A chorus of caution reverberates from northern Nigeria as prominent leaders voice concerns over potential plans to relocate US and French military bases from the Sahel to Nigeria.
In a letter addressed to President Bola Tinubu and the National Assembly, these leaders sound a clarion call, warning against the perils of embracing such proposals, citing inherent dangers and broader implications for the nation’s security and stability.
Signatories to the letter include eminent figures such as Abubakar Mohammed of the Centre for Democratic Development, Research and Training (CEDDERT); Kabiru Chafe, former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, from the Arewa Research and Development Project (ARDP); Attahiru Jega, former Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC); Jibrin Ibrahim of the Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD); Auwal Musa (Rafsanjani) of the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CCISLAC); and YZ Ya’u of the Centre for Information Technology and Development (CITAD).
“It is a common knowledge that the American and French governments have been desperately lobbying the governments of Nigeria, Benin, Togo, and Ghana to agree to sign new defense pacts that would enable them to redeploy their soldiers expelled from Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger,’’ the letter said partly.
‘‘Some of the troops have been redeployed to Chad but France and United States prefer countries of the Gulf of Guinea that are more strategically located to serve their interests in the central zone of the Sahel. Of the countries in the Gulf of Guinea, Nigeria turns out to be the most strategically located.’’
The signatories of the open letter said they believe strongly that the economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases are profound and far-reaching, citing the potential damage it will bring to the relationship between Nigeria and Niger Republic.
“Therefore, in this circumstance, Nigeria must be bold enough to reject the proposal, if for no other reason than to return a good turn. At least since independence Nigeria and Niger have maintained relatively cordial relations that have always helped in stabilizing the sub-region on several occasions. The two countries have come to the aid of one another during their moment of crises,’’ they said.
The backdrop to this cautionary letter lies in the strained relations between the Niger Republic and France following a military coup in the Sahel country. France, a key security ally, faced backlash after condemning the coup and demanding a restoration of constitutional order. In response, the junta demanded the exit of French military forces, echoing similar actions by neighboring Burkina Faso and Mali.
This geopolitical upheaval paved the way for Russia to deepen its engagement in the region, capitalizing on anti-Western sentiments and forging alliances with Niger’s military government.
Against this tumultuous backdrop, the letter from northern leaders underscores concerns over alleged lobbying by the US and French governments to secure new defense pacts with Nigeria and other regional countries. Citing Pentagon data, the leaders question the efficacy of Western military operations in combating terrorism in the Sahel, characterizing them as “quite unimpressive, if not a complete failure.”
Moreover, they raise alarms over the economic and environmental ramifications of hosting foreign military bases, cautioning against potential diversion of resources from critical sectors and exacerbation of poverty and environmental degradation.
Emphasizing the broader implications of such agreements, the leaders urge the government to prioritize Nigeria’s long-term peace and security over short-term strategic alignments. They noted the need for thorough consideration of the socio-economic and environmental consequences, as well as the potential strain on diplomatic relations with neighboring French countries.
Niger, France, the US and the new comer Russia – the fight for the heart of Sahel
In delving deeper into the complexities of the situation, it’s crucial to understand the fallout of the coup in Niger Republic and its ripple effects on regional dynamics, particularly with France and its Western allies. The July 26, 2023 military coup in Niger, which saw the ousting of President Mohamed Bazoum, triggered a series of events that reshaped the geopolitical landscape of the Sahel region.
France, a key player in the fight against terrorism in the Sahel, found itself at odds with the new junta in Niger. The coup was met with swift condemnation from France, which called for the restoration of constitutional order. However, the junta, emboldened by anti-Western sentiments in the Sahel, made the expulsion of French military forces a key demand. This demand mirrored actions taken by neighboring Burkina Faso and Mali, both former French colonies, following successful coups in those countries.
The expulsion of French forces from Niger marked a significant shift in regional security dynamics. France, which had maintained a strong military presence in Niger with over 1,500 troops, played a crucial role in the fight against jihadist groups linked to al-Qaeda and Islamic State. The sudden withdrawal of French forces created a security vacuum in the region, raising concerns about the resurgence of terrorist activities and the potential spread of instability across the Sahel.
Amidst these developments, Russia seized the opportunity to expand its influence in the Sahel region. Capitalizing on the anti-Western sentiment prevalent in Niger and other Sahelian countries, Russia embarked on a diplomatic and military charm offensive, offering military assistance and forging alliances with the new military government in Niger. This move further complicated the geopolitical situation, introducing new actors and rivalries into an already volatile region.
The repercussions of these geopolitical shifts were felt beyond the borders of Niger. The strained relations between France and Niger, coupled with the growing influence of Russia, prompted Western powers, including the United States, to reassess their military presence and engagement in the Sahel. The US, which had maintained a significant military presence in Niger with around 1,000 troops, faced mounting pressure to reconsider its military operations in the region.
In March, the Nigerien junta further escalated the tensions by revoking an accord with the US government, which allowed American troops to operate on two military bases in the country. The decision to revoke the agreement, coupled with the expulsion of French forces, signaled a seismic shift in the geopolitical ties of the Sahel, with far-reaching implications for regional security and stability.
The letter in full
“It is a common knowledge that the American and French governments have been desperately lobbying the governments of Nigeria, Benin, Togo, and Ghana to agree to sign new defense pacts that would enable them to redeploy their soldiers expelled from Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger. Some of the troops have been redeployed to Chad but France and the United States prefer countries of the Gulf of Guinea that are more strategically located to serve their interests in the central zone of the Sahel. Of the countries in the Gulf of Guinea, Nigeria turns out to be the most strategically located.
“There are indications that the Nigerian Government may be favorably disposed to the proposed defense pact. However, there is widespread apprehension that the signing of the pact by Nigeria would have wide-ranging implications for the defense and internal security of the country. On 22nd December 2023, the last of France’s 1,500 troops deployed in Niamey and two other bases in the tri-frontier of Niger were marched out of the country. On March 16th, 2024, Niger Republic suspended the military agreement with the United States signed in 2012, which allowed the US to station about 1100 US troops and civilian personnel permanently in Niger, to operate from two American bases in the country.
“American Airbase 101 is located in Niamey while Airbase 201 is located near the small northern city of Agadez, about 920 kilometers southwest of Niamey. These French and American bases were used by the French and the Americans to carry out manned and unmanned surveillance flights and other operations in the Sahel. The bases had become the focal points for Western intelligence and surveillance operations in West Africa. The American and French troops were expelled because their presence did not serve any useful purpose. Instead, they were using the defense pact to carry out surveillance operations in the region to serve their geopolitical strategic interests. As a result of this expulsion, the Gulf of Guinea countries especially Nigeria, are being pressured to compromise their sovereignty by harboring these foreign troops who would come to serve the interests of NATO to the detriment of the national interests and security of the countries of the Gulf of Guinea.
“Nigeria’s civil war experiences when France overtly supported the Biafran secessionists, and the ambivalence of the US should provide our leaders with food for thought. It is important to remember that Nigerians have consistently opposed defense agreements with foreign countries since the 1960s when the Balewa administration was forced to abrogate the Anglo-Nigerian Defense Agreement because the agreement contained a clause that allowed the Royal Air Force to overfly and test its aircraft in Nigeria. The Agreement also allowed the Royal Air Force to station maintenance staff in Nigeria. The Balewa administration was pressured to abrogate the Agreement because public opinion perceived it as an impairment of Nigeria’s freedom of action which might draw the country into hostilities against its wishes. This remains true.
“In 2001, in his bid to ostensibly re-professionalize the Nigerian army, President Obasanjo almost unilaterally signed the “Military Cooperation Agreement Between the US and Nigeria.” To its credit, the Ministry of Defense responded appropriately by opposing the agreement arguing that, the ministry was not involved in the negotiations between Nigeria and the US, neither were the service chiefs, who could have provided input relating to the syllabus and doctrinal content of the programme. In fact, the agreement was highly criticized by Lt General Victor Malu, the Chief of Army Staff at the time, when the US military officers demanded Nigeria’s strategic doctrine and unfettered access to its strategic military locations. According to General Malu, those were “exclusive to Nigerians only” adding that “a friend today can be an enemy tomorrow.” Malu was not alone in protest against the agreement. His immediate boss and Chief of Defense Staff, Vice Admiral Ibrahim Ogohi also told a visiting US Air College delegation to his office that “what Nigeria needs is logistic support and not training.” In November 2007, the US renewed its attempt to set up its Africa Command (AFRICOM) in Nigeria.
“This move was rejected by the National Council of State. Incidentally, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was a member of the Council of State at the time. The latest proposal to relocate America from Niger to Nigeria coming not long after the suspension of Niger from ECOWAS, with Nigeria’s active collaboration as a result of disagreement between Niger and the US, has many serious implications not only for Nigeria – Niger relations but also for Nigeria’s national security and that of the West African region in general. According to the late Major General Joseph Garba, Nigeria’s former Minister of External Affairs, Nigeria’s neighbors are a matter of colonial heritage and socio-cultural diversity; but it is in Nigeria’s interest to deliberately cultivate the friendship of our neighbours. This posture has been and must continue to be a major feature of Nigeria’s foreign policy. This is even more so because historically, there has always been a noticeable degree of suspicion of Nigeria’s intentions among its French-speaking neighbors, arising no doubt from the mutual suspicion which seems to have always characterized Nigeria’s relations with France.
“Therefore, in this circumstance Nigeria must be bold enough to reject the proposal, if for no other reason than to return a good turn. At least since independence Nigeria and Niger have maintained relatively cordial relations that have always helped in stabilizing the sub-region on several occasions. The two countries have come to the aid of one another during their moment of crises. The new military rulers in Niger jettisoned the security cooperation agreement between Niger and the United States because of the “attitude of the US delegation which visited Niger recently “in denying the sovereign rights of Niger’s people to choose their partners and allies capable of really helping them to fight terrorism.” General Michael Langley, head of the African Command (AFRICOM) had expressed “concern” that Niger was cultivating close ties with Russia and Iran.
“Other reasons given for the abrogation of the agreement included the fact that the presence of the American troops in Niger was illegal. According to Amadou Abdramane the spokesperson for the Niger’s Military Council, “it was not democratically approved and imposes unfavorable conditions on Niger.” The “Agreement” was simply a list of demands drawn by the US Embassy in Niger and sent to the Mahamadou Issoufou’s administration for its consent, which it willingly gave. The Agreement for example provides that all United States personnel be accorded the privileges, exemptions, and immunities equivalent to those accorded to the administrative and technical staff of a diplomatic mission under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of April 18, 1961; that United States personnel may enter and exit the Republic of Niger with United States identification and with collective or individual travel order.
“It is important to clearly state that there are only dangers and no gains from such military operations. The American operations in Niger Republic for example were ostensibly to pre-empt and uproot terrorists from the Sahelian region. The result has so far been quite unimpressive if not a complete failure. It is apparent that the presence of American troops and other intelligence personnel in the Niger Republic is not serving any useful purpose. This is for the simple reason that terrorism, far from abating, has in fact risen dramatically since the US began its operations in the region. Data sourced from the Pentagon, indicate that “with 2,737 violent events, the western Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Western Niger) experienced the largest escalation in violent event linked to militant Islamist groups over the past years of any region in Africa, a 36% increase.” …” Fatalities in the Sahel involving militant Islamist groups rose even more rapidly, 63%, resulting in 7,899 fatalities. Niger in particular in particular “saw a 43% increase in violent events in the past year. “All told, …attacks linked to militant Islamist groups in the Sahel have jumped 3,500% since 2016.” “At a minimum, more US security assistance isn’t leading to more security and all signs suggest it plays a role in making matters worse.” (Elizabeth Shackelford) “The Sahel now accounts for 40% of all violent activity by militant Islamist groups in Africa, more than any other region in Africa. …Militant Islamist violence in the Sahel is also responsible for the displacement of more than 2.6 million people.” Are these results worth the erosion of sovereignty?
“We the signatories of this open letter believe strongly that the economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases are profound and far-reaching. Economically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations. This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions.
“Moreover, hosting foreign troops often leads to increased prices and living costs in local areas, disproportionately affecting the lower-income population. Environmentally, the construction and operation of military bases can lead to significant degradation of the local environment. This includes deforestation, soil erosion, water contamination, and loss of biodiversity, which are detrimental to agricultural communities and indigenous populations. The long-term environmental damage could further hinder economic opportunities and sustainable development.
“Historically, the presence of foreign military bases has often led to strained relations not only with neighboring countries but also within the host country itself, as seen in numerous global instances. Public opinion in Nigeria has consistently shown a strong resistance to foreign military alliances that compromise the nation’s sovereignty and independence. The controversial history of foreign military presence in Nigeria, dating back to the abrogation of the Anglo-Nigerian Defense Agreement in the 1960s, serves as a significant historical precedent highlighting the potential risks and public discontent associated with such agreements. This historical awareness and skepticism are echoed in the present day, where there is considerable public apprehension towards the re-establishment of foreign military bases.
“In conclusion, as stewards of Nigeria’s sovereignty and guardians of its national interests, it is incumbent upon our leadership to heed the lessons of history and the voice of its people. The relocation of foreign military bases to Nigerian soil represents not just a potential compromise of our sovereignty but also sets a precedent that may lead to unforeseen geopolitical, economic, and social consequences. We, the signatories of this open letter, urge you to consider the broader implications of such agreements and to prioritize Nigeria’s long-term peace and security over short-term strategic alignments. By standing firm against the pressures to house foreign bases, Nigeria can affirm its commitment to self-determination and foster a more stable and prosperous future for all its citizens. Let us choose a path of cautious diplomacy and strategic independence, ensuring that our nation remains a beacon of stability and a model of sovereign integrity in Africa.”
