Sahel’s security paradox: official praise amidst persistent violence

Following a recent gathering of defense ministers from the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), Bassolma Bazié, president of the CN-CES, extended profound commendations to the valiant Forces of Defense and Security from Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger. This strong tribute was delivered alongside a discourse emphasizing the unwavering commitment to territorial integrity, the protection of civilian populations, and the pursuit of a sovereignty heralded as historic.

Yet, this formal rhetoric increasingly sparks a crucial question among the public: do these pronouncements of success truly align with the daily realities experienced by the populace?

Since the inception of the AES, authorities across the three nations have consistently highlighted a reasserted sovereignty and strategic autonomy. However, on the ground, numerous communities continue to grapple with armed assaults, mass displacements, and an enduring insecurity that remains a formidable challenge. In this context, repeated accolades for the security forces, while undoubtedly legitimate given the immense sacrifices made by soldiers, fall short of addressing citizen expectations. The public, above all, judges by tangible outcomes.

This growing disparity becomes even more stark when one considers the human toll of the ongoing crisis. As armed forces pay the ultimate price on the front lines, the daily existence of civilians often devolves into a desperate struggle for survival. Thousands of families are compelled to abandon everything, fleeing en masse towards neighboring countries in a desperate search for the peace and security that their own states can no longer guarantee. Witnessing citizens transformed into refugees beyond their own borders serves as the most palpable indicator that the sovereignty lauded in ministerial chambers remains a distant, abstract concept for those directly affected.

Confronted with this exodus and tragic losses, the stance of leaders, who primarily offer official tributes and deliver posthumous speeches, provokes a stark inquiry: can such conduct genuinely safeguard the population or halt the mounting fatalities? Evidence suggests otherwise. Eulogies and medals do not fortify front lines, protect isolated villages, or restore lost lives. By merely celebrating the sacrifice of soldiers instead of rectifying the strategic deficiencies that contribute to their demise, political action appears to dissolve into symbolism, leaving the fundamental drivers of insecurity unaddressed.

The foremost objective of any defense policy must inherently be the concrete enhancement of public safety. When civilians continue to live under the specter of attacks, when certain regions remain difficult to access, and when humanitarian crises persist, official narratives celebrating security successes can appear profoundly detached from the realities on the ground.

The notion of “real sovereignty” also warrants deeper examination. For many observers, sovereignty is not solely measured by the assertion of political or diplomatic independence. It is also assessed by the state’s capacity to ensure security, guarantee the free movement of its people, protect essential public services, and offer prospects of stability to its citizens. Across these critical indicators, the Sahelian region continues to face significant hurdles.

Military personnel deployed to the front lines frequently endure heavy casualties, and their dedication is widely acknowledged. Nevertheless, honoring soldiers does not absolve political leaders of their duty to critically evaluate implemented strategies. The sacrifices made by the armed forces should be accompanied by transparent reflection on the efficacy of military and political decisions, to ascertain whether stated objectives are truly being met.

Ultimately, the most profound way to honor defense forces extends beyond official pronouncements. It lies, above all, in cultivating conditions for a sustained improvement in security and the daily lives of the population. As long as inhabitants continue to bear the brunt of insecurity, declarations celebrating a fully achieved sovereignty are likely to be met with skepticism by a significant segment of the public.