The military regimes of Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso have firmly rejected the six-month withdrawal moratorium proposed by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), labeling the move as yet another external attempt at destabilization.
During a summit held on December 15, 2024, leaders of ECOWAS announced the moratorium, giving the three nations until January 29, 2025, to reconsider their prior decision to leave the regional bloc. This decision aimed to provide 'a transition period' up until July 29, 2025, to negotiate the withdrawal process and leave the door open for their potential return.
Following the summit, the three countries, which have collectively formed the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), did not hesitate to express their discontent with this initiative. On December 22, they issued stark statements rejecting the moratorium, asserting it does not bind the AES and claiming it is merely another tactic used by external powers, particularly France, to interfere with their governance.
"Cette décision unilatérale ne saurait lier les pays de l'AES", declared Assimi Goïta, the leader of the Malian junta, highlighting their position against foreign maneuvers. Likewise, Colonel Amadou, closely associated with Goïta, referred to the moratorium as "une manipulation" during public broadcasts.
The background of this tension is complex. Following successful coups d'état since 2021, Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso have been under military rule, facing increasing challenges related to security and governance. Historically, the relationship with ECOWAS has soured, primarily due to the organization’s response to the military takeovers, which included sanctions and suspensions against these nations.
During the same summit where the moratorium was presented, ECOWAS leaders emphasized their desire for negotiations and peaceful discussions with the Sahel nations. Yet, the AES firmly denounced such efforts, insisting they are nothing more than strategies meant to cloud the reality of external destabilization.
“Cette décision est une énième tentative qui permettrait à la junte française et à ses supplétifs de poursuivre la planification et la conduite des actions de déstabilisation contre l'AES,” the AES leadership articulated, asserting their belief of manipulative undertones behind the moratorium.
This standoff reflects broader geopolitical dynamics at play, particularly as the three countries have increasingly leaned on military and political partnerships with Russia, as they counteract threats from jihadist groups within their regions. They perceive these relations as integral to safeguarding their national sovereignty and combating terrorism effectively.
Despite the moratorium, the AES has put its defense forces on high alert. Their leadership consistently calls on their populations to reject any attempts to engage with terrorist groups, which they see as another form of foreign influence.
The three regimes have emphasized their resolve not to be swayed by what they describe as 'external solutions' imposed by leaders outside their borders. The military leadership has grown ever more vocal against French influence and has accused it of seeking to reinstate control over the Sahel states.
This turmoil and the rejection of the moratorium signify not only the deteriorated relationships between the AES nations and ECOWAS but also point to the potential for heightened tensions within west Africa. Such conflicts could proliferate as debates surrounding neo-colonial influences and autonomy continue to dominate regional discussions.
Looking forward, the political posture of Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso seems to solidify around national interests defined largely by resistance against perceived external interventions, particularly from France and other ECOWAS states. Their allegiance within the Alliance of Sahel States could serve as both defensive and strategic against future pressures from outside forces.
Consequently, the current situation raises serious questions about how this realignment will affect regional security and governance within the Sahel, especially as they navigate the challenges posed by militant groups simultaneously.
While ECOWAS indicated its willingness to find "a negotiated solution,' the rejection of the six-month period signifies growing isolation among the three states. Observers ponder about their next steps as they attempt to define their role within the larger political discourse aimed at addressing both local and external security dilemmas.
