‘Democracy’ and Military Coups – The African Leadership Conundrum

In the days immediately following the military coup in the Republic of Niger and the ECOWAS threat to launch military action against the Nigerien junta, I had a conversation with a friend in which I expressed concerns about the unfolding situation. Specifically, I was apprehensive that the pattern witnessed in Niger, where the military seized control, akin to recent events in Guinea, Burkina Faso, and Mali could potentially escalate to other African nations if not decisively addressed.

Now, with the recent removal of President Ali Bongo of Gabon, a mere few weeks following the coup in Niger Republic, it seems my concerns have been substantiated.?

When I conversed with my friend, I argued that despite civilian leadership's inability to deliver positive outcomes for the countries where the military has taken power, I doubted that soldiers would fare better in governance. We have seen this scenario play out before, right?

However, I did not – and still do not – believe that ECOWAS, led by President Bola Tinubu of Nigeria, possessed the moral authority to demand the reinstatement of civilian leadership in Niger or accuse the junta of subverting the people's wishes. Given that civilian leadership in other ECOWAS countries had not significantly improved citizens' lives, what basis existed for advocating civilian governance over military rule in Niger Republic??

In ECOWAS countries where "democratic leadership" is supposedly in place, fundamental democratic values like the rule of law, free and fair elections, and an independent judiciary are severely lacking. Elections are willfully manipulated, enabling individuals who are not the people's preferred choices to assume power. Justice is subject to the influence, with the judiciary often ruling in favour of the highest bidder. Moreover, the leaders of many of these countries have maintained their countries' dependence on and servitude towards the colonial powers that ruled them before independence.

In addition, certain countries have had individuals clinging to power for over 30 years. If these leaders had led their countries to prosperity, citizens might have overlooked their extended tenures. Instead, they have impoverished their people and failed to advance their nations significantly. Such leaders should not continue to hold power.

However, is military intervention the solution? I do not think so. But, other than a coup, how can these leaders be removed from office? The possibility of removing them via elections is unlikely, given their tendency to manipulate the process to remain in power.

To highlight the frustration felt by many Africans, citizens of countries where the military has assumed control celebrated the removal of civilian leadership. This is puzzling because under normal circumstances, who would rejoice over the military's incursion into governance, knowing that democratic rights like freedom of speech, freedom of association, and freedom of the press are likely to be curtailed?

In my view, resolving Africa's leadership and economic development challenges is not a straightforward matter. Although democracy is the preferred governance model, the military won't hesitate to seize power if civilian leadership falters. In this regard, whether civilian or military, leaders of African countries should commit to fostering sustainable economic development and national prosperity.

Meanwhile, every military junta should aim to transition their country back to civilian rule once they have stabilized the system, established democratic institutions, and nurtured a culture of democratic engagement.

?