By Alexander Ekemenah, Chief Analyst, NextMoney
Executive Summary
1. In preparing this article, a general reading across board and a kind of literature review were done including the three previous articles written by this author on the same subject-matter of the military intervention in Niger Republic and the subsequent (still ongoing) crisis in that country. With this approach, an attempt was made to vault over what have been previously written to gain new insights and understanding into the still unfolding crisis in the Niger Republic – and to cut out the various background noises that interfere with process of interpretation of events in that country. This approach is on strictly strategic scale of evaluation or assessment in order to better understand the strategic intendment behind all the grandstanding by the lead actors so far involved in the unfolding drama in Niger Republic. Particular attention is paid to the perceptibly lead actor, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, his agitations and antics (what may actually be the raison d’etre behind his posturing) and other ancillary matters involved in the ongoing drama.
2. The lead role by Nigeria’s President Tinubu should be placed on strategic pedestal or scale. In this regard, the role of other ECOWAS members is subsumed or made subsidiary to the overwhelming influence of Nigeria in the matter. So what are the expectations from Nigeria especially from the Western powers? Are these expectations based on what the Western powers think President Tinubu can deliver or based on the leverages they think they have on him? If it is based on the expected deliverables, what are these deliverables? If it is the leverages, what are those leverages? What are the domestic factors President Tinubu is looking at: the support of the Nigerian political class across board in the midst of the strongly perceived crisis of illegitimacy rocking his Government, the support of the masses of the northern Nigeria or the total loyalty of the Nigerian Armed Forces? Nobody really can tell in this maze of factors.
3. President Tinubu wants to go to war with Niger Republic amidst the crisis currently rocking the Nigerian economy. Who goes to war when the national economy is terribly in such a bad shape? How is he going to fund such a war? Is he expected or expecting to do Father Christmas on behalf of other ECOWAS members who are also going through economic crisis from one degree to another? How does he expect the Nigerian Senate to approve any war appropriation bill – the same Senate that outrightly rejected his earlier request to go to war with Niger Republic? Nigeria has already joined other ECOWAS members to impose punitive sanctions against Niger Republic, closed borders with Niger Republic with all the economic and commercial implications.. It is just a question of time before protests would erupt in the northern part of Nigeria and other ECOWAS countries for the border closure from thousands of traders whose livelihood depends on trading with Niger Republic and who are already being hurt by the border closure and imposition of sanctions. From strategic point of view, the regime of sanctions and border closure do not make any sense at all essentially because Nigeria and other ECOWAS members are equally hurt by them. They will not move the military junta in Niamey an inch since they will have other channels to bring in goods and services from countries that readily too willing to come in to fill the gap created senselessly by ECOWAS and its Western paymasters. It is horrifying to see how a leader could calibrate and arrive at such policy decisions that are ill-thought, ill-advised and have back-firing effects. It is incredible.
4. It is without doubt strange to see how President Tinubu is viewing what would or could be the likely reaction to his actions from the northern Nigerian Moslems to such a declaration of war against Nigeriens considering the centuries-old bond of ethnic-religious consanguinity between most northern Nigerian Moslems and Nigeriens as a whole who are predominantly Moslems. Does President Tinubu sincerely believe that he can be forgiven or even get away for such a war which would inevitably be interpreted from the lens of betrayal of faith? Or does he think he can mobilize and carry along northern Nigerian Moslems on this impending chariot of war? Why does President Tinubu seemingly willing to burn all bridges of little goodwill and the relative political support that he got from northern Nigeria in the just concluded election? Let us even assume that he manages to get away with the “blue murder” of such a war till 2027, does he reasonably believe he can seek re-election and succeed again after betraying the northern Nigerian Moslems in such a brazen manner?
5. Assuming the conquest of Niger Republic and the ousting of the military junta (and the restoration to power the already discredited President Mohammad Bazzoum) how do Nigeria and ECOWAS wish to rebuild and reconstruct a war-shattered Niger Republic? How does President Tinubu hope to repair the damages to the hitherto or otherwise bilateral relationship between Nigeria and Niger Republic? How does he hope to mend broken hearts, minds, families shattered by the war, including damages to the ethnic-religious consanguinity between the two countries?
Introduction
The amount of sabre-rattling, throwing of mortars and pestles, issuance of threats and counter-threats against the Niger Republic so far (from July 26 to August 12, 2023) probably showed that something very fundamental that the public is yet to know anything about must have taken place in Niger Republic. Otherwise nobody could claim to understand the venom with which the new military junta is being treated like a pariah. In the view of this author, it is most probable that some secret vested interests or expectations have been breached or threatened by the military intervention of July 26, 2023. And that such secret agreements must have been reached with the ousted President Mohammad Bazzoum which is now feared to be going down the drain with the new military junta in Niamey.
Ordinarily, it would have been sufficient to rest or base the entire crisis on the threatened well-known military and economic assets of the Western powers already in place in Niger Republic. It would have been sufficient to say that the primary objective of restoration of democratic rule and/or constitutional order im Niger Republic are the supreme considerations and drivers of the wild-cat reactions from the Western powers and their ECOWAS stooges.
But we all know that this could not have been the case, if not arrant nonsense – since we all know that, for instance, democratic rule and/or constitutional order in Niger Republic are simply a caricature, shambolic and mendacious display of Third World mental and physical deficiencies in constitutional management or pretense to democratic rule. Nigeria is not in any way fundamentally better than Niger Republic in this regard..
We all know that President Mohammad Bazzoum is one of the most venal, effete, incompetent and corrupt in West African subregion. Again, Nigeria is not in any way fundamentally better than Niger Republic in this regard. We have had our fair share of incompetent leaders and corrupt Governments.
This is why we should extend our telescopic analysis beyond the current facade of what is publicly known, displayed and pronounced by the lead actors so irked by this almost inexplicable conundrum of a military intervention in Niger Republic. What is even more interesting in this regard is that the military intervention that have taken place so far in other West African countries did not draw so much ire as this one in Niger Republic – which is why it is not beyond reasonable doubt that something else might have been involved in this coup beyond the scope of knowledge of the public
This author do not claim to know that “something” at all. But what we know is that this coup is not about an “ideological” battle or declaration of war against the West. It is not per chance a perceived threat to Western military and economic assets. This latter part can be justified on the fact that the military junta in Niamey has not closed down any of the Western military bases in the country nor threatened to nationalize any of their economic assets. On the contrary, the military junta has even promised to respect all its international agreements and obligations. So what could have irked the Western powers and their ECOWAS stooges so much that they have all ganged up to go to war to remove the military junta and spill the blood of innocent Nigeriens in such a senseless and irresponsible war?
“Literature” Review.
Useful were many insights gained from the many columnists and writers on the crisis of the Nigerien State as a result of the military intervention. But also useless were many social media posts that rehashed the same cliches about the coup.
Not left out in this review are many videos that circulated online which helped to shed light on the ongoing crisis in Niger Republic both from historical perspective and from contemporary standpoint. Reviewed finally are the various Government pronouncements by Nigeria and other ECOWAS countries.
However, leaping out of this review exercise are several major disturbing questions concerning the leading role assumed by the Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
What exactly did the US and France promise to do for him to make to him assume this position of Commander-in-Chief or Generalismo of ECOWAS’ intendment to invade Niger Republic to dislodge the military junta there?
Why and how did President Tinubu fail to gauge the mood in Nigeria before issuing the battle cry to invade Niger Republic? How did President Tinubu and his advisers fail to account for the ethno-religious consanguinity between Niger Republic and northern Nigeria as a strategic limiting factor to his battle cry for the invasion of Niger Republic? Did he ever review all the existing treaty agreements between Nigeria and Niger Republic to serve as strategic guide or caution against his war-mongering instincts or tendencies against the Niger Republic?
Did he sincerely believe that he would ever be forgiven here in Nigeria and in Niger Republic politically, socially, culturally for any attack on Niger Republic irrespective of whether he loses or wins in this type of problematic geopolitical “game of thrones”?
Did President Tinubu even assess the impact of his decisions so far on his own religious belief due to the fact as a leader from southern Nigeria and southwest in particular, and as a Moslem having been praying five times daily and having gone to Hajj several times in. Saudi Arabia, his Islamic faithfulness would not be questioned by hard-core Islamic fundamentalists and/or extremists? Did he ever weigh the connotative interpretations of his momentous decisions as a Moslem and as a perceived Islamic leader in Nigeria?
How much and to what extent are ECOWAS members willing to commit their militaries to the invasion of Niger Republic within the framework of the so-called “Standby Force” in view of the psychological impact that the coup in Niger Republic may have had on them (i.e. ECOWAS members’ militaries)? Have the ECOWAS leaders accurately assessed what may be the reactions of other superpowers such as Iran, Russia, China and other Middle Eastern powers in the much-talked about proxy war between the West and the East over the coup in Niamey? If so, what could be the strategic parameters or considerations for such an assessment, judgment and conclusions?
What makes President Tinubu think that the Nigerian Armed Forces as it is presently constituted would be able to lead an ECOWAS invasion force successfully to topple the military junta in Niamey given the recent background of the tragic or sordid inability of the same Armed Forces to defeat Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria in the last fourteen years? What gives him that confidence? Does he think he would get the requisite military support from the Americans (White House, Pentagon, State Department and the CIA) and the French when it comes to exchange of blows with Niger Republic? What makes him think so? Or does he have a secret super weapon somewhere or a magic wand to exorcise the spectre of military intervention in Africa? Why has he not mentioned other West African countries that are currently under military rule? Why has he not threatened them with invasion the way he is doing now in the case of Niger Republic? What is so special about Niger Republic?
Why have the Americans refused so far to give Ukraine the much-needed American F-16 Falcon fighter jets, its Army Tactical Artillery and Missile System (ATACMS) and other advanced weaponry to fight the Russians in Ukraine?
Of course, there is no point comparing the military firepower of Niger Republic with that of Nigeria or any other ECOWAS member’s military. The point is that you do not under-rate your opponent more so when the envisaged war itself is completely irresponsible both in morals and political expediency.
Ask the Russians how they are feeling now about their misadventure in Ukraine.
What are the Franco-American Interests in Niger Republic?
The Franco-American military and economic interests are well known in Niger Republic as well as other African countries. They are naturally the byproducts of neo-colonial agreements reached with many of our post-colonial leaders who largely lacked foresight of what they were doing at the time. One may argue that our leaders were arm-twisted to grant the several concessions to the colonial masters. In fact Nigeria was not exempted in this regard if we recall the Anglo-Nigerian Defense Pact of 1964 which was later abrogated as a result of massive protests from Nigerian university students of the time.
Thus after more than 60 years of independence of many African countries, we still have these neo-colonial agreements hanging on the necks of African countries like albatross.
For repetition sake, some of the French economic assets in Niger Republic include but not limited to the following:
1. Areva is a French multinational corporation in nuclear energy sector and is reputed to be in charge of mining of uranium in northern Niger.
2. Total SE is a French multinational oil and gas company drilling and producing oil and gas in the country.
3. Orange is a multinational telecom service provider in Niger like MTN in Nigeria.
4. There are many other French companies mining gold and other precious metals in Niger..
The Americans on the other hand have the following assets, among others.
1. ExxonMobil
2. Chevron
In one of the videos reviewed for this article was the Nigeria-Morocco 30bcm Gas Pipeline project considered as a critical asset allegedly threatened by the military putsch (without any shred of evidence) even when the military junta had earlier promised to respect all international agreements and obligations by Niger Republic. This oil and gas pipeline passes through Niger and the Americans and the French are probably afraid that the pipeline project might be jeopardized or endangered in its security of right of way across Niger. The pipeline when completed would pump oil and gas to Europe via Morocco at a time when the Americans and the Europeans are imposing punitive sanctions on Russia over the War in Ukraine.
The estimated $25 billion Nigeria-Morocco pipeline project is alleged to being managed by Chevron. The fear is that if the pipeline project should go under, this huge investment would be lost.
In addition to the above economic assets are also the well-known military assets operated by Western powers in Niger.
1. The Agadez Air Base located near the border of Libya and Mali is owned and operated by the Americans.
2. Madama military base located in the Diffa region near the border of Libya is operated by the Americans.
3. Niamey Air Base is operated by the French but also frequently patronized by the Americans too.
All the American military assets in Niger as well as in other African countries are controlled by the African Command headquartered in Stuttgart in Germany.
As we have stated earlier, alleged threats to these well known military and economic assets could not have been the only reason for the vociferous campaign against the military junta in the Western media. There may still be something else not known to the public.
Of course, one cannot dismiss these military and economic assets as not been sufficient enough for the hostility displayed by the Western powers if they are so threatened.
Niger has the seventh largest deposit of uranium in the world. The Nigerien uranium is considered one of the purest, easily enriched to produce electricity in nuclear power plants and also extraction for manufacturing of nuclear weapons. The US and France are both nuclear powers armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons with first-strike capabilities. They are two of the Five Permanent Members of the United Nations Security Council with veto powers while no African country is such a permanent member. France and the US have been the two major importers of the Nigerien uranium in the last two decades or thereabout and would probably do anything and/or everything to safeguard the mining sites to prevent them from falling into the hands and control of rival powers such as Iran, North Korea, Russia and China. Niger has no nuclear power plant to generate electricity as more than eighty percent of Nigeriens live in darkness. It has been reported that one-third of electricity consumed by France comes from Nigerien uranium turned into electricity via nuclear power plants all located in France. The electricity consumed in Niger is supplied by Nigeria by about 75 per cent which has now been cut off as a result of this brouhaha over the coup in Niger.
It is very clear that Niger Republic is a basket case amidst abundant solid and liquid mineral resources derived from the lopsided economic arrangements between Niger and other Western powers including Nigeria that supply about 75 percent of Niger’s electricity..
This is the dependency syndrome or structure of inequalities that the Western powers want to keep perpetuating and anything that threatens or seeks to upset this structure of inequalities would be viewed as a collective threat or challenge to their economic and military security interests. This partly explains why the Western powers have several military bases in Niger to serve as staging posts for any emergency in the region, and keep off rivals like Russia and China.
We all know that the US alone has about eight hundred military bases that ring-fenced the entire planet.
But interestingly the new military junta in Niamey has not in any way abrogated the existing military and economic alliances between Niger and the Western powers. So one wonders why the Western powers are hollering to the high heavens even when Niamey has not taken any direct step to break ties with Western powers..
While addressing the nation.and with particular reference to Niger’s global allies on July 27, General Abdrahmane Tchiani, the head of the military junta, said the junta will respect all the country’s international commitments as well as human rights. Indeed no blood has been shed so far as a result of the coup. So one finds it extremely difficult to understand why the Western powers are epileptically foaming in the mouth and bellowing at the top of their voices at the military junta, running from pillar to pole in an attempt to have the junta removed at all cost as soon as possible using President Tinubu and his ECOWAS gangs as the attack dogs or dogs of war against Niger Republic.
Niger has largely been an unstable country politically. The July 26; 2023 coup would be the fifth since political independence from France in 1960. Nigeria has had more than that number. So there is really nothing strange about the coup except what it may have upset in the arrangements of forces of inequalities and exploitation in the country. So it is prequels to the coup that we don’t really know much about. But the sequels are the well known in forms of the violent reactions that greeted the coup.
The European Union has since suspended all security cooperation with Niger Republic – as if the latter would immediately collapse and disintegrate without the security cooperation and aids. This is the same European Union that condemned the recently held election in Nigeria considered massively rigged and with about 70 people that died as a result of election violence across the country. INEC management of the election was considered the poorest since 1999 to date. The US on its part has declared its “unflagging support” for former President Muhammad Bazzoum, an evident Western puppet or “ally” in the so-called fight against Islamic jihadists in Niger Republic.
Economic Warfare.
First of all, the basis for which the military intervention in Niger Republic was carried out were argued by the khaki boys to be economic crisis, insecurity and corruption under the former civilian administration.
No doubt, each of these issues can be broken down to see exactly how they might have contributed to the deterioration of the general situation in Niger Republic under the former civilian administration that led to the military intervention.
Secondly, there may, of course, have been other hidden motives behind the coup that are not known to the public while many people including analysts are hitting their heads against the concrete walls over democracy and all those nonsensical claims.
Yes, democracy matters. But what kind of democracy are we talking about here? Was it an election that was allegedly to have been rigged in favour of the former President Muhammad Bazzoum and his party? Was it the shambolic administration of the State framed by economic woes, insecurities and corrupt practices at the highest level of government, and evident perception that the former administration was effete and a lackey of the Western powers? For how long does anybody expect citizens to cope with such brazen malpractices at the highest level of government?
Of course, the elasticity of citizens’ endurance varies from one degree to another and from one place to another.
The military is a barometer for measuring the political oscillation in the society behind their placid posturing.
The doctrine of necessity for extra-judicial intervention such as military intervention kicks in when the elasticity of citizens’ endurance has evidently reached a breaking or tipping-over point. It is both an inflection and intervention points which can hardly be distinguished by an unsuspecting analyst.
These are the fine granular details that can be exhumed, archeologically speaking, and captured at the epistemological level – definitely not at the blaise level.
Now, economic warfare is a generic conceptual umbrella terminology for capturing geopolitical or geostrategic fight over economic resources between powerful power blocs – in this case, global players such as the US, France, Russia, China even Nigeria or among multinational corporations belonging to the same or different countries.
Much has been heard and written about the solid and liquid mineral resources in Niger Republic and the fight over their control that might have contributed to the military intervention on July 26, 2023. It can also be asserted on the basis of the term economic warfare itself may have reached the threshold of tipping-over point culminating in the military intervention in order for one faction or the other to gain supreme control over the mineral resources.
If it is assumed that it is such a geopolitical or geostrategic economic warfare that triggered off the military intervention, such an assumption must be substantiated by hard evidences and we will need to know exactly which of the mineral resources or other economic assets might have triggered off the military intervention.
There are two such economic assets that have come up for mention: the Nigeria-Morocco Gas Pipeline project and the Nigerian-TransSaharan Gas Pipeline project. Both are not the same and both have followed different trajectory of development.
But in other materials reviewed on the Nigeria-Morocco Gas Pipeline project, nowhere was Chevron Nigeria Ltd mentioned as the project initiator or contractor contrary to what some videos also reviewed here mentioned. So one wonders where the narrators in the aforementioned videos got this information from. This is very crucial to answer the veracity and/or admissibility of the evidence before us for critical interrogation and analysis. Again and again, one to be extremely wary of most of these social media reports.
Meanwhile, New York Times of August 17, 2023, hinted at some of the morbid fears of Western powers about the coup.
“The military takeover in Niger has upended years of Western counterterrorism efforts in West Africa. The coup also poses challenges for the Biden administration’s fight against Islamist militants on the continent, especially in the Sahel, the semiarid region south of the Sahara where groups linked to Al Qaeda and Islamic State are quickly gaining ground.
“Niger, an impoverished nation of 25 million people that is nearly twice the size of Texas, has recently been the exception to that trend. Terrorist attacks against civilians there decreased by 49 percent this year, largely because of French and U.S. troops’ training and assisting of Nigerien forces there, as well as efforts from the deposed president, analysts say.
“Those gains could be in jeopardy if a regional conflict breaks out or if the junta orders the Western forces, including 1,100 American troops, to leave and three U.S. drone bases to be shuttered. It could also open the door to Russian influence in Niger in the form of the Kremlin-backed Wagner private military company.
“A security vacuum in Niger could embolden the militants to ramp up propaganda, increase recruitment, establish ministates in remote areas and plot attacks against Western countries. Removing the relatively small U.S. presence would make it harder to manage threats as they emerge, officials said.”
This author would review the two particular projects aforementioned and the security concerns raised by the US separately in our next article.
But none of the warring parties has told us precisely what economic advantage they are fighting for. Niger Republic has not indicated precisely whether it has entered into negotiation with any of the Western powers over the need to re-price the commodities they are extracting and carting away to their respective countries.
None of the ECOWAS countries, including Nigeria, has told us which of their economic interests in Niger Republic has been negatively affected by the military intervention. Rather they have all imposed sanctions on Niger Republic. All they have been foaming in the mouth and fulminating about are restoration of already discredited President Mohammad Bazzoum, constitutional order or democracy, etc.
Of course, it is a well-known axiom that economic interests are always thicker than blood. Blood would rather be spilled than to allow economic interests to be jeopardized.
Damage to Nigeria-Niger Bilateral Relationship
This incident of (bloodless) military putsch in Niger Republic and the concomitant reaction to it by President Tinubu and his ECOWAS co-travellers including their Western backers has done a great deal of damage, if not the greatest damage, to President Tinubu’s public image ever.
He has come to be seen as a leader who preremptorily act before thinking if he ever thinks at all, according to some critics. Such a leader is perhaps rightly considered to be extremely dangerous for the sheer possibility of plunging his nation into crisis or chaos before realizing what he has done.
If, however he thinks he is unwilling to step back from an evident perilous path, apologize and/or abandon cause and course, such a leader is considered dangerous because he is forever self-opinionated and unwilling to consider well-meaning advisory.
He is also perceived to be a puppet or stooge of Western powers especially of the US and France individually or collectively. In short, he is a lackey of the Western powers. Some critics may have rightly traced this compromised position to his stints at ExxonMobil, his claimed academic sojourn in Chicago and other places in the US, where critics further charged that he has been well-packaged by the American intelligence agencies notably the CIA and State Department’s Bureau of Research for his current status of political leadership in Nigeria to the detriment of electoral laws in Nigeria.
Yet the content of this relationship is largely unknown and can only be speculated upon. Unfortunately, speculations are never sufficient or even acceptable in this type of matter
In one of the videos reviewed for this article, President Tinubu was said to be a stooge of the Americans. Tinubu was said to have repeatedly visited the US Embassy in Nigeria, citing WikiLeaks papers, to appraise the US with the ongoing developments in the Nigerian political landscape which the US authorities, according to the narrators in the video, from a major political actor in Nigeria.
This was part of the reasons according to the narrators in the video why Tinubu was allowed to keep part of the drug money earlier seized from him in the US. Through this way, Tinubu was alleged to have been tainted, compromised from the very beginning and set up as a future tool to be used and to advance US interests in Nigeria and West Africa as a whole.
This is why Tinubu can be seen a wounded lion riding to fight the military junta in Niamey as he perceived it to be a threat to his own power base in Nigeria and West Africa because with the number of military juntas now in West Africa they constitute a high challenge to US and other Western powers’ interests in West Africa.
Thus most probable is the possibility that what we are now dealing with here is a Triangular Alliance of Deep State ( web of intricate relationship) between Nigeria’s Tinubu, the United States and France, an unholy Alliance we may never be able to untangle for now.
However, this video could not be independently verified. So we are forced to take its content with a pinch of salt!
Meanwhile, this incidence of military putsch in Niger Republic and the concomitant reaction to it especially from Nigeria has done a great deal of damage, if not permanent rupture, to the bilateral relationship between the two countries. This is strictly on official State-to-State level.
However, because of the existing ethno-religious consanguinity between the two countries, the socio-cultural relationship will also be heavily impacted upon negatively from one degree to another. This is because the ethnic-religious consanguinity is deep-rooted than generally believed. It is historical. According to a commentator, the more-than century old consanguinity dates back to even before the time of Othman Dan Fodio who was reported to have hailed from the present-day Niger Republic..
How Tinubu hope to break up these centuries-old bond of ethnic-religious consanguinity between the two countries with war is a strategic conundrum or a cautionary tale of how not to start such a war. It is simply a hopeless task. Nobody knows precisely what Tinubu is thinking in this regard. What was he thinking or what did he think?
President Tinubu, please, tread carefully. You are walking into a minefield! Don’t let the Americans and the French goad, push or railroad you into stepping in those minefields that will without doubt consume you.
There is no permanent friends but permanent interests in statecraft ever. The American and French national interests are completely exclusionary to those ofNigeria’s permanent national interests. Don’t be fooled into believing otherwise. Don’t be led by the nose. Beware of the Ides of March!
Lasisi Olagunju, a highly respected columnist with The Nigerian Tribune, and a thoroughbred wordsmith, wrote on his Monday Lines of August 7, 2023:
“One of the bitter lessons Bola Tinubu may have learnt in the abortive war against Niger Republic’s military junta is that with northern Nigeria, blood will always be thicker than water. In this matter, Niger Republic is blood. Nigeria, especially the part of it outside the Moslem north, is water. Northern Nigeria will not sacrifice their brothers and sisters in Niger for anything, not for nebulous concept about democracy and definitely not in defense of Western interests”
Unfortunately, in view of this writer, the bitter truth is that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has not learnt any lesson at all from the ethno-religious consanguinity or relationship between the Niger Republic and heavily Moslem- populated northern Nigeria. If he had, he would have been cautioned or be cautious in all his “gladiatorial” grandstanding against the military junta in Niger Republic.
The fact that his immediate predecessor in office, Muhammadu Buhari, had such ethno-religious consanguinity (paternal root) in Niger Republic which he never hid from the public domain and had even threatened to relocate to this same country if Nigerians disturb him too much should have cautioned President Tinubu to tread carefully and refrain from making all those inflammatory public pronouncements about the coup.
Or should we assume that Tinubu does not care about the sensitivity and/or sensibility about his immediate predecessor in office? Or should we assume that Tinubu is firing arrows in the direction of Buhari and his factual ethno-religious worldview?
If President Tinubu has not forgotten so soon that Buhari still command a legion of hard-core supporters in Nigeria who may not have seen anything wrong in whatever Buhari did in the last eight years, he should have been more cautious in his approach to the coup in Niger Republic.
President Tinubu erroneously believe that he is more democratic than all his predecessors in office, that he is the modern viceroy and chief custodian of democracy in Africa, a clear case that can only be described as that of a megalomania who think that his autocratic pronouncements or commands should be “democratic laws” in Africa! Such an epistemic disorder!
It is a grave and fatal strategic assumption or presumption that his autocratic pronouncements, unmindful of the sensitivity of the northern Moslem populace, would the law or horse to ride roughshod over the ethno-religious consanguinity between Nigeriens and northern Moslem Nigerians – appearing in false gladiatorial armor to fight the cause of democracy in Niger Republic when his own domestic front is largely unstable.
Olagunju (supra) further stated that: “Northern Nigerian was saying that it wouldn’t have Nigeria fight Niger, a country with which it had been one family before the British created Nigeria. Uthman Dan Fodio was born in Maratta in the Tahous region, present-day Niger, landed in 1817 im Sokoto, present-day Nigeria. Read Oxford Research Encyclopedia of African History. Nothing, not Nigeria, not democracy, neither coup nor pressure from any patron abroad would make northern Nigeria cut its family tie with Niger. What clever leader walks headily into a trap as Tinubu has done? He is, however, lucky; he has a Senate of night soil men that has helped to clear the mess. But why did he think he can pull off a military campaign against Niger by Nigerian forces? Who would have helped him pull the trigger and fire the tanks? Why did he write the Senate? Why did he not look carefully at the ethno-religious demography of the Senate before unleashing his war whim on that chamber? He should have weighed the opinions he had.”
Alas. He did not. And he is now left like a rickety canoe on a turbulent sea or a punctured kite in a windstorm.
Does Tinubu deserve pity and support? Absolutely not at all. It is strategic foolishness. No leader does things like that at all, not even in the wildest imagination.
But I think Tinubu is a victim of his own self-inflicted epistemic disorder, a grandiloquent megalomaniac to think that he is the viceroy or ambassador plenipotentiary or chief custodian of democracy in Africa, the final arbiter of any crisis arising from regime change anywhere in Africa.
However, this suspect of an epistemic disorder is rooted in something else – in another serious malady. Tinubu is doing all he is doing to appear as a viceroy and chief custodian of democracy in Africa. To “appear” is the key word and nothing else, not that he is actually such a viceroy or chief custodian of any democracy anywhere.
Tinubu is currently in a state of quandary over the unpredictability of the final judgement that may issue or come from the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal. He is mortally afraid. He is not absolutely certain that the judgement would favour him and uphold his claimed or purported electoral victory.
So he is running from pillar to pole to appear legitimate, to appear as a strong leader and to appear as a war juggernaut in the eyes of the Nigerian public and in the eyes of the international community. It is now very clear that his election as the ECOWAS Chairman around mid-July was stage-managed for him to assume this position of West African leadership with clay feet.
If the PEPT judgment upholds his acclaimed election victory, then he would have gotten away with few bruises for his larceny of the Nigerien heart. If otherwise, then his name would down in infamy. There is no middle ground anywhere for him to stand!
Digging in for the Long Haul
As of August 10, 2023, the military junta in Niamey has dug itself into power in full control of apparatus of State by appointing a 21-member federal cabinet headed by a Prime Minister, Ali Mahaman Lamine Zaine. With this development, it can only be argued that the military junta can only be removed from power by force of arms. No peaceful negotiation can remove the junta from power. But this cannot be through war as being planned by ECOWAS and its Western backers.
At the same time, at the ECOWAS Extraordinary meeting held in Abuja, Nigeria, and chaired of course by President Tinubu, the arrowhead of the clamor for the removal of the military junta from power, the meeting decided, among other things, to create a Standby Force (a rapid deployment strike force) in readiness of the envisaged invasion of Niger Republic. The Manichean quest to topple the military junta knows no bounds. It’s almost reaching a crescendo. President Tinubu has turned himself out to be a conquistador, a Field Marshal of ECOWAS legionnaire and hireling of Western powers to do their dirty jobs for them.
Thus the stage is set for clash of arms between ECOWAS and Niger Republic.
Only the final order to go to war is now being awaited.
ECOWAS should stand down its Standby Force. The planned invasion will never bear good fruits.
But one would have expected ECOWAS to order the launch of the attack on Niger Republic by this time going by the previous amount of noises and grandstanding that have taken place so far. However, what one is now seeing (at least as at the time of writing here) is the increasing binary situation where both parties are digging and entrenching themselves into position of strengthening their forces or bases.
The military junta in Niamey is day-by-day strengthening its position as it awaits the invasion that may or may not come. The balance of forces is more favorable to Niamey than to ECOWAS because of the increasing domestic opposition to war from many ECOWAS-member countries.
Meanwhile ECOWAS continues to meet to deliberate and make more noises and putting their so-called Standby Force on operational mode!
So who blinks first: the military junta in Niamey or ECOWAS in Abuja?
It is like watching a slowly swinging pendulum – not knowing precisely where it would swing with its seemingly equal weight on both sides of the scale. Only a slight push serving as a trigger is needed to tip the scale one way or the other – with all the consequential effects coming to manifest in full force. It is a very dicey strategic scenario. Every detail becomes important at this point while the pressure and counter-pressure are mounting on daily basis.
It is like watching four or more dashboards at the same time: one in Niamey where the military junta is watching every move of the avowed enemies and/or scanning the environment for any sign of danger; another dashboard at Abuja where the operational headquarters of the ECOWAS invasion Standby Force is and also monitoring the situation in Niamey while awaiting the final order to launch attack and deploy to the battlefield; another dashboard in Paris where all the French reactionary personnel are assembled, analyzing details of every development in Niamey and Abuja.
The French Establishment cannot unilaterally order ECOWAS to deploy its Standby Force. It has to do this in agreement or in sync with the American Establishment.
The final dashboard is in Washington or may as well be in Stuttgart in Germany where the African Command is headquartered.
Actually, the Americans seem to hold the final ace cards on its table. The Americans are very savvy. They can even decide to call off the entire invasion plan depending on the dominant or prevailing strategic advisory from the White House. The Americans are always too willing to go to bed with the Devil as long as they can strike a suitable deal with it – leaving everybody else in the lurch..
Indeed, it is the high suspicion of this author at this point of time in writing that despite the ongoing public face-off between Washington and Niamey, the Americans may have been hard at work behind the scene trying to reach out to the military junta in Niamey probably with or without third-party intermediary.
The Americans are also very good at this, historically speaking, with numerous Institutional examples to cite. For instance, according to New York Times of August 10, 2023, the US has reached a deal with Iran to free five American detainees and allow them to leave Iran in exchange for Tehran to gain access to $8 billion for humanitarian purposes and freedom for several jailed Iranians in US prisons. Who could have imagined that few months ago?
In such a scenario, the US would simply call off all the standby plans to attack Niamey. In such a scenario too, people like President Tinubu and his ECOWAS co-travellers would be left in the lurch, left to deal with domestic backlash for their strategic shortsightedness – one of the worst afflictions that can assail a leader. It is this type of strategic shortsightedness that blundered Russia into Ukraine where it is now mired in a war of attrition.
In this scenario too, the Americans may wish to carry along the French or not. The “or” is because of the prevalent principle of modern statecraft: no permanent friends but permanent interests. The Americans are also famed for undercutting their so-called friends and pushing them aside when convenient without any moral scruple. Indeed, modern statecraft is devoid of moral scruples.
That is why people like President Tinubu should be pitied as they could be pitilessly pushed aside without any moral scruple when the stakes become strategically high – to the high-tension wire level.
The War Scenario
The province of war is largely unpredictable. There is never an iron-cast overall master strategy, operational and tactical plans for all times. Such overall strategy and operational and tactical plans are forever subject to the dictates or dynamics of the battlefield. That is the First Law of Modern Warfare.
The Second Law of Modern Warfare is had to underrate one’s enemy or opponent. All superpowers have committed that egregious fundamental mistake from the time of Genghis Khan through Napoleon Bonaparte down to the current Russo-Ukrainian War.
Of course, as it is often said in strategic circles: “God is always on the side of the Big Guns”. But not always as several histories of warfare have shown.
The Third Law of Modern Warfare is that it is always easier to destroy but costlier to rebuild and reconstruct. Psychological damages and traumas (often assuming the proportion of post-traumatic stress disorder) last almost forever. Both Russian and Ukrainian soldiers have already been reported to be suffering from the psychological effects of the war between them. American soldiers are still suffering from PTSD from Vietnam War, Afghan War and Iraqi War.
In chapter 1 titled Strategic Considerations (The Art of War Sun Tzu The Book of Lord Shang ‘Shang Yang’ translated by Yuan Shining and Introduction by Robert Wilkinson – Wordsworth Classic of World Literature) (From General Tao Hanzhang”‘s Commentary on the Art of War) “Five Fundamental Factors of War” were listed
“Sun Tzu said: “One should appraise a war first of in terms of five fundamental factors and make comparisons of various conditions of the antagonistic sides in order to assess the outcome. The first of the fundamental factors is politics, the second, weather, the third, terrain, the fourth, the commander and the fifth, doctrine. In summary, Sun Tzu believed that one has to deliberate on the basic conditions which decide a war, and among them, five fundamental factors (supra) and seven elements (infra) are the primary ones.
“In terms of politics, he meant that the sovereign should use political pressure or other means to bring the people into harmony with him. As for weather, he referred to the interaction between natural forces, the effects of day and night, rain and fair weather, cold and hear, time of day and seasons, and to make full use of favourable conditions and avoid any negative factors. By terrain, he meant distances, whether the ground is traversed with ease or difficulty, whether it is suitable for offensive or defensive tactics, and whether it is fit for the deployment of troops. As for the Commander, he specified the general’s quality of wisdom, sincerity, benevolence, courage, tenacity, and strictness. By doctrine, he meant the discipline and organization of troops, the assignment of appropriate ranks to officers and their respective duties, regulations, and management of logistics.
“These are the fundamental factors Sun Tzu believed to be imperative for analyzing and judging victory or defeat in a war. To analyze these factors, one has to answer the following questions which were known as the seven elements:
1. Which of the two sovereign is more sagacious?
2. Which of the two commanders is wiser and more able?
3. Which of the two armies has the advantage of nature and the terrain?
4. On which side is discipline more rigorously enforced?
5. Which of the two armies is stronger?
6. Which side has better-trained officers and men?
7. Which side administers rewards and punishments in a more enlightened manner?
“After making a comprehensive analysis, one will be able to forecast which of the two will be victorious. Of course, from the point of view of a modern war, these conditions are obviously insufficient. It was commendable, however, for Sun Tzu to discover these fundamental factors over two thousand years ago”.
There are, of course, other ancillary laws, but the above three Basic Laws, the Five Fundamental Factors and Seven Elements of War according to Sun Tzu formed the grundnorm of modern warfare.
A careful balancing or aggregation of these laws, factors and elements or lack of it is what confer victory or defeat in a modern war. So big guns might not be enough – all other things being equal! Ceteri paribus!
Conclusion
It must be confessed with all sense of modesty that there are no easy answers to most of the questions raised in this article.
This military intervention in Niger Republic is without doubt an intractable hydra-headed monster of an enigma that needs further probing to get to the root-causes of the military intervention.
Unfortunately, there is visible kind of psychotic addiction to cliches and speculations that do not provide any depth of knowledge of what has happened. The social media and blogosphere in general are full of these cliches and speculations.
The numerous questions are asked or raised in this article in order to provide a pathway to drill to the depth of this sudden geopolitical crisis in West Africa – very much unlike what has happened in the past. This also shows clearly that the stakes are extremely high in this military intervention in Niger Republic of which access to some confidential documents relating to the crisis can shed light upon.
However, what is certain is that this development has been tragically allowed to spin out of control of everybody essentially because of the jingoist recklessness with which the development was greeted in the first place.
Diplomatic caution and finesse were thrown overboard with impunity because of the unjustified confidence that the ECOWAS leaders think they (of course not without the backing of the Western powers) have to bully the khaki boys in Niamey out of the way and restore the old regime headed by President Mohammad Bazzoum.
The confidence was clearly unjustified because ECOWAS leaders failed to assess the internal dynamics and balance of forces within Niger Republic. They failed to assess that the khaki boys have unexpectedly garnered public support for their intervention and the Nigerien public is ready to stand by or behind the new military leaders. They failed to assess the increasing sullen anger against Western powers in Niger and even in their own individual countries.
For instance despite the heavy presence of these Western powers in Niger Republic, their presence has been of no essential benefit to Niger as Niger still remain one of the poorest countries in the world despite the abundant riches of solid and liquid mineral resources in that country.
It is noteworthy that another instance is the gross inability of both the American and French troops stationed in Niger Republic to achieve the purpose of defending the Nigerien State against the attacks of the Islamic jihadists for the past years. The jihadists have not been crushed even with the heavy presence of the well-trained American and French soldiers. It was the same pretext that the French canvassed for their presence in Mali until they were finally and justifiably kicked out of Mali and replaced with Russian Wagner Private Military Company soldiers who, unfortunately, are as worse as the French soldiers they replaced, if not worst.
This unjustified confidence led to further several miscalculations.
Of all the corpus of these miscalculations is the threat to attack Niger Republic if the khaki boys there do not step down immediately within the period of seven-day ultimatum given to them. That is a huge joke!
Condemnations, imposition of punitive sanctions and cutting off diplomatic relations with Niamey would have been enough and may have gone a long way to demoralize and even undermine the new military junta. But to now cap it with the threat to attack and use force of arms to chase out the khaki boys and restore the old regime is clearly the domino that upset and topple all other chips on the strategic board. It is a trigger to escalate the stakes most probable beyond what they can handle as subsequent events the expiration of the 7-day ultimatum have shown.
It is the icing on the cake! It immediately produce instinct of self-preservation and to fight back by the new military junta in Niamey. Nobody likes to be threatened physically. The military junta knows that if there is an attack, it may survive it. So the best option is to threaten to fight back by counter-attack to defend themselves.
One significant thing largely overlooked in this development was that the military intervention in Niger Republic is simply about regime change based or predicated on what the military junta said are increasing economic woes afflicting Niger, insecurities and massive corruption (which indeed are undeniably true) but not an ideological fight and/or proxy war between the military junta and its suspected external backers (such as Russia, etc) on the one hand and the Western powers on the other hand.
The military junta had even promised to respect all Nigerien international agreements and obligations; and as at the time of writing there has been no evidence of abrogation of any of these international agreements and obligations.
This is why an amicable mutual agreement is quite possible between the two warring parties – a sort of agreement that the new military junta could consider acceptable to Nigerien national interests at least for the time being – and not excluding the interests of other parties.
Again and again, that is why people like President Tinubu and his ECOWAS co-travellers are pitiable figures in international diplomatic circuit for lacking far-reaching strategic and diplomatic foresight and even finesse by rushing headlong into a cauldron that may consume them politically at the domestic level. They behave like rookies. They lack the requisite intellectual rigour and strength of an avant-garde Foreign Policy Establishment peopled by intellectual gladiators in the mold of Otto Metternich of Austro-Hungarian Empire, Henry Kissinger, Alexander Haig (a former American General and Supreme Allied Commander of NATO), George Shultz (former Chairman of Bechtel Corporation – a global construction firm based in California, Andrei Gromyko, the former suave Soviet Foreign Minister for many years) and many others
President Tinubu has been his own Foreign Affairs Minister, his own spokesman, primus inter pares. This has not escaped the notice of vigilant analysts and they are shaking their heads in wonder how a President is the lead actor, the interlocutor, the salesman and spokesman in the same film production.
Wonders may indeed never end in Nigeria!
Recommendation
Sequel to my earlier recommendations as contained in my last article, I wish to further make the following recommendations.
1. In view of the complications that are becoming more evident, there is the urgent need for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to step back to review the entire strategic scenario, go beyond the current stance about the coup and look at the future as regards the larger implications of the intended invasion. It is not too late to do this at all.
Invasion of an independent sovereign country do not usually follow the pattern established for it in advance as there are often unforeseen complications arising from variables not hitherto thought of. Every invasion has its unintended consequences. The contemplated invasion of Niger Republic for the reasons canvassed so far would be the first of its type at least in the West African subregion. Niger Republic is not at a civil war requiring military intervention from external forces to separate the warring parties like in Sierra Leone and Liberia in the past. The planned invasion of Niger Republic is a declaration of war by a multinational force of ECOWAS, pure and simple.
Nigeria should not own the invasion in any manner whatsoever.
2. ECOWAS should, therefore, think through the far-reaching implications/consequences of its planned invasion of Niger Republic. Whatever the outcome of the contemplated invasion, ECOWAS would never remain the same again in the long terms. It may even break and scatter ECOWAS apart.
A gang-up invasion of Niger would alter the dominant structure of political consciousness prevailing in West Africa today. It would expose ECOWAS as a complete stooge of Western powers and would present a very powerful argument to the radical Left and push quite many a people into the waiting arms of rival powers like the Russians and the Chinese.
3. West Africa, and by extension the whole of Africa, must not be turned into a battle ground for the superpowers. Africa must protect its distinct and/unique identity and do everything possible to develop itself.