Basically, there was an environmental crisis
The Sahel, over the decades, has experienced climatic disturbances that have profoundly altered the stability of the seasons as we know them in this space because one cannot now temporally delimit the seasons, which have become erratic and uncertain. For several years now, this place has experienced cyclical droughts that have profoundly marked and changed the lives of the population, all of whom have been forced to adopt resilient, new adaptation strategies, either through mobility, emigration, migration or redirecting their economic activities when agriculture and animal husbandry , the most important of them, depended on climatic hazards that severely affected agricultural production and destroyed livestock. However, successive governments have not been able to put in place bold policies to prevent the difficult situation presented to them by these new, uncomfortable facts. And since then, certain clichés have been associated with the representation of this place which we still see through these images of beggars who stretch their arms and skeletons, often bloated, sick and dying. Thus famine and misery are associated with the name and fictional image of the Sahel. But other factors exacerbated this situation.
The other problem that has thrown the Sahel into disarray is the bad governance that can be observed in almost all the countries in this space and it has been hypocritically created since the 90s, when it was important in the pretext of democracy. Alternatives to better govern states with rigor and transparency, justice and responsibility. In almost all countries in West Africa, and therefore beyond the Sahel, democracy has erred, elections have been rigged to impose unpopular leaders on the people, people more committed to imperial powers than the rulers whose interests they are supposed to protect. . We have seen a certain democratic decline in this space over the years and a divorce between leaders and people, even in the face of frustration, people’s distaste for politics and democracy, in which, often, the people lead. To prefer this pitiful exception to democracy which the often unethical intellectuals foist on the people that the post-National Convention era dreamed of renewing. Africa has not been so badly governed under this democracy that it has produced a race of politicians who have used it to legitimize massive theft, looting and embezzlement, stolen in the name of the majority, like illicit fortunes.
By such regimes, and the injustices that follow, we have fueled frustration and anger, but also created conditions of social rebellion that no state will be able to prevent. With a school in flux, a young man abandoning himself, without prospects, plunged into unemployment, we can only expect social explosions that, like the French context of 1789, will lead to great upheavals that will displace society and provoke the reconstruction of a promised society. A new order. Perhaps this is why the former French President, the late Jacques Chirac visited Niger, under Tandza Mamadou, worried about Niger when, passing through the city, everywhere he saw only youths and children who came to welcome him, expressing his fears. The future of the country, when, in the deep and absent eyes of children, politicians will not succeed in responding to this large number of young people who will be able to assimilate a social bomb that may explode tomorrow. The uneasiness felt in the Sahel today also has its roots in this political situation, which is nevertheless rarely taken into account. It is understandable that some use it to exploit the plight and ignorance of our people for their petty interests by importing a terror into the Sahelian space that the government does not profess, to justify its violence, not political or religious.
Imported terror for recolonization?
Isn’t terrorism another way of distracting Africa from its development challenges, its priorities and therefore its real struggle to distract it in this imposed war which it could have done instead of channeling its efforts and resources into economic recovery? Integration of peoples and economies, consolidation of national units and more ideally, African unity that has been battered since the demise of the OAU?
After the fall of the Libyan state by the West, who for several years came from far and wide, especially Afghanistan and Syria, to sow chaos in the Sahel, they were more involved in it for their own interests than for the democracy they demanded. To bring it up, do they have reasons that can justify the tragedy they have inflicted on the Sahelian population? Lone at one time learned that Bazum Mohammed was entering into negotiations with the terrorists by his own admission at the presidential palace, even agreeing to release some of their prisoners to aid peace, but could he dare to say? Nigerians are the cause of such initiatives and above all, the demands for which he has agreed to negotiate with people whose hands are stained with blood when he cannot have the same elegance in this field with other political opponents who have nevertheless chosen to register. Their fight, face exposed, in the political arena of the text of the republic in the way they gave? So should we kill for listening in democracy? The question is sad but, alas, relevant.
The purpose of this other evidence imposed on the Sahel is, we understand, not only to delay the Sahel, from which we can have an excuse to rush to its aid, but more to legitimize the military occupation of its territories, to continue the unfinished mission. Exploitation of the continent only to protect it from terrorism and its violence. It is even more true now that we know the potential of mining, especially of rare and precious metals, that this vast apparently poor but potentially rich space is attracted by the power of the same resources to greed for abundance when they can be very poor. Lack, using patriot leaders, invested more in France’s struggle to strike the continent. It is known that during the heyday of the century, this part of the continent was full of gold, almost the surface of the earth and all this part of the continent which today is called the Gold-Coast up to the three border strips, present day Ghana, were rich in gold and the sovereigns of that time were the image of Sumungur Kant, When they left Mecca they traveled with large quantities of gold, so that during their stay gold was worth only peanuts. To what extent could the colonizer then have meant for the inexhaustible stockpiling of his territory and for the progress by which, today, he continues to hate us and exploit us? The great historical texts say so but, on purpose, this part of history has been hidden so that Africans are not aware of their wealth and their wealth and the idea that it destroys them internally and is believed accordingly. They are poor and told to live as if a curse can enter their minds and their violated memories. If Africans do not fight to protect the little bit of their looted resources to build their future and the future of future generations, the continent will have no future. That is the issue. The fight, the last thing Africans have left to fight.
What is serious is, yesterday to see a certain youth at the forefront of social and political struggle, as some of their years are hidden today in trade union organizations which they animated in other times to serve a political agenda known to all. How do we understand today, when times are critical, this disturbing silence of a USN, which has betrayed its heritage and its struggle, which has also betrayed a youth and its dreams? Where are all these power plants which, under Tandja, are ready to move heaven and earth to threaten the government of the day, for financial influence, of which they speak little today? Today, everyone knows who everyone is so that no one can cheat others. There are some who no longer fight in the country. They know they have compromised themselves and they can no longer hold the lost trust of Nigerians.
As we have often noted, Samuel Laurent, in his essay, Sahelistan, sees for this rich Sahel, a victim of its wealth, the same fate as Afghanistan at the hands of the West because they could not win the war that they use as an excuse. Go there and fight with their soldiers and their weapons who find there a testing ground, especially for those who have not yet participated in armed conflict since conception. The war therefore serves this part of its potential which has geostrategic parts intrinsically when we know that these resources are essential for the advancement of technology, of the new modernity that today puts the world’s powers in competition, with the entry into the scene, emerging countries. which interferes with their dominance.
As we can see, the problem in the Sahel is deep and cannot be limited to partnership relations, in terms of cooperation. It is still and always the same balance of power that governs North-South relations for which we are condemned today to understand the people’s struggle, finally yearning for control of their destiny and their resources.
It is an appointment in history that we cannot miss at the risk of disappearing.
A good listener