The new AES Confederation: is the historic ECOWAS Union on the brink?

Military Leaders of the AES emerging from discussions during the alliance’s first Joint Summit, where announced the creation of a Confederation.

On Saturday, July 6, Niger’s president received his two counterparts from Mali and Burkina Faso at the Niamey airport as they arrived to deliberate on what would become the most significant political realignment the West African region would witness in almost half a century.

The occasion was the first Joint Summit of the Alliance of the Sahel States (AES) where a treaty would be signed recognising the alliance as a confederation of states, six months after they exited the ECOWAS union.

The event also provided a platform for the leaders to denounce the regional body and reiterate their rejection of all appeals to return to the Union.

A day after the three military leaders announced their break from ECOWAS and the creation of a separate regional bloc in Niamey, leaders of ECOWAS member-states gathered in Abuja to elect a chairman for another year while weighing the consequences of the exit of the three Sahel states.

The African Union (AU), just like its sub-regional counterpart, was also considering the implications of the decision and came out with a statement that showed its unwillingness to accept the new reality.

The AU Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security, Bankole Adeoye, speaking on behalf of the Chairperson of the Commission of the African Union, Moussa Faki, declared that “the withdrawal by the three countries is unacceptable to the African Union and we believe in one ECOWAS.”

Responding to this position, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the three states, under the aegis of the AES, said they disapproved of and condemned “in the strongest terms this attitude, which is contrary to the duty of reserve and the obligation of impartiality incumbent on any official of an intergovernmental organisation”, insisting that “the approval of a third party is not part of the responsible dynamic of the Confederation of Sahel States (AES), whose priority is and remains the preservation of the territorial integrity of its member states and the defence of the vital interests of its populations.

Deliberations among leaders of ECOWAS member-states emphasised the enormous security and economic implications of the withdrawal, and also the need to continue efforts to mediate the return of the countries.

Mediation efforts embarked on by Senegalese president, Bassirou Diomaye Faye, in the past months indicate a willingness to go the extra mile to resolve the current impasse. However, the military leaders of the three states have insisted that they will not reconsider joining the regional body for as long as it remains under Western political influence.

The words of the Nigerièn military leader, Abdourahamane Tchiani clearly captured their sentiments when he said that they were “going to create an AES of the peoples, instead of an ECOWAS whose directives and instructions are dictated to it by powers that are foreign to Africa.”

These accusations of Western control are prompted by what many have described as the immense pressure that France and the United States exerted on the regional body to impose stiff sanctions on the three military regimes, which weakened the economies of the three countries and eventually led to their decision to withdraw from the bloc.

Several reports had highlighted the influence of the French government on states like Cote D’Ivoire, Togo, Senegal and Benin in their insistence on total blockade of the three Sahel states and possible military intervention to return the ousted civilian governments.

Further bolstering the claims by the Sahel states is a recent report by the French media that the Ivorian government, had approved the construction of a United States (US) military base in north-western Côte d’Ivoire, following withdrawal of the US from Niger.

While the French report explained that the base will have some practical range limitations for US intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance drones, compared to the previous base in northern Niger, the new base risks fomenting a popular anti-Western backlash against the Ivorian government and the USA.

Apart from criticisms of western dominance over ECOWAS and the focus on pushing back against external political influences, Analysts say the military juntas in the Sahel may not be aware of the full implications of their exit from the regional body.

The creation of the AES has weakened the ECOWAS economic bloc, further amplifying the regional body’s list of challenges. Some economists and regional security analysts say that, in spite of its global recognition as one of the most resilient regional blocs, ECOWAS has not recorded significant successes in economic integration and in addressing security challenges in the region.

They say while it has undoubtedly recorded some successes over the years in ending internal conflicts, it seems to have suffered setbacks in strengthening regional coordination to address key factors that have spurred cross-border conflicts, such as the proliferation of small arms and light weapons.

Also, some regional observers have said, in its almost half a century of existence, the ECOWAS’s promise to unite fifteen countries in the region in a single market and establish a currency union has continually been delayed.

The Potential Impact of the Withdrawal of the three Sahel countries from ECOWAS goes beyond security challenges and the impressions created by the current economic realities, according to the President of the Commission, Omar Touray. He warns that the disintegration of the ECOWAS space could disrupt the freedom of movement and establishment that has existed since 1975, worsening regional insecurity.

The withdrawal of the countries would be a major blow on several fronts. Security cooperation would undoubtedly experience serious disruptions, particularly with regard to intelligence sharing and the fight against terrorism, security experts warn. Joint initiatives, such as the implementation of the ECOWAS regional standby force, would be seriously affected.

Diplomatically and politically, withdrawal would isolate these countries on the international stage. They would lose bloc support for candidates for international positions in the African Union, the United Nations and other similar organisations.

Travel and immigration conditions would also be affected, with citizens requiring visas to travel within the sub-region. In addition, they would no longer be able to reside or create businesses freely within the framework of ECOWAS facilities and would be subject to various national laws.

Economically and financially, the withdrawal could result in the cessation or suspension of projects and programs sponsored by ECOWAS, with a current estimated value of more than US$500 million. Regional financial institutions, such as The ECOWAS Bank for Investment and Development (EBID) and West African Development Bank (BOAD), which have significant investments in the three countries, would also be affected.

According to reports, EBID, for example, has 27 ongoing projects in the three countries, totalling approximately $321 million, and they have contributed US$33 million to the Bank’s capitals. Institutionally, the withdrawal would result in the closure of several ECOWAS regional structures in these countries, affecting the job security of their citizens who make up some 130 ECOWAS staff. The loss of this regional infrastructure would be a significant setback for regional integration and development.

Reaching a consensus on how to resolve what appears to be a stalemate has been arduous. Efforts to restore normalcy have been met by stiff resistance from the military regimes and deliberations on alternative approaches among leaders of ECOWAS member-states.

There have been suggestions that visits to the three Sahel states by no less a personality than Nigeria’s nonagenarian former president and one of the founding fathers of ECOWAS, Yakubu Gowon, and a number of respected pan-African leaders, would make significant progress in mitigating current hostilities, especially if guarantees of respect for sovereignty are given.

For now, these suggestions do not seem to be under consideration as both regional alliances jostle for control of the regional political space.