By any measure, Mali’s crisis is no longer just a domestic conflict. What began as a long-running dispute over governance, identity and marginalization has evolved into one of Africa’s most consequential geopolitical contests, involving former colonial powers, regional governments, armed movements, foreign mercenaries and global competition, over strategic minerals; and the tussle to keep insecurity under check.
Recent accusations by Mali’s military leadership against France, have reignited debate across Africa, accusing external powers as probable sponsors of the continued shaping and reshaping of instability in the Sahel region, for strategic and economic advantage. While Paris strongly denies supporting separatist or extremist actors, critics across the region claim that the indepth story of Mali, cannot be separated from the enduring legacy of French influence, in West Africa. Who benefits from this delicate situation in Mali? This question is the cardinal-spine of the narration of crisis rooted in history. To understand today’s tensions, there must be a return to the final years of French colonial rule.
Modern Mali, formerly known as French Sudan, emerged from the wave of African independence movements in 1960, under the leadership of Modibo Keïta. A socialist-leaning nationalist, who envisioned a more independent African future. Like Ghana’s Kwame Nkrumah and Tanzania’s Julius Nyerere, Keïta promoted pan-African unity and sought to loosen European economic control over African states. But Mali’s political trajectory, quickly became unstable.
A 1968 military coup led by Moussa Traoré, marked the beginning of decades of authoritarian rule, economic hardship and repeated political upheaval. Since the early 1990s, Mali has oscillated between democratic transitions and military interventions, while abysmal grievances persisted in the country’s vast northern territories. The Tuareg populations of northern Mali, ethnically and culturally distinct from many southern communities, have long debated that Bamako neglected their regions politically and economically. Rebellions erupted periodically over demands for autonomy, development and representation. Those tensions exploded dramatically in 2012, when the Tuareg separatists declared the independent state of Azawad, following the collapse of state authority in northern Mali.
The France’s military intervention, wade-in. You would ask, was it to rescue or reassertion? France militarily intervened in Mali in 2013, through Operation Serval. Later expanded into Operation Barkhane, after armed groups linked to extremist organizations, advanced southward toward Bamako. At the time, the intervention received wide-range international support. French forces were credited with preventing the collapse of the Malian state and pushing back jihadist fighters. The United Nations also deployed a large peacekeeping mission, hoping to stabilize the country. Still, over time, public sentiment in Mali began to change.
In gradual but progressive increasing, many Malians questioned why insecurity persisted, despite years of foreign military presence. Civil society activists, student groups and political commentators, claimed that the external interventions then, only addressed symptoms of the unrest rather than the root-causes, which was poverty, corruption, unequal resource distribution and weak governance.
In Bamako and across the Sahel, a growing number of citizens began to see France less of a stabilizing force, but as a power protecting long-standing strategic interests. That perception intensified in the midst of wider criticism of France’s role, in francophone Africa; particularly concerning the CFA franc currency system, military agreements and resource extraction networks that critics say they disproportionately benefit French economic interests.
Continue reading with Eandel
Subscribe to unlock the complete story and receive your subscriber benefits.
