Last week, Algeria presented a political initiative to resolve the crisis in Niger, after the political, and even military dust of this crisis spread to the rest of West Africa. Algerian Foreign Minister Ahmed Attaf visited Ghana, Nigeria, and Benin, before holding a press conference to announce the initiative put forward by President Abdelmadjid Tebboune.
Of the six points included in the initiative, the proposal of a 6-month transition period overseen by a civilian figure accepted by everyone across the political and social spectrum, followed by elections. The initiative also emphasized that, as stipulated by the 1999 African Summit in Algeria, any actions counter to the constitution are rejected.
Algeria occupies a distinct position in Africa. It was the backbone of the African struggle against colonialism and racial discrimination. It also plays a vigorous role in West Africa, the Sahel, and the Sahara. It was at the forefront of the successful mediation efforts that ended the conflict between the Azawad revolutionaries and the Malian government.
The Algerian initiative is vital amid the political clash and military escalation in Niger and the new sanctions that the ECOWAS has imposed on it. Algeria shares a 1,000-kilometer-long border with Niger, and the two countries have profound social, cultural and historical ties. For all these reasons, the Algerian initiative should inspire hope. In fact, there are other reasons Algeria is uniquely well-placed to contribute to resolving this crisis.
Indeed, the stability of Niger is crucial to the national security of Algeria, its border with Libya to the east is volatile, and extremist organizations roam Algeria’s borders to the south, with recurrent waves of irregular migrants also a problem there. Algeria has more to lose from military conflict in the region than almost anyone else.
The military council in control of Niamey has promised to look into the Algerian initiative and respond to it soon. Why should we be optimistic about the Algerian initiative, albeit cautiously? We should have hope in its success because other regional and international players have taken divergent positions. Some are even very hostile. ECOWAS took severe measures against Niger, imposing harsh sanctions. This has created a lot of suffering, even destitution, in Niger. Some of the group’s countries objected to these measures.
The position of the West, on both sides of the Atlantic, shifts between political and diplomatic paths. Western countries are betting on a peaceful solution while hinting or hinting at military intervention. The United States has sent several delegations to Niamey and its ambassador arrived in the capital of Niger. However, to this day, no one can be certain that the United States will not be involved if regional forces or forces from outside the continent rush in.
The European Union is happy to merely reiterate calls for a negotiated solution. France is the only European country waging heated political battles with the military junta in Niamey, as well as being the only one with military forces inside the country. It categorically opposes the military coup and insists on the return of President Mohamed Bazoum. French President Emmanuel Macron’s speech last week to his ambassadors affirms this sharp position and shows that France is not willing to budge.
There are questions around the crisis. The first is the duration of the transition period. The Military Council insists on a three-year transition, and no regional or international actor involved in the crisis finds this acceptable. The second is the fate of the overthrown president, Mohamed Bazoum. Some have tied the resolution of the crisis to his reinstatement. Others see his safety as the priority, and there are whispers suggesting that President Bazoum should resign to safeguard peace and security.
The third question is about the people of Niger that have mobilized in the streets. Furious hoards have been protesting on a daily basis in collective rage, chanting in support of the military junta and against the French. They oppose the return of President Bazoum, demand the complete exit of anything French from Niger, and as well as condemning ECOWAS.
Why Algeria? Because it is a local actor and a neighbor whose people have religious, cultural, and social ties to the people of Niger. It is neither part of ECOWAS nor a supporter of the French approach. Media reports that Algeria refuses to allow French military aircraft to fly over its airspace has strengthened Algeria’s political capital and popularity in Niger even further.
The transition period proposed by Algeria, and which the Military Council has promised to look into and respond to, could be the point on which domestic regional parties meet, allowing everyone involved to save face. Niger’s two largest neighbors are Algeria and Nigeria, and both of them have a strong influence on it politically and economically. Algeria can engage with Nigeria within the framework of the African Union, and they can achieve an actual political breakthrough on the ground together.
The Algerian initiative could be the last lifeline for the people of Niger, who are suffering terribly. They could be caught in a bloody quagmire whose scope and duration is impossible to determine. We do not know how long the ECOWAS will remain in place either. What is certain, however, is that a large-scale military operation would be a catastrophe.
Algeria’s six-item initiative does not link the restoration of constitutional legitimacy to the return of President Mohamed Bazoum, deviating from the French position. The Algerian initiative has sparked some hope and presents a plan that can be built upon so as to include all actors and keep the flames in the near and distant future.
