Path of military intervention in Niger gloomy, doomed to failure: FP

By Al Mayadeen English
Source: Foreign Policy
9 Aug 2023 18:00

In a piece published by Foreign Diplomacy, Folahanmi Aina, an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, argues that the potential consequences of an unsuccessful ECOWAS military intervention are more significant than any anticipated benefits.

The defense chiefs from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) countries excluding Mali, Burkina Faso, Chad, Guinea, and Niger pose for a group photo during their extraordinary meeting in Abuja, Nigeria, Friday, Aug. 4, 2023, to discuss the situation in Niger. (AP)

The recent seizure of political power by the military junta in Niger has led to speculation about the potential for military intervention from neighboring countries. Niger, a landlocked nation in West Africa, is among the world's poorest countries and is grappling with a rising threat from violent extremist groups like Boko Haram and the IS in the West African Province (ISWAP), resulting in significant casualties and large-scale displacement.

While Niger has experienced several military coups since gaining independence from France in 1960, this particular coup has drawn a more pronounced regional response.

The West African bloc ECOWAS said, on Wednesday, it has the capacity to provide up to 25,000 troops for the potential invasion of Niger with the goal of reinstating Nigerien President Mohamed Bazoum, Nigerean-based RFI radio station reported.

The majority of forces will be deployed by Nigeria, the report added.

The crisis in Niger was sparked on July 26, when the presidential guard detained President Bazoum, leading to the subsequent declaration of interim leadership by Gen. Abdourahmane Tchiani, who also assumed the presidency of the Caretaker National Council for the Safeguard of the Homeland.

ECOWAS has resorted to implementing a full pressure campaign on the country, which included the closure of land and air borders between the bloc's countries and Niger, the suspension of all commercial and financial transactions with it, and the freezing of the country's assets in ECOWAS Central Banks.

The bloc gave Niger's coup leaders one week to reinstate the detained President, or the community would use "all measures", including military, to "restore order" in the African nation.

On their part, the military governments of Mali and Burkina Faso, Niger's neighbors, warned that any military intervention against Niger would be considered a declaration of war against them.

Absence of ECOWAS’s full-scale legitimacy among the citizens of Niger

The perceived security threat along the border between Niger and Nigeria is causing concern among leaders in Abuja and other neighboring capitals. This apprehension could impact their decision-making regarding potential actions. However, some recent actions by ECOWAS to pressure the junta in Niamey, Niger's capital, could lead to unintended outcomes.

That’s the take offered by Folahanmi Aina, an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, who argued that there are uncertainties about the ability of the military junta in Niger to effectively manage its porous borders.

In a piece published by Foreign Diplomacy, Aina acknowledged that unmonitored borders could result in increased infiltration of terrorists into Nigeria.

The activities of insurgencies in the Sahel region have caused a significant influx of 300,000 refugees from Mali into Niger. This number is expected to rise considerably, with many likely seeking refuge in Nigeria and other neighboring countries in the event of a full-scale armed conflict, as per Aina.

In Aina's view, Nigeria would likely not remain passive, especially given its own internal security challenges in such a scenario. There is also a potential for Chad, which boasts a strong military, to consider intervention alongside Nigeria for security reasons. However, Chad seems to be favoring diplomatic efforts at this point.

The gist of Aina's argument is that the opportunity for a peaceful and diplomatic solution is dwindling, and the possibility of a military intervention appears to be increasingly likely.

ECOWAS has previously engaged in military interventions within the region, such as during the Liberian and Sierra Leonean civil wars in the early 1990s, as well as more recently in the Gambia.

Aina gushes, "The current realities are different. The first major impediment to a successful regional military intervention in Niger is the absence of ECOWAS’s full-scale legitimacy among the citizens of Niger. Following the coup, some Nigeriens have taken to the streets in demonstration of their support for the putschists. For as long as a significant portion of Nigerien society backs its new rulers, a foreign intervening force will struggle to win the hearts and minds of locals on the ground. The fluid nature of the situation could mean the absence of a comprehensive exit strategy or transition plan, thereby giving way to a prolonged intervention."

Armed conflict could quickly expand to neighboring countries

Nigeria, as the current head of ECOWAS, is expected to play a leading role in any potential military intervention in Niger. However, Nigeria is grappling with a legitimacy crisis following a disputed presidential election and challenging reforms that have inadvertently led to economic hardships for many Nigerians.

Undertaking the financial and human burdens of an intervention in this context would be challenging. Given Nigeria's existing economic struggles, the termination of its fuel subsidy program, and the numerous internal security issues straining its military, the effectiveness of foreign meddling is far from guaranteed. This is especially true considering that Ghana and Senegal, two other influential regional players, are facing their own economic and political difficulties.

Nigeria's involvement in an intervention in Niger could worsen the already strained relationship between the government and its citizens, who have long harbored distrust. The Nigerian Senate has also expressed reservations about military action. Launching an intervention without broad domestic support would have significant domestic costs for the Nigerian government, which is grappling with widespread economic challenges causing tensions across the nation.

A potential consequence of armed conflict would be an influx of refugees and displaced people into Nigeria and neighboring countries, along with an increased risk of foreign terrorist infiltrations. This strain could overwhelm already limited infrastructure and social resources in the region.

Moreover, a regional military intervention could ignite a proxy conflict involving both state and non-state actors. Burkina Faso, Mali, and Guinea have pledged assistance to Niger in the event of a regional military offensive, with credible capabilities derived from previous security aid.

The European Union, ex-colonizer France, the United Kingdom, and the United States might offer direct or indirect backing to ECOWAS during a full-scale military intervention. This situation could quickly escalate across the Lake Chad and Sahel areas, exploited by extremist groups, thereby escalating insecurity and instability throughout the region.

"As ECOWAS mobilizes for military action in Niger, the prospect of a failed intervention far outweighs any projected gains. Rather, ECOWAS should tread with caution while exploring robust, diplomatic responses to the crisis. Time should also be given for ongoing mediation efforts to take root. Human lives are at stake; a non-military solution must be prioritized above all else," Aina concluded.