Inside AES Countries: Military Rule or Transition to Civil Power? What is the Future of Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso?

By Raymond Enoch

The wave of military rule sweeping through West Africa is notably visible in the AES (Alliance of Sahel States) countries of Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso. What initially appeared as a temporary shift to military-led governance, positioned as a necessary corrective measure against perceived failures in civilian leadership, is becoming increasingly entrenched.

The question now arises: is this a long-term trend, or are these countries on the verge of transitioning back to civil rule? More critically, is the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) prepared to continue its interventionist stance, or is it heading towards a rethinking of its approach to these breakaway countries?

One of the most significant political developments in these countries has been the extension of military rule. In Niger, for instance, the National Conference recently approved a five-year extension of the military-led transition, allowing General Abdourahamane Tiani the possibility of running in elections at the end of that period. This scenario is similar to past practices in overthrowing civilian regimes where leaders extended their reign under the guise of “popular legitimacy” – a tactic once used to justify authoritarian rule. While the current military governments in the AES countries claim to prioritize national sovereignty, their political maneuvering often mirrors that of the very regimes they replaced.

In both Mali and Burkina Faso, the military has dissolved political parties, suspended constitutional provisions, and concentrated power within the hands of the military leadership. In Burkina Faso, President Ibrahim Traoré’s plans to extend his rule and hold a central position in future elections, underlines the persistent consolidation of military rule. The result is a political environment that increasingly resembles autocracy, with the military now firmly in control of the state machinery. This shift has left little room for opposition voices, further intensifying concerns about the future of democracy in the region.

Security remains a major justification for military rule in these countries, with governments arguing that they need the time and authority to defeat terrorist insurgencies. AES leaders frequently cite the instability wrought by groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS in the Sahel region as evidence of the necessity of their rule. However, the results on the ground are more complex. Despite claims of a unified regional force of 5,000 troops to combat insurgencies, terrorist attacks persist, particularly in rural and border areas.

The situation on the frontlines is dire. While some military leaders have seen success in pushing back insurgent groups in certain areas, the long-term security situation remains precarious. A worrying trend has emerged where senior military officers, who should be focused on combating terrorism, have shifted to lucrative ministerial positions, leaving rank-and-file soldiers to bear the brunt of the conflict. This suggests a lack of genuine commitment to long-term security reform and raises doubts about the ability of these regimes to address the structural causes of insecurity.

Beyond the security issues, the economic and social situations in Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso have taken a significant hit under military regimes. While these countries are rich in resources, the prolonged instability has severely disrupted trade, agriculture, and other vital sectors. Sanctions imposed by ECOWAS and other regional actors have exacerbated economic challenges, leading to inflation, unemployment, and rising poverty levels. In rural areas, where insurgent activity is most intense, people face severe hardships as basic services become scarce.

Socially, the concentration of power in the hands of the military has also led to repression of dissenting voices. The silencing of political opposition and civil society groups has stifled meaningful public discourse, making it difficult to form a coherent plan for national recovery.

The Military’s Grip on Power: Is There an Exit Strategy? Looking at the trajectory of military rule in these countries, it becomes evident that the military has little or no intention of relinquishing power anytime soon. The prolonged transitions, including the five-year extensions granted in Niger and Burkina Faso, suggest that the military leaders are preparing to entrench themselves further within the state’s power structures. In Mali, the junta has already demonstrated its willingness to marginalize opposition parties, and the recent actions in Niger point to a similar path. In all three countries, the military seems more focused on consolidating its own grip on power than addressing the broader issues facing the region, such as governance, economic development, and social cohesion.

ECOWAS and the Future of AES Countries.
ECOWAS, which has historically sought to restore civilian rule and prevent military coups, finds itself confronted with it’s rule in its dealings with AES countries. The regional body has imposed sanctions on these countries, demanding a return to civilian rule within a set timeframe. However, with the military’s persistent hold on power, it is unclear how effective these sanctions will be in influencing a change in governance. The question now is whether ECOWAS will continue to pursue a policy of pressure, or whether it will shift towards a more pragmatic approach that includes engaging with the military regimes to find a sustainable solution for the region.

Reform or Continuation of Military Rule? The AES countries of Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso face a complex and uncertain future. While the military regimes have justified their rule on the grounds of security and national sovereignty, their actions suggest a deeper focus on consolidating power rather than addressing the underlying problems facing the region. The question remains whether these regimes will allow for a genuine transition to civil rule, or whether they will follow the well-worn path of authoritarian rule.

The future of AES countries hinges on the ability of their leaders to break the cycle of power consolidation and prioritize national reform. Without meaningful political, social, and economic reforms, these nations risk remaining trapped in a cycle of instability and military dominance, with little prospect for democratic renewal. As the region watches, the international community, led by ECOWAS, must carefully navigate this precarious situation to ensure that the path forward is one that prioritizes peace, security, and democratic governance for the people of the Sahel.