West African Crisis

[bilaps]

The difference between the Russian government and the non-governmental extremists loyal to it is like the difference between a Sicilian mafia boss posing as a quiet honest businessman, and his soldatos.

How did you miss whole Prigozin coup thing?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Africa's problems are deep-rooted and multi-faceted, I don't think we can necessarily call this coup clearly good or bad simply from the process it followed.

Yes we can and should call it bad specifically *for* the process it followed!

Not only are African state institutions weak compared to other parts of the world (military or otherwise), but there's a long track record of Africans getting failed by all sorts of governments.

This does not, under any circumstances, justify a military coup d’etat of a democratically elected leader.

Sorry, but reality does not provide justification for blanket application of your ideological theories everywhere in the world.
If this is the selfish coup of the sort Zinneke mentioned, it is indeed likely to be net bad for the country, but the situation is really quite unsettled and in ways you are blinding yourself to. Additionally, as someone noted (was it him? someone else? not sure) the State Department has been silent on the coup, while the Russians at least pretending to be critical of it...I think we can unambiguously call this coup anti-France, but going further is dubious.

[Devout Centrist]

Sorry, but reality does not provide justification for blanket application of your ideological theories everywhere in the world.

What ideological theory? I think coups against democratically elected governments are bad out of principle. Please tell me exactly what you mean by ideological theory here. Don’t beat around the bush.

If this is the selfish coup of the sort Zinneke mentioned, it is indeed likely to be net bad for the country, but the situation is really quite unsettled and in ways you are blinding yourself to.

Unsettled is it now? Well why don’t you share your insights with us and discuss, precisely, how the unsettled situation in Niger justifies a military coup d’etat?

Additionally, as someone noted (was it him? someone else? not sure) the State Department has been silent on the coup, while the Russians at least pretending to be critical of it...I think we can unambiguously call this coup anti-France, but going further is dubious.

I do not care what the State Department has or hasn’t said. I don’t care what the Kremlin has or hasn’t said. I *have* said I oppose coups against democratically elected governments.

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

The difference between the Russian government and the non-governmental extremists loyal to it is like the difference between a Sicilian mafia boss posing as a quiet honest businessman, and his soldatos.

How did you miss whole Prigozin coup thing?

Lol. You seem to know no more about Wagner's "mutiny" than I do about quantum physics.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

There's nothing like the freezing cold takes of the "foreign policy left" to drive home just how bad at distinguishing between moral principles and deductive applications of those principles many people are. Powers like the US and France have generally been malign actors in West Africa because of things that they have done that are bad; "being a malign actor in West Africa" is not "that which powers like the US and France do," since actors in West Africa that are not those powers might, and do, also do bad things. Somehow the difference escapes countless people.

I agree strongly about what you said for most of this post, not really fully sure what I think about the start of it.
More generally, dividing the world into neat, easy good vs bad categories on basis of type is simplistic thinking, and pushed far enough, it turns into zealotry.
Africa deserves to be better developed and more able to defend its own interests from the outside world, it will need many material things to get there (given that institutions are weaker than their counterparts are elsewhere), and, to the blunt, small-d democracy is not one of those necessary things...otherwise, modern South Korea would still be poor.

[AAPSO]

I'm sure Nigeriens are extremely concerned by how many Reddit Freedom Points™ some Western think tank awards their country.

It will never not amaze me how the people who make such a big fuss over "democracy" simultaneously have no issue with the violent subjugation of the majority of humanity.

[Jerseyan]

Perhaps I'm ignorant, but I haven't read anything that leads me to belive Nigeria's Senate has the power to prevent military intervention. It seemed more of a symbolic show of support that the Nigerian senators promptly smacked down.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Sorry, but reality does not provide justification for blanket application of your ideological theories everywhere in the world.

What ideological theory? I think coups against democratically elected governments are bad out of principle. Please tell me exactly what you mean by ideological theory here. Don’t beat around the bush.

If this is the selfish coup of the sort Zinneke mentioned, it is indeed likely to be net bad for the country, but the situation is really quite unsettled and in ways you are blinding yourself to.

Unsettled is it now? Well why don’t you share your insights with us and discuss, precisely, how the unsettled situation in Niger justifies a military coup d’etat?

Additionally, as someone noted (was it him? someone else? not sure) the State Department has been silent on the coup, while the Russians at least pretending to be critical of it...I think we can unambiguously call this coup anti-France, but going further is dubious.

I do not care what the State Department has or hasn’t said. I don’t care what the Kremlin has or hasn’t said. I *have* said I oppose coups against democratically elected governments.

Specifically I was talking about the idea of military coups always being terrible, yes. I do NOT think the coup d'etat was clearly justified, I am in fact criticizing (most) strands of that school of thought with the same brush I am criticizing (most) strands of the school of thought that claim the coup is unjustified. Me six years ago would have probably agreed with you, incidentally; I just don't think such things fit as uniform rules anymore (though I would be among the people most vehemently opposed to Trumpist military elements coup in the US). I care more about needs being done than who does such needs; there's also a deep personal factor at play that gets ignored, improperly in my view. What does the person in power actually think is important, and what things in his power can he be expected to undertake? Perhaps I'm being too harsh on the governments of Africa, people rely on them perhaps less than they do here. (They have not gotten used to our first world problems...)

Fair enough on that last point, the reason I brought it up is that the opposition to it on this forum is rooted partially on those grounds, and fear of Wagner-led destabilization.

I am aware of the unkind instant pigeonholing of me as somehow someone who loves this coup. I don't, I never did, my stance always has been "don't know for sure" and while I lean towards it being bad, it is better described as "unhelpful". You really think someone has the "main evil stance" (as your brain sees it) the moment they express opposition to some of your priors? That problem rests with you, not with me.

[Sol]

I'm glad to see TimTurner outright admitting that he has contempt for democracy. What a philosopher king!

[Red Velvet]

I'm sure Nigeriens are extremely concerned by how many Reddit Freedom Points™ some Western think tank awards their country.

It will never not amaze me how the people who make such a big fuss over "democracy" simultaneously have no issue with the violent subjugation of the majority of humanity.

Nothing surprises me from liberals nowadays, regardless if they identify as left or right. They only really have theoretical concepts and speeches to validate their politics because they simply have zero to offer to people’s concrete needs and real life practical issues.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I'm glad to see TimTurner outright admitting that he has contempt for democracy. What a philosopher king!

1. This thread is not about me, it's about the crisis in West Africa.
2. I am not a universalist anymore and I reject as total tosh the idea that you have to believe something should be applied everywhere to believe in it as an idea in and of itself for one's country. That does not mean I am not supportive of our ballot-box-elections system here in America, I am, I think it is the best of multiple flawed and partially imperfect systems we could ask for. If anything, I have less qualms with getting ruthless in protecting it than anyone else here. The fact is that what flies in West Africa does not fly in America and Western Europe and that will remain such as long as we have enough of a collective stake in maintaining a stable political system. Neither you nor I would like to see the state of an America in which people have gotten desperate enough that our body politik would want or could tolerate something else...in this I'm probably very much in line with the types of people (say, the bureaucrats) who have helped sustain the American state throughout the ages, the people you might have more contempt for than I have ever had.
3. This thread is not about me, it's about the crisis in West Africa, so this is the last that should be spoken of along these specific lines of argumentation. There's facets to what's going on that are more deserving of discussion, such as America possibly using these people to undercut France's sphere of influence, and further ramifications this coup has elsewhere. Maybe the merits of them being "democratic" (however defined) or not fall under this (this is a military coup, after all) but that's something of a sideshow.
P.S. Stop treating democracy like a religion, for your own sake...that mysticalizes it and makes it harder to preserve it, let alone understand the world.

[lfromnj]

So it seems like the Nigerian senate has ruled out military intervention. Pretty humiliating for Tinubu. A diplomatic solution obviously won't work (we literally have three recent examples in the same region to know that it won't) which means that ECOWAS will now have four suspended member-states (Mali, Burkina Faso, Guinea and Niger). Four members is probably enough to create a "coup d'état" union between themselves lol. Poor ECOWAS, that organization is pretty much useless at this point.

This is over unless France decides to intervene.

Hopefully it won't come to that. My housemate, an IR person, suggested the generals may be willing to talk concessions or power-sharing at some point given that they haven't killed or exiled Bazoum.

France bribes the generals directly and offers them exile in peace?

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

Fair enough on that last point, the reason I brought it up is that the opposition to it on this forum is rooted partially on those grounds, and fear of Wagner-led destabilization.

Oh, sure. An invasion by a terrorist organization financed and run by Kremlin is nothing to worry about. And nothing pleases Africans more than white Nazi skinheads like Utkin or Prigozhin. This is a big victory for the left.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Fair enough on that last point, the reason I brought it up is that the opposition to it on this forum is rooted partially on those grounds, and fear of Wagner-led destabilization.

O, sure. An invasion by a terrorist organization financed and run by Kremlin is nothing to worry about. And nothing pleases Africans more than white Nazi skinheads like Utkin or Prigozhin. This is a big victory for the left.

Never said the coup was nothing to worry about, rather it is something to worry about in a measured way. There is a wide range of possibilities with how things unfold in the long run and this coup is hardly the end of the world; Africa and its collective will is not so weak that it's just going to fall into Wagner and Russia's lap and accept any kind of treatment. If there's anything to worry about, it is what this might portend; the "New Scramble for Africa" ending in Africans being unable to take advantage of the fact that the global economies likely will need African resources more than ever and will get those resources no matter what ordinary Africans feel, or, worse, ending up in a worse place because of said need.

Reminder that every time this has happened before, what is good for Africa has been strongly subordinated...there is the days of the African slave trade with the Americas (in which its elite sold its people off to Europe to fight wars among themselves) and the late 1800s too (driven first and foremost by growing European industrial economies). We are perhaps even likely to get a repeat.

Africa does have agency, but it needs to overcome tribalism and figure out for itself what it wants if it is to use it.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I'm sure Nigeriens are extremely concerned by how many Reddit Freedom Points™ some Western think tank awards their country.

It will never not amaze me how the people who make such a big fuss over "democracy" simultaneously have no issue with the violent subjugation of the majority of humanity.

Nothing surprises me from liberals nowadays, regardless if they identify as left or right. They only really have theoretical concepts and speeches to validate their politics because they simply have zero to offer to people’s concrete needs and real life practical issues.

What are the generals offering Nigeriens' concrete needs that the Bazoum administration wasn't? Be specific.

[Red Velvet]

I'm sure Nigeriens are extremely concerned by how many Reddit Freedom Points™ some Western think tank awards their country.

It will never not amaze me how the people who make such a big fuss over "democracy" simultaneously have no issue with the violent subjugation of the majority of humanity.

Nothing surprises me from liberals nowadays, regardless if they identify as left or right. They only really have theoretical concepts and speeches to validate their politics because they simply have zero to offer to people’s concrete needs and real life practical issues.

What are the generals offering Nigeriens' concrete needs that the Bazoum administration wasn't? Be specific.

You’re missing the point. First that I didn’t see anyone in this thread saying the coup was necessarily a “good” thing, but that the situation has always been bad and exploitative by multiple parts and people don’t care about it or they treat it as normal.

So this coup in Niger happens and people are all suddenly super invested in Niger “democracy”?? Give me a break, if the protesters weren’t using Russian flag symbolism, we all know that people here would give it the same treatment the regular African coup is always given. At minimum, this thread would get 50% less posts, maybe even more!

But because the connotation is that OMG RUSSIA is winning some influence somewhere, national tribalism from westerners and people who believe they’re westerners makes them perform as if what really concerns them were Nigerien democracy. Yeah okay lol

It’s like “democracy” / “freedom” is always used as an excuse to justify interventions somewhere and it’s always shocking how selfless westerners always are fighting for others rights without any self-interests of their own while still mostly making peoples lives worse abroad on the balance.

Same way stuff like Euromaiden is treated as a “good revolution”, this is automatically treated like a “bad coup” exactly ONLY because of whose side the government is siding with.

“Democracy” is something that doesn’t belong to countries, but to people. And it’s up to them to fight and assure it, it’s not something that can be IMPOSED to anyone like I see some people constantly acting over and over again.

If the coup is indeed bad, it’s not up to me, you or anyone to do something about it. It’s Nigeriens who need to take that stand if the coup is indeed bad. Like, this sounds obvious to me.

This idea that it’s up to you to dictate every place system of government reeks of liberalism false complex of superiority and a performance that only convinces some because people saying this have convinced themselves that after years of propaganda.

Cuba isn’t a democracy either, does that mean the Cuban revolution was a catastrophe for the country? Not really, if anything the results are clearly mixed in my view, with both good and bad consequences coming out of it.

But it’s always funny to me how “Liberal Leftists” are quick to immediately dismiss the complexities of these geopolitical matters and simplify it all as Democracies = Good Guys; Non-Democracies = Evil Villains. You can always cut the “leftist” and keep just the “liberal” with them.

I won’t pretend Niger was in a wonderful ideal situation while as a “democracy”, so is it really up to me to decide whether the government change is good or bad? I honestly don’t feel like it’s in my place to say, neither do I believe things are as linear and simplistic like a Marvel movie as most people here act like.

Only time and people in Niger will be able to really tell.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

It's awfully rich of you to insist that the other people in this thread are unconcerned with the material situation when you're the one ignoring the ample evidence that the Nigerien people do not want this and instead philosophizing about whether there's really any first-principles moral difference between democracy and military dictatorship. It's especially curious to see this from a Brazilian leftist of all nationalities and political leanings. I'm not going to accept the idea that it's morally neutral for a cadre of generals to overthrow an elected President (an elected socialist President, no less) no matter how many times you throw around the phrase "Marvel movie" or use "liberal" as a contentless snarl term. I'm also not going to accept the idea that the Cuban Revolution is a reasonable point of comparison here, unless it's a joke that you were trying to make that didn't land. Do you think Batista somehow had better democratic credentials than Castro?

I absolutely think it's an indictment of Western reporting on Africa (such as it is) that most of us, myself included, were unfamiliar with Niger and its politics before this started, but I've appreciated the opportunity to read up on the country and the region and come to my own conclusions about what is happening there. I hope you're genuinely not aware of how hypocritical and insulting it is of you to refuse to accept that I and others are actually thinking about this in a meaningful way rather than defaulting to the positions that our own world-historically turboevil countries have programmed into us or something. The alternative to you not be aware of that is far, far worse.

[Anti-Trump Truth Socialite JD Vance Enjoying Juror]

It really is impressive the shear amount of nothing that Red Velvet says every time he comments on international politics. It's not even reminiscent of Chat GPT, moreso a Markov chain bot from about 15 years ago.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Lots of people, liberals included, have concern for what is happening in Niger. The (maybe minor, maybe major, YMMV) problem is that a lot of it is coming from a myopic place and is filtered through a lense that misleads at least as much as it misinforms. As Torie said in another thread, "Awareness of ignorance is the first step to knowledge." There's a ton we don't know, especially given just how far Niger is from us. Are any of us flies on the wall of the Nigerien presidential palace? Are any of us a bureaucrat in Washington or Paris who has talked to these people? How much of us have really dissected the record of the previous President?

There's a certain wisdom in the "oh, it's just another coup in Africa" reaction that something like this creates from ordinary people in America. And it's rather respectful really, it's intellectually honest, and it's respectful of their autonomy...the idea it is our job to tell Niger if it has a military government or not, like that's a question for us to decide, is questionable. It's not even an exceptional thing, this is nothing new. Africa has to rely on itself in part and it rests in a bed of its own construction, whether it be roses or thorns. Where we have common interests though, we may deal with them as it suits American interests, and in general Africa, to the extent it has organized itself, is owed help as per part of our coalition and possible allies and partners, and its people are owed humanitarian assistance either way. Biden has done what he can in calling for the president and his family to be freed. And he has done decent things like reaching out to the African Union.

People may adopt different coats of paint than us. Welcome to the diverse world. Governments of all stripes have to work with each other. Chauvinism is easy to maintain when you focus on the perceived flaws of other places instead of pouring that energy into improving your own country. Is humility too much to ask for?

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

Today, humility to Russian flags in Africa is the same thing as humility to flags of the Third Reich in Africa in the early forties.

[Battista Minola 1616]

It's especially curious to see this from a Brazilian leftist of all nationalities and political leanings. I'm not going to accept the idea that it's morally neutral for a cadre of generals to overthrow an elected President (an elected socialist President, no less) no matter how many times you throw around the phrase "Marvel movie" or use "liberal" as a contentless snarl term.

But it’s always funny to me how “Liberal Leftists” are quick to immediately dismiss the complexities of these geopolitical matters (Goulart took the side of Cuba and opposed the embargo, he dealt with the Soviet Bloc while limiting opportunities for US-sponsored development) and simplify it all as Democracies = Good Guys; Non-Democracies = Evil Villains. You can always cut the “liberal” and keep just the “leftist” with them.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Today, humility to Russian flags in Africa is the same thing as humility to flags of the Third Reich in Africa in the early forties.

If Wagner really is as singularly comparable to the Third Reich as you claim, then they will get kicked out. Probably.
Wagner, unlike what it would want you, me, and the wider world to believe, is not the most important moving part here. The most important moving part is probably the mechanisms for African governmental cooperation, as the region becomes more contested and France is increasingly crowded out over time. If they go, the consequences could be pretty far-reaching and the area truly becomes a free-for-all.

Of course, this being defused would probably be better for the generals (less risky) and definitely better for France (easier to handle the situation). And the long-term trends I mentioned continue to present themselves. Africa has never stopped mainly being a source of minerals (and other extractive products) for the world economy. The more Africa is able to move as one unit (generally speaking), the better of a deal it'll get from the wider world for this role, and the more able to diversify and become something else. Beyond coats of paint and propaganda (from France, Russia, etc.), economics matters, quite a lot in fact...if there is any single reason the coup might be reasonably seen as bad, it would be that it destabilizes the wider region and makes it harder for the region to work together on that, at least a bit.

It's also worth pondering African civil society as well in all of this. Africa has incredible amounts of young talent, if youth demand change in these societies, it might well happen (provided they work for it).

EDIT: the point isn't that ECOWAS is particularly useful, it isn't. It's that if it falls apart, then that's another sign of fragmentation.

[Sweet kiss of liquid modernity]

https://twitter.com/VivianKesandre/status/1688030825114165251?t=C7zqcFBqtAo9_p1I...

[Hindsight was 2020]

For all the condemnation Red Velvet and others here throw at liberals here for only caring about this crisis due to the Russian part, they themselves have shown a far greater ignorance of the topic. Just doing basic research into the issue shows that there is nothing about Bazoum presidency that comes off problematic (unless you find trying to improve women’s education access and increasing the fight against ISIS to be bad) and that the reason for this coup was Bazoum was planning on firing the head of this coup Gen. Tchiani. These coup plotters are just running the Idi Amin playbook of playing up anti-Western imperialism rhetoric and platitudes to dress up a self serving power grab.

[Red Velvet]

It's awfully rich of you to insist that the other people in this thread are unconcerned with the material situation when you're the one ignoring the ample evidence that the Nigerien people do not want this and instead philosophizing about whether there's really any first-principles moral difference between democracy and military dictatorship. It's especially curious to see this from a Brazilian leftist of all nationalities and political leanings.

Not sure why? If I can position myself in favor or against Brazilian military coup supported by US in 1964 is necessarily because I AM Brazilian and I am close to the issue and I know that the Republic of 45 period, however unstable and polarized, was much better for the country than the Military Dictatorship that followed it.

I am not going to pretend that I am a Niger PhD specialist like people suddenly have all become so yeah, I can be morally neutral! Especially on something that is unlikely to get explored by the media beyond the surface for an expanded knowledge.

What I see from Niger is some people who are against it and some who support it. But we don’t even know their perspectives because western media doesn’t really a damn about them, look at how the coverage AND discussion of this is all circled around how some Nigeriens were using Russian flags.

What are “revolutions” other than coups that people approve of because they consider them morally good or valid? Wasn’t Euromaidan a good revolution because people liked Ukrainians sticking up to their “oppressors” in Russia? So why Africans sticking up to their “oppresors” in France that much more morally unacceptable? Because France is democracy and Russia is not it somehow changes the way you’re exploited?

There’s an instinct of self-survival and tribalism in this that I totally understand and think it’s 100% valid, but it’s hindered by the hypocrisy of the false narrative of wanting to “spread democracy” everywhere in the world - which only substituted the “Capitalism is better than Communism” one as the propaganda instrument to validate Western superiority and intervention/control over other places in a way that looks nice in history books.

In fact, it’s exactly because I am Brazilian Leftist that I understand that me or my country will NEVER be included in the same “global club” you are, which puts our interests in conflict. And that’s okay?

For example, you suggest the interest in Niger events is mostly driven by a real concern about Nigerien democracy more than it is about a symbolic “win” for Russia. Okay then. If there’s really so much unanimous support for democracy from the government and the people nowadays (good thing!), then why don’t they publically apologize to Brazil for 1964? Or all the other coups or invasions on democratic nations - since you still want to believe it’s all justified as long as the nation is not a democracy - they supported throughout history?

You see, I don’t hate US or the West like you apparently believe that I do, what I just HATE is that it’s impossible to have a direct conversation with you guys because you’re exactly just like the Russians to me in the sense you really fully absorb the propaganda that is fed to you, about being heroes who are supposed to spread and ensure democracy all around the world.

I believe democracy isn’t something anyone outside is responsible for other than citizens of their own country. Whether a change of system is a “coup” or a “revolution” is something only internal dynamics and the people’s own fight will dictate. People outside can obviously have their opinions but the FIGHT itself can only be done by people inside because they’re the ones who will have to sustain and protect that system.

But if anyone points it out they either are called anti-democratic (for not believing that foreign interventionism for the the sake of democracy effectively works in practice, neither it’s desirable) or there’s some speech about hating Americans which puts them as victims or something.

I feel like this debate we’re having is a constant since the 90s, where this interventionism is used harshly and always with the presented narrative of taking down the anti-democratic leader and to implement democracy. How much of it has really worked so far in practice, at least in the terms of the publicly presented goal? Societies need a specific social and cultural backing to sustain democracy, you can’t just go there and put one. It’s just robotic to believe otherwise.

Of course, you should never do stuff to interfere on ENDING democracies that aren’t convenient for you when they don’t align with your interests either. That’s what being a true democrat means.

I just don’t understand why there’s always high concern about the moral theatrics by all places when people would behave in the same exact way if you presented them with the realpolitik argument over the “moral” one. It would be so refreshing and easier to respect if people just got directly to the point.

In the end of the day, people in their everyday lives want better conditions of living and that matters much more to them than who their government is. If the new one can present that and fulfill people’s demands, that’s what will validate it as a “revolution”. If the government flops, that’s what will validate it as a “coup” internally. And I simply don’t have the tarot cards to say or predict what will happen, neither I have access to listen enough Nigeriens from all kinds as a whole to form an opinion other than one of neutrality on this.