It is impossible to predict all the consequences for the Sahel of the war in Ukraine. However, some effects are already visible. Soaring prices, availability of raw materials, cereals and, above all, fertilizers raise fears of worsening food insecurity in many countries with significant risks of famine. Another and not the least backlash would be the reorientation of funds from major donors in favor of the conflict in Eastern Europe. This would lead to a decrease in NGO activity in the Sahel at one of the worst times in its history. The director of the World Food Program (WFP) begged developed countries not to neglect the Sahel, Libya, Lebanon, Syria: "If you do, the consequences will be catastrophic, more than catastrophic. ». But in addition to these serious humanitarian consequences, it is on the geopolitical and military ground that changes can take place.
United States concerns
The United States is aware of this and what concerns them most is the loss of influence of the West on the Continent. Pascal Airault, in an article in L'Opinion sums up the American state of mind very well, headlining: "Joe Biden wants to keep Africa in the axis of good". It is an understatement to say that the result of the vote at the UN General Assembly calling on Russia to "immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all its military forces in Ukraine" caused a certain stir. Only 28 out of 55 African countries approved the resolution, the rest either abstained or practiced the empty chair policy, only Eritrea voted against.
The matter is being taken very seriously in Washington. The US ambassador to the UN said that there "could be no neutral ground and that this crisis was not simply a cold war competition between the West and Russia". In the wake of the resolution, the head of American diplomacy Anthony Blinken received Moussa Faki, the president of the Commission of the African Union, and as for the deputy Secretary of State, Michele J. Sison, she visited Mali on March 15 and is about to come to France.
Finally, General Townsend, head of AFRICOM, recently cracked out a series of tweets expressing his attachment and interest in the Continent: "Maybe America has been able to ignore Africa in the past, but this is not the future. (...) we are the partners of choice in much of Africa (...) USAFRICOM protects and advances American interests, prevents strategic distraction and preserves America's options (...). " Despite such remarks, Africans are unconvinced and continue to be "strategic distraction"…
The tipping point of public opinion
These visits, like these statements, show that Washington is trying to regain control in Africa. It it that the US trusts their French partner less and less to ensure the containment of Russia and China on the Continent? It is true that Mali and the Central African Republic are no longer voting in chorus with France and voices such as those of Senegal, whose president is also that of the African Union for the current year, or Congo Brazzaville have abstained. Like all their counterparts around the world, African heads of state are sensitive to the state of mind of their own public opinion and that is not predominantly pro-Western.
Far from dispelling this rejection of the foreign policies of France, the European Union or the United States, the war in Ukraine exacerbates it. The double talk about this conflict compared to those of Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan annoys. The fate of nationals, whether they are Latinos, Asians or Africans, who try to flee Kiev is unworthy. The privileged reception given to Ukrainian refugees, who are fleeing the bombings, like so many others before them, is shocking. As for the words of uninhibited racism uttered by some commentators on television and politicians about "these refugees who look like us" "this quality immigration, from which we could take advantage", these are not likely to tilt African public opinion towards the "axis of good"!
The military changeover
Whatever the duration of the war in Eastern Europe, it will also and necessarily have consequences on the military arrangements of France and the Europeans in the Sahel. A first collateral damage has already taken place. The Ukrainian Antonovs that France was relying on to disengage from Mali and repatriate heavy equipment were destroyed by the Russian army at Ukraine's Gostomel airport. Paris now operates rotations with the A400 M which carries only 37 tons instead of the 250 tons of the largest cargo plane, which does not simplify an already delicate task.
A priori, the reconfiguration of Operation Barkhane in Mali should not be change since it was already underway before February 24. But, for now, the contours of the new format still remain unclear, observers are faced with the "fog of war", to use a phrase that is currently in vogue. The statements made by General Michon, commander of France's Barkhane force, in Ouagadougou contradict those of Emmanuel Macron. The latter had declared "It is not a question of moving what is being done in Mali elsewhere, but of strengthening what is being done in Niger and further supporting the southern flank". However, General Michon announced that this withdrawal does not "consist in repositioning to Niger".
According to our information, the new mechanism should be split between various countries, Ivory Coast, Benin, Niger, Burkina Faso, but nothing seems to be final. The announcements are scheduled for the month of June, that is, after the French presidential election. By the way, with the war in Ukraine crushing everything, it is regrettable that there was no debate on the subject during the election campaign, nor assessment of the French commitment to the Sahel under this new five-year term.
However, it is a safe bet that the coming decisions will still leave a more congruent portion to the new deployment. The strategists of the French army will no longer be inclined to pressure for increased war effort in the Sahelo-Saharan Strip in order to protect the military budget. The conflict in Eastern Europe has miraculously put the dossier of that region back on the top of the pile. Furthermore, manpower and material resources are not expandable, and it is very likely that at the extraordinary NATO Summit held on March 24, the Alliance will have asked member States for troops to strengthen its eastern flank.
The death certificate of the EU country Takuba operation, Emmanuel Macron's great project, is already written, even if it is not officially registered. In any case, four countries Romania, Czechia, Estonia, Poland, out of the nine still committed, have other priorities.
Germany, on the other hand, is questioning the continuation of its commitment within the European Union Training Mission in Mali (EUTM) in which 300 of its fellow citizens are employed. This reflection was started before the outbreak of the war in Ukraine. In any case, its maintenance or not would not be existential: in a recent poll eight out of ten Malians did not know this mission even existed…
The existence of the United Nations force in Mali, (MINUSMA) is not, at least for now, in question, and that is fortunate. Whatever the structural defects of this force, its presence remains essential to provide relief to the local population, maintain a presence and document security incidents. It should be noted that throughout the period of intense tensions between the French and Malian governments, MINUSMA remained in a posture of strict neutrality. To its credit that it did not reproduce the mistakes of UNOCI during the 2011 war in Côte d'Ivoire. However, Barkhane's departure complicates its mission and makes it even more dangerous (1), with no reaction force and no air support. France has proposed to continue to provide this support to Mali, and therefore to MINUSMA, but on the express condition "that there is no Wagner force" as specified by General Michon at his press conference in Ouagadougou.
Regarding the Russian private military company, Antonio Guterrez took a more measured position, declaring last January: "It is a sovereign decision of the government of Mali to have cooperation with an organization like that", he added that "the only thing we want is that it does not create any difficulties" to our Mission. Nevertheless, a reflection on the increase of MINUSMA's resources, its reaction force, and a stronger mandate does need to be on the agenda.
The ten plagues of Egypt
The situation remains unchanged for the G5 Sahel so long it has the means and the problem of its resources has been recurrent since its beginnings in 2014. The European Union is the largest donor to the G5 and the Sahel, but even with its substantial budgets, given the war in Ukraine it is no longer certain that this region is one of its priorities.
Since 2014, Brussels has granted more than 18.2 billion euros in aid and loans on very favorable terms to Ukraine (knowing in addition that with the conflict, about half of these loans will not be repaid). The countries of the Sahel region have received some 8 billion euros in aid since 2013. Budgets are also not expandable, after the "whatever it costs" of the pandemic and the consequences of the sanctions imposed on Russia, inflation and economic difficulties lie in wait for European states. In the event of a sudden drying up of Western financing, what means will there be left for Sahel countries that have to face jihadist threats, soaring energy prices, shortages of fertilizers and cereals due to sanctions that they have not enacted? The Sahel is one of the great losers of this conflict. All that's missing an invasion of locusts and the picture would be complete.
(1)This mission is the most dangerous UN peacekeeping operation, to date 161 peacekeepers have been killed since 2013.
