of the junta. An ECOWAS intervention would only succeed if Niger’s junta were to fold or a critical mass of the armed forces were to defect the moment ECOWAS forces cross into Niger (and, crucially, if there were a modicum of consensus among Nigeriens on who should take power in the junta’s absence). 

“There is also a risk that an intervention would have the opposite effect. If the junta were to dig in its heels and rally the populace around the flag—possibly even arming civilian militias—the intervention could morph into a multifaceted counterinsurgency that ECOWAS would not be prepared to handle. At the moment, the junta appears to be threatening this approach, gambling that its best hope for legitimacy lies in channeling the population’s frustrations toward an external enemy.

“No ECOWAS member state can afford to have its military bogged down in a protracted counterinsurgency abroad, least among them Nigeria’s. Abuja’s armed forces are already overstretched, grappling with high levels of insecurity in nearly every part of the country. And despite the pledges from other ECOWAS member states, President Tinubu should not expect much help from the bloc’s other under-resourced militaries. Nigeria shares the longest land border with Niger. Whatever the cause of Niger’s destabilization, Nigeria will bear the brunt of its effects. 

“This should worry the junta as well. Its swaggering rhetoric notwithstanding, a regional conflict would be a major gamble for the military regime in Niamey. The junta would face a real risk of cracking—if not immediately, then at some point down the line once the bodies start to pile up. The generals ruling this landlocked and impoverished country would have limited options for external support. In what passes for pan-strongman solidarity, Mali and Burkina Faso have suggested that they would come to Niger’s defense in the event of an ECOWAS intervention, though it is unclear what this would mean in practice given that those nations’ armies can hardly leave their respective capitals without running over jihadist landmines. Niger’s junta is reportedly looking for support from the Wagner Group to fill the vacuum. But Wagner would be unlikely to tip the scales much if a Nigeria-led ECOWAS fully committed to the fight, especially with air power. The junta may also hope that Algeria will provide a lifeline, but Algiers might be wary of extending overt support. Drawing ECOWAS into a war therefore does not seem like a good long-term strategy for Niger’s junta. Unfortunately, the putschists might not be thinking about their long-term survival at this stage.

“The situation is very worrying, but Washington and ECOWAS should still seek an acceptable settlement that would avert a larger war. A compromise would first need to convince the junta members that they are not facing an existential threat. Second, it would need to give ECOWAS some face-saving opening for further talks. Down the line, a broader political deal could still be salvageable. However, at this stage, a deal would most realistically involve a transition back to civilian rule rather than the immediate restoration of President Bazoum. It would require significant engagement and the tactful exercise of leverage on the part of Washington and its partners to avoid repeating the mistakes of failed transitions like those in Sudan or Mali, where military forces stepped back in to assume power, only to destabilize their states further. But a transition in Niger, though unideal, is preferable to a protracted regional war. The principal victors in any drawn-out conflict would be the Sahel’s ever-expanding jihadist groups, a fact that is hopefully not lost on the generals in Niamey.”

Scylla and Charybdis

The blogosphere/informational space/social media is currently inundated with all manners of nonsensical speculations, half-truths, misinformation or disinformation, cloned videos (all meant to throw sands into the eyes of the unwary), etc, about the role or otherwise of Wagner Military Company of Russia, the Russian State itself, the Chinese State and other alleged rogue nations seeking to either foment more troubles in Africa or seeking to have their shares of the African pie or cake.

To fast track our thought, there is reasonable doubt that Wagner could have so swiftly organized a coup in Niger Republic after its debacle of military coup attempt in Russia on June 24, 2023. Wagner Group is definitely not a global coup maker at least going by its short history of existence and activities so far.

The resultant effect of that coup attempt in Russia on June 24 was the demonization and disbanding of the Wagner Group soldiers by the Kremlin, labelling it a criminal organization and all manners of unprintable adjectives of which the Russian language has a large repertoire.

Wagner Group has been forced to relocate its headquarters to Belarus from Russia. It is yet to completely resettle down to its normal trade of mercenary fighting. It is no more fighting in Ukraine.

Yevgeny Prighozin is a pariah in Russia even though he still moves around freely between Russia and Belarus.

So it is very much doubtful that Wagner Group has a direct hand in the coup that ousted President Mohammad Bazzoum in Niger Republic. Of course, Wagner Group not only morally and politically supported the coup (for its own selfish reasons and not for any altruistic reason at all), it is also standing by to be invited to come into Niger Republic to play the same role it has been playing in Mali and elsewhere in Africa.

What is, however, certain is the very unsavoury character of Yevgeny Prighozin himself, the notoriety of the Wagner Group for committing egregious violation of human rights wherever it operates. 

I shake my head when I hear people talk romantically about him or about Wagner Group. 

Even though France has been kicked out by Mali, for instance, the situation there has not fundamentally changed for good in any appreciable manner with the presence of the Wagner Group soldiers.

So when some analysts start to create unnecessary narratives in the informational space favourable to Wagner Group, Russian or Chinese States, they are either been mischievous or they do not know what they are talking about at all 

From the era of former Soviet Union to its breakup in 1991 and the Russian inheritance of all former Soviet weaknesses, there is no record anywhere in Africa to show their better performance than their Western counterparts.

The Russian romanticists clearly forget the history of how the former Soviet Union suppressed the democratic revolts of some Warsaw Pact members such as Hungary and Czechoslovakia in 1956 and 1968 respectively.

For instance, on June 23, 1956, Soviet Red Army rolled its tanks into Hungary. Thousands of Hungarian soldiers and civilians were massacred. Hundreds of thousands were forced to flee to the West for safety and asylum. Another phase of the invasion was from October 23 to November 4, 1956. 

The Hungarian revolt was effectively put down. Hungary would not breath air of freedom until the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991. 

Unfortunately, Hungary today is under the grip of Victor Oban-dictatorship But Hungary is a member of European Union and NATO! EU and NATO could do little to change the situation in Hungary preferring to accommodate it.

On August 20, 1968, Soviet Union once again sent its Red Army troops alongside four other Warsaw Pact armies to invade Czechoslovakia to crack down on reformist tendencies that have reared their heads in Prague. Thousands of Czechoslovakians were slaughtered in cold blood.

Meanwhile, Poland was able to wrestle itself from the grip of Soviet Union and Communism especially with the election of Lech Walesa as President.

Today, Poland is both a member of European Union and NATO.

Soviet Union once again went into Afghanistan on December 24, 1979 and got stuck there till February 15, 1989 (almost a decade).

Soviet Union was beaten blue-and-black like a dog out of the country in 1989 by the Afghan mujahedeens aided and abetted by the United States after which Soviet Union was forced to withdraw its Red Army troops.

Soviet Union, the alleged second most powerful military country in the world after the United States, looked for tears but could not find a drop. Soviet Union was humiliated.

Following a chain reaction from that point on and by August 1991 Soviet Union had combusted, disintegrated and splintered into fifteen independent republics of which Ukraine was one of them.

Russia that inherited most of the military arsenal of the former Soviet Union is still embroiled in the attempt to bring back the famed glory of the Soviet Union.

It did not take long before Russia started showing its fangs.

The first war between Russia and its neighbours broke out in 1994.  

War broke out on December 11, 1994 in which the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria waged a war of independence against the Russian Federation which was preceded by Russian intervention in Ichkeria in which Russia tried to overthrow the Ichkerian Government headed by Dzhhokhar Dudayev.  This war lasted 

1 year, 8 months, 2 weeks and 6 days in which 3,000 Chechen soldiers were killed while Russia lost about 14,000 soldiers with 52,000 wounded.

The Second Chechen Wat took place from August 7, 1999 to April 30, 2000 in which Chechnya lost between 25,000 and 200,000 civilians and soldiers while Russia was alleged to have suffered between 8,000 and 40,000 casualties of its soldiers.

The insurgency phase lasted from May I, 2000 to April 16, 2009 (8 years, 11 months and 15 days). Thousands of lives were lost.

On August 7, 2008, Russia invaded Georgia. The war ended on August 12. It was a five-day war in which Georgia defended itself against Russia and the Russian-backed self-proclaimed Republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. This war resulted in ethnic cleansing of Georgians from South Ossetia and Kadon Gorge in Abkhazia.

Russia lost between 65 and 67 soldiers with 283 wounded while Georgia lost 167 with 947 wounded.

The First Russo-Ukrainian War broke out on February 20, 2014 in which Russia snatched Crimea and annexed it.

The “mother” of it all is the Second Russo-Ukrainian War which broke out on February 24, 2022 and is still ongoing.

Vladimir Putin is now reported to want to lead Russia into a civilizational conflict with the West that goes far beyond the current scope of war with Ukraine (New York Times of August 8, 2023).

The above is to show that Russia is not in any way better than or should be preferred  to Western powers.

One is as bad as the other.

Having Wagner Group soldiers stationed anywhere in Africa is a strategic cautionary tale.

Conclusion

Let President Tinubu be reminded that his current romance with France in particular is not worthy at all. In statecraft, there are no permanent friends but permanent interests 

What are the permanent interests in Nigeria’s foreign relationship with France. This is what we want to know from Tinubu Administration to serve as the grundnorm for understanding our relationship with France.

Has Nigeria taken French activities in its Franco-phone dominion into consideration within the context of our national security interests, sift and evaluate them?

For instance, have we forgotten the behind-the-scene role played by France in the Nigeria-Cameroon border dispute over Bakassi Peninsula which we eventually lost via the Green Tree Agreement reluctantly signed off by former President Olusegun.Obassnjo?

Has Tinubu Administration considered and assessed that despite France’s claim of friendship with Nigeria, that Nigeria is geopolitically surrounded in its immediate environment by Franco-phone  led countries (Niger Republic, Chad, Cameroon, Benin Republic and even Togo)?.

Food for thought.

A word is enough for the wise.