Tag: Burkina Faso

• By Tiko Okoye

The Nigeria-chaired ECOWAS Authority immediately slammed a number of punitive sanctions on Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger – just it had done in the case of Guinea – when elected officials were overthrown in military coups, and demanded that the coupists either restore the deposed political leaders back in office or crystallize a road map to restoring civilian rule within a “very short” period of time.

But the punitive measures adopted by ECOWAS seem to have escalated rather than reduced tensions. The leaders of the three countries rose from a meeting held in Mali’s capital Bamako, on January 28, to announce their withdrawal from the regional body. It may be recalled that French President Emmanuel Macron had notably boasted that “Without France, there’d be no Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger.”

The reasons for Mr Macron’s bragging rights are not shrouded in rocket science. All the foreign exchange earnings belonging to Francophone nations are statutorily held by the French Central Bank and majorly used to ‘manage’ the Francophone Franc (CFA) Monetary System at a high cost. The French apex bank still deducts hefty charges for the ‘colonial work’ France performed in the past in those enclaves. It’d be very interesting to see how the three nations cut off their umbilical cords and circumvent the daunting obstacles bound to confront them.

Still, the snowballing conflict is happening right in the heartland of ECOWAS and not thousands of kilometres away in France or America. An African proverb avers that no man in his right senses would ever think of using a sledgehammer to smash a tsetse fly perched on his scrotum due to the predictable consequences. ECOWAS must consider that the affected three nations have already called Macron’s bluff by ordering all French troops and diplomats to vacate their territories. A Yoruba proverb posits that if someone claiming to be a ‘Good Samaritan’ cannot improve one’s position then the least that’s expected of him is not to worsen it.

The leaders of the three countries lament that terrorists increasingly continue to hold their territories in a vice-like grip whereas the ostensible reason for the establishment of well-fortified French military bases was to protect their national institutions and the civilian populations. They also accuse France of wilfully leveraging on the asymmetrical balance of power to rob them by paying pittance for solid minerals extracted and exported overseas.

The point being made is that ECOWAS should handle the matter of the purported withdrawal of the three member-states with tact and caution. An Igbo adage avers that when discipling an errant child it is preferable to flog him with one hand and draw him close with the other to console him.

It’s true that the initial reactions of a majority of members of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) were marked by rasping and indignant speeches. But a more closer interrogation would readily reveal that they were no more than knee-jerk responses attributable to self-preservation and optics to playing to the gallery because truth be told, there are more sinners than saints among ECOWAS heads of government as concerning democratic mores. And isn’t it a trite saying that there should be honour even among thieves? 

Let’s not delude ourselves into thinking that their withdrawal has no serious political, economic, social and security implications for the entire West African sub-region. Prior to succumbing to the temptation of replacing whips with scorpions as the more appropriate way to browbeat the three ‘mutinous’ states into submission, the ECOWAS Authority must be mindful that this ‘Rehoboam solution’ regrettably ended up splitting the kingdom of Israel into two.

When it comes to ECOWAS membership, more is better than less; which explains why the Authority must tread very cautiously. Besides, it’s very much in Nigeria’s interest not to be stampeded by external forces to toe a hard line, as shortfalls in member-contributions are most likely to be picked up by Nigeria as “Big Brother” – a very tasking proposition in these dire financial times.  

Come to think of it, the three countries are speaking about pan-Africanism while moving into Russia’s orbit. They rue the rising incidences of insecurity and terrorism while pan-handling to the foreign Wagner mercenary group. These embedded contradictions apart, can three really work the magic that 15 allegedly couldn’t satisfactorily perform?

In all good conscience there’s no way one can take in what has recently happened in some West African nations without having a strong sense of deja vu. Between the 1960s and 1980s, Africa was the hotbed of serial military coups. And after what now seems to be an interregnum, military coups seem to be experiencing a resurgence. The pattern remains the same. A band of military officers capitalize on ongoing economic downturn to announce the toppling of elected political office holders. The run-of-the-mill justification is an inability by the deposed leaders to curb corruption and improve the welfare and security of the citizenry.

Hordes of jubilating people take to the streets to welcome the coupists with great enthusiasm and excitement. The first action the new rulers take – in addition to closing the international borders and airspace – is to immediately suspend the constitution. They next abrogate the mandate of the national and state legislatures to make laws, while simultaneously ousting the jurisdiction of the judiciary in most instances by the enactment of decrees.

And much sooner than later, these folks realize to their chagrin that the same challenges that ostensibly justified a violent regime change have even gotten worse but are powerless against men with heavy military armament. Greed and lust for power begin to drive a domino effect as military officers shove their colleagues out of power in a spaced out pattern reflecting an awa lo kan syndrome (“It’s our turn to chop”).

Folks soon discover that their freedom of speech has been taken away and they can no longer criticize those in power and get away with it as they did under a democratic dispensation. All those folks who spontaneously trooped out on the streets to initially welcome the coupists with wide open arms soon realise they have boarded a “one chance bus” as the nation undergoes a prolonged period of arrested development.

Read Also: Tinubu working for a better nation, will fix present challenges – Rep. Ogbara

In most cases, the street protests are even engineered and sponsored by politicians who lost elections as a way of cozying up to the coupists. These are folks who would rather rule in hell than serve in heaven and the best thing would be for God to grant them their wish and dispatch them to hell! If they had wanted to be taken seriously, they should have demanded for the recolonisation of Nigeria by Britain or for the country to be administered under a special UN Protectorate Mandate! 

Still, all politics is local. It is the man who wears the shoe who knows where it pinches most. Although it’d have helped a lot if officials of the three countries toned down their insulting rhetoric and assumed a genuinely reconciliatory tone, President Bola shouldn’t allow himself to be stung by the grotesque disrespect of his antecedents, the high office he occupies and the great nation he presides over.

Niger, in particular, and Nigeria have very strong neighbourly and fraternity ties. There’s an ages-old history of cross-border marriages and commercial activities between both nations. What becomes, for instance, of the billions of naira we invested in constructing a standard-gauge railway line to Niger?

The ECOWAS can certainly seize the day and obtain the same results with minimal collateral damage by taking the Na softly-softly dey catch monkey catchphrase to heart. ECOWAS heads of government ought to be more rightly worried about how to avoid the paradox of despotic military rule offering their hard-pressed compatriots a better situation than does civilian and democratic government from becoming a reality. ECOWAS member-countries must get their act together in terms of providing effective governance and promoting democratic ideals.

It was expected that the introduction of a peer-review mechanism would remove the limitations placed by a non-interference policy so why does the body still fail to speak out when elected officials flout their national constitutions and rule their countries like their private estates? Why doesn’t the ECOWAS Authority publicly call out a head of government subverting constitutional provisions and/or the electoral process to enable him sit tight in office for years unending?

However imperfect, however frustrating and however slow, “We the People” ought to still have the greatest check on political power through people power – their vote – in a functioning democracy. It’s the failure of power-intoxicated African leaders to honour the most fundamental check on executive power enshrined in the constitution – the recognition of credible election results – that increasingly gives democracy a sour and bitter taste, turning off many young voters and fostering violent protests – rather than ballot boxes – as a necessary and sufficient means to effect regime change. Or is it only when soldiers successfully execute a coup that an unpardonable crime is committed against democracy?   

Editing guidelines

l               Para 13: awa lo kan (itals)

l               Para 18: Na softly-softly dey catch monkey (itals)