The Context of the Niger Coup

Coups in Africa are by some estimates far from unusual. There have been many in recent years and while often mentioned, the news coverage in the West is minimal. Africa does not generate a great deal of interest to Western audiences and for many it's impossibly complicated and they are unable to follow the stories or contextualize them.

But the 2023 coup in Niger seems to be different. There's a surprising amount of focus on the Western Africa nation and its recent takeover by a military junta. And why is that? There is a story, and once again the Establishment media's failure to contextualize this story – is a story in itself and reveals the nature and role the media plays.

And what is the context?

First and foremost, Niger is a major source of uranium – some will remember its name appearing in the news cycle in connection with the Bush administration's 2002-2003 claims regarding 'yellowcake' and the accusation that Saddam Hussein had acquired it in order to pursue his programme of WMD or weapons of mass destruction. The story used in part to justify the 2003 invasion was false and yet the Niger story took on a life of its own and resulted in the Valerie Plame scandal – a nasty little tale of cover-ups and even revenge.

Aside from this key resource which Western powers would like to manage and control, both France and the United States have made major military investments in Niger and the country hosts bases with thousands of troops and a great deal of hardware. Officially the US has about 1000 troops there but as I have previously explained these figures are often misleading and the true number is certainly much higher. Indeed, the nation is abuzz with Western activity as some have testified. The place is crawling with Western officials, business figures, and military. Niger was selected by Washington for its strategic importance, its central location and the fact that neighbouring Nigeria (though far wealthier and regionally influential) continues to be unstable and thus unsuitable for its purposes. The US placed its military in Niger, arguing that it serves as a base to fight against Islamist groups such as Boko Haram and ISIS in both Nigeria and the larger region. As such the focus of the Agadez base is for drones, Special Forces, and a hub for training regional militaries.  This is all part of a larger series of wars and operations in Africa that have been in effect since 2001 – most of which remain unknown and virtually hidden from the US public. Placed under the aegis of the 'War on Terror' the wars represent a scramble for geopolitical control and the management of a resource-rich but unstable continent that is increasingly a tinder box.

So despite the claims of battling Islamism, it's much bigger than that – as is the basis for the US occupation of Eastern Syria. In that situation there's an anti-ISIS military mission that is pursued to a point but the real reasons for the military presence is geostrategic and as much about resources as anything else. The US has invested a great deal in Niger – and this must also be considered (at least in part) as a component of Washington's longstanding rivalry and contest with France. They are allies on one level but rivals on another and both work together and simultaneously seek to circumvent and undermine each other. In other words American interests, even Western interests are multi-faceted and not always consistent.

France has suffered numerous setbacks in the region as the various coups – all somewhat murky in terms of their origin and support, have ousted their government and troops. In light of these losses, Niger has become that much more critical to Paris and its interests.

But all of this changed just a few weeks ago. The new regime is not friendly to the West and both Paris and Washington are highly resistant to the junta and seem unlikely to obey if they are asked to leave – which could lead to violence.

Most of this context is being ignored, downplayed, or spun by the mainstream media. The message the want to send is clear – Washington is not happy and beyond that it seems the media is straining to try and demonstrate some kind of Moscow connection or suggested Russian threat related to what is happening. This has also proven difficult because Russia has no direct role in these events, and so when pressed the media then focuses on the threat of Wagner – and when this is pressed and found wanting, the discussion shifts to Wagner's potential for harm should it turn up in country or be invited in by the junta. Since a lot of this is hypothetical and speculative, the coverage must be described as manipulative theatre and hype.

The media presents Russia's stance as universally supportive of the coup, but even this is misleading. Wagner's Prigozhin has expressed support, but the Putin government has condemned the coup, revealing once again some of the confusing divisions at work within the Russian military power structure and the obtuse nature of the Kremlin-Wagner dynamic. Of course one may grant that governments are not always sincere in their official proclamations. This is easy enough to believe when it comes to Moscow but it's no less true when it comes to Washington.

And then to add to the confusion, you have Ukrainian officials running about and trying to blame Moscow for everything. But I think it's clear to all parties that Kyiv's claims are simply not credible on this point and many others for that matter.

Undoubtedly the power centres in Washington are both angry and alarmed. The fact that Victoria Nuland was dispatched sent a strong message – her presence represents a viable threat to the regime as she is associated with stirring up trouble and strife, civil unrest, and revolution. She is like a virus or catalyst for the interests of the American Empire. Yes, in real life Darth Vader can appear as an overweight middle-aged woman. All joking aside she is an important figure representing the migration of the Neo-Conservative imperialists once associated with Bush into the Democratic fold. The fact that the junta rebuffed her will have not gone down well in Washington. The ante has been upped as it were.

In addition to the anti-Russia spin angle the media is pursuing, some have tried to tie the coup and its threat in with the larger bogus narrative concerning Western Liberalism and its opposition to a resurgent Authoritarianism represented by the likes of China, Russia and the anti-democratic juntas. These pro-Russian regimes appearing in Africa are viewed as part of this larger struggle – the new Cold War that is struggling to find a coherent and sustainable narrative. It is posited as the freedom-loving and rule-by-law Liberal regimes of the West standing against exploitative tyranny.

But if anyone knows how bogus these narratives are, it's the people of Africa. In addition to the long history of colonial, post-colonial, and neo-colonial manipulation and machinations, they also know that it is Western trained and allied troops that keep overthrowing governments throughout Africa. Either they are the tools of the West, or represent a failed and reckless policy as these officers are merely utilising the Western tools they have been equipped with and yet once in power, they are turning their backs on the West, or at least that's how it is perceived. It's unclear and I highly doubt every coup is the same – a point also applicable with it comes to the current situation with the Niger junta.

Further, for all the supposed 'security' these foreign militaries are meant to provide, the public perception is quite different. Many believe (with some reason) that Western troops are stirring strife and instability, and indirectly promoting recruitment for groups like Boko Haram and ISIS – and emboldening them. Others are just plain cynical and believe these troops aren't really there to eradicate these threats at all but rather to manage them and thus justify their continued presence – all part of a larger game. All of these arguments contain a degree of both credibility and even plausibility.

What is troubling and also a signal of how critical Niger is to Western interests is the developing ECOWAS angle. The West African economic bloc also functions as a military or 'peacekeeping' interest and is threatening to invade Niger and restore the former government. That's quite an expansion of its mandate and it seems that it is being supported by the West. Can you imagine how the West would respond if the SCO decided to militarily intervene in say, Central Asia?

In response, not only has the junta vowed to fight, it looks as if it may be supported by other regional juntas (such as Burkina Faso, Guinea, and Mali) that have risen to power on an anti-Western platform.

There is a real threat of a regional war should ECOWAS send in troops. And once that begins, it's hard to say what will or could happen as there are numerous regional players with claims and concerns of their own. There are many possible scenarios and all of them are terrible.

And once the actual fighting starts it will quickly turn into a proxy conflict as the US and France will certainly get involved in terms of support and at that point why wouldn't Moscow do the same?

In some capacity the strife is growing and may expand into a more overt proxy conflict between the unofficial interests and players with the SCO/BRICS bloc and that of the G7 – led by France and the United States who are both opposed to the coup but beyond that are not in harmony, a point that has to be re-emphasized in order to grasp the nuances of Western networks and relationships within Africa.

There are also (to be sure) anti-colonial elements motivating this junta and its public support. France is resented for its historical colonisation but also for the way in which Paris has continued to dominate the region in both economic and military terms. The Americans represent another type of exploitation that is increasingly not appreciated.

There are anti-liberal elements to the resistance in some of these places. Conservative cultures are not overly thrilled with Western hypocrisy with regard to the supposed 'rules based order' or its ideals which seem more and more to translate into expressions of decadence, feminism, sodomy, and other such values that represent degenerative forms of Classical Liberalism. Russia and China are looking more attractive all the time and the relationships are more transactional rather than pedagogical, let alone a kind of patron-supplicant type arrangement often promoted by the West when dealing with African nations. They're tired of being treated like disobedient and undisciplined children.

Perhaps the strangest part to this whole affair is the already alluded to military role. In many cases the US is training these forces and it has been reported that of the many recent coups in Africa – they have largely been conducted by US trained and armed troops.

So what is happening? Is this failed policy, a case of Pentagon Keystone Cops investing in their own opposition and undermining their own goals? Are these rogue elements? Or is it more complicated as in some cases the US is keen to supplant French interests and is willing to let things ride for a bit in order to see this goal come to fruition? It's hard to say and there is likely no single or simple answer.

But this reality has understandably fostered a great deal of African scepticism and even cynicism regarding relations with the West. Many of these states want to pursue a non-aligned policy but in the West such a course is perceived as being in functional alliance with Moscow and Beijing and thus met with hostility. The posture of the US drives these regimes into the arms of the SCO/BRICS bloc.

The next few weeks in Niger have the potential to be quite dramatic. It will all depend on what ECOWAS does or doesn't do and whether or not their actions generate a regional response.

One thing is certain – Western media cannot be trusted and at best will only tell part of the story, rooting its narrative in convenient facts and critical omissions. Though I mention it as a footnote to this story – there are millions of professing Christians who are caught in the middle of all this. And sadly there are more than a few who are keen to engage in the fighting which will only add another tragic layer to an already terrible situation.