The French Ambassador to Niger, Sylvain Itte, remains within the French Embassy in Niamey’s capital, 48 hours after the order by the new leaders on Friday the 25th to vacate. With Monday’s deadline surpassed, French President Emmanuel Macron confirmed the Ambassador’s persistence, warning that France was ready to attack.
Although France cites non-recognition of the New Niger leadership as grounds for not leaving, there undeniably exist deeper, more ominous motives that align with their military intervention agenda.
Essentially, France has adopted a protracted war stance. Their refusal forms just one facet of an overarching strategy aimed at prolonging, justifying, and ultimately launching a military offensive against Niger.
Below are the five key reasons:
Infiltration and Division
Firstly, France is buying time to infiltrate and orchestrate division among Niger’s new leaders. However, this strategy has so far failed, and the military leadership remains united and speaks with a singular voice.
European Consensus
Secondly, France is buying time to secure consensus among its European allies to back its planned military intervention.
This plan is so far proceeding as intended. Following Macron’s recent threat to attack Niger, the European Union offered “full support.” Nabila Massrali, EU spokeswoman for foreign affairs, called Niger’s expulsion of the French ambassador a “provocation.”
Germany likewise concurred on the same day, offering backing to France. Foreign Ministry spokesman Christian Wagner warned Niger that Germany is “keeping a watchful eye on things.”
Terrorist Fabrication
Thirdly, France is buying time to gather terrorist forces to fight the new government.
Yesterday when confirming that French Ambassador is not leaving Niger, Macron claimed that the new Niger leaders are abandoning the fight against terrorism.
This seems a carefully orchestrated narrative, by France to sow seeds of doubt about Niger’s commitment to counterterrorism. This narrative potentially sets the stage for France to manipulate a terrorist attack, absolving itself of responsibility.
Stir Internal Resistance
Fourthly, France is buying time to stir internal resistance, perhaps with ethnic-driven dimensions, within Niger as an excuse to intervene. Recall early August when a former Nigerien rebel leader, Rhissa Ag Boula, started a resistance movement named the Council of Resistance for the Republic (CRR), pledging to join forces with France to reinstate ousted Bazoum.
Exploiting Evacuation
Fifthly, France is anticipating Niger’s forced evacuation of its ambassador, so that it can exploit it as a flashpoint and pretext to launch a military attack.
As of yesterday, after his refusal to leave, the Niger Government reportedly cut off power and electricity to the French Embassy, and has threatened forced entry to evacuate the ambassador.
It seems to me that France is anticipating this forced evacuation as a potential trigger and justification for launching an attack under the guise of rescuing the Ambassador and other French citizens.
What next, for Niger?
Now, the question is: What must Niger do, considering France’s seemingly unyielding ultimatum of either reinstating Bazoum or facing an attack?
Given that reinstating Bazoum evidently amounts to capitulation, disappointing the aspirations of an entire nation to break free from French imperialism, Niger’s leadership must ready itself for war. The question is no longer “if” but “when.” Evacuate the Ambassador with force, and France attack, if it wills!
Otherwise, France is stalling, maneuvering for optimal advantage before attacking. Such optics demand that Nigeriens now act preemptively – now when the world is watching and neighbors such as Burkina Faso and Mali stand with them. If they don’t, they will still find themselves having to face France tomorrow, likely under less favorable circumstances.
