Mariama Khan, Former Secretary General Office of The President, Security Analyst & Africanist Scholar Writing from Rhode Island.
By: Mariama Khan
Security Analyst & Africanist Scholar
Writing from Rhode Island
In my book, Politics in The Gambia and Guinea-Bissau, Precolonial Influence on the Postcolonial State, published by Routledge in 2021, I argued that due to the immoral and unethical political culture of the postcolonial African state, there has been widespread social disenchantment in most postcolonial African societies. Hence, Justice, Integrity and Truth (JIT) movements spearheaded by youth and women who demand new measurements and practices for leadership, will continue to grow in especially West Africa.
Post-2021 political events in the subregion seem to convincingly indicate that many West African countries are slipping back and hoisting themselves on the anti-democracy swing. But after sixty-years of independence, the weight on the swing is too heavy. Countries have two choices- to either redirect their missteps and act the way proper states should behave or let their morbid excesses lure the military to break the swing. We do not support military coups. But we are aware of the fact that most of the time, the sustained voluntary missteps of civilian authorities invite the military to attempt to push them from their mantle. So, our focus should be after Gabon, which country will be next?
The successive spades of coup d’états in the subregion indicate a deeper and longstanding political malaise that characterise politics in most postcolonial African states. Similar to Gabon, majority of the citizens in Mali, Guinea Conakry, Burkina Faso and Niger have been quick to embrace their new military rulers partly due to the psychic turbulence in state-society relations. Majority of the citizens in these countries, like those in many other African states, have limited or no developed psychic or cognitive assurance in the state to build the necessary social and cultural confidence in its legitimacy, dependability and security.
In other words, many Africans do not have a strong sense of attachment to the state. They largely view it or the government as an institution that works and safeguards external interests over national or domestic ones. Therefore, they think the state is mostly against them even though routinely during elections they are the people who queue to cast their votes for the incoming government.
Public services and general social welfare in even resource-rich nations like Gabon have for long been in dire conditions. This implies the leaders in government have not prioritised the general welfare and wellbeing of the country’s citizens. While citizens confront acute poverty in their daily lives, some of the people associated with the state live large and flaunt their personal opulence in public. A good number of citizens in some African countries face food insecurity, daily power-cuts, dilapidated health care facilities, substandard health care services unaffordable cost of living, poor quality education, and in some cases serious insecurity due to conflict-related crisis in their state or in a neighbouring one.
In many African countries, majority of citizens are “not ideologically and philosophically incorporated within the state.” They see the state as an alien entity that is run by people who come from the same origins as them, but have long been alienated from them. As such, majority of the people will eventually come to think that their leaders do not know or are not interested in knowing or solving their challenges. This perspective about the “legitimately elected” leadership is a contrast to what majority of citizens think of military leadership, especially in the early days after they grasp power from civilian authorities.
Patterns show that immediately after the military comes to power, they speak to the nation in the language many people understand. They talk about the hardship they think people confront every day. They state the failures of the deposed regime which have made people live in the discomforting circumstances they confront. More than these, they promise the people that they are here to ease their burdens, improve their lives, find solutions to their difficulties. In some cases, they even prepare citizens in advance about the possible difficulties that will come along as they face what from the military’s point of view are unjust sanctions that will be imposed on them.
The talking points of military rulers become more credible to the public because they show that at least they are aware of the problems of the people. Additionally, they express their intentions to ameliorate the socio-economic and sometimes political hardships that beset citizens under the civilian leadership. So, majority of citizens feel psychological closeness to the military and see them as their saviours. Thus, military coups are more likely to receive widespread support in their early days, and until they settle and forget what brought them to power, they remain the darlings of society.
The military’s strategic approach to endearing themselves to citizens is aided by several failures of the elected leadership that has been deposed. The probability of a coup d’état taking place in a certain country can be gauged long before the coup actually materialises or even before the military is convinced, they need to take action and topple the civilian government.
Patterns and logics of statecraft in many post-colonial African countries seem to gloss over some key basic principles about power. In other words, how the leaders relate and understand power makes them or becomes their undoing. We can quote many examples in different West African countries where the leadership deviates from the fundamental norms of power in order to pursue self-interested agendas. For example, there is a saying that great power must be used softly. However, the trend in many countries has been that leadership fails to grasp the tight-knit rational ties between self-preserving power and justice. In other words, when power refuses to be just, it eventually destroys itself.
In a number of West African countries, we have seen cases where the state flexes its muscle against individuals at odds with it, without following dure process. Such actions of the state can be termed as “matai” rule, a Wollof term meaning unjustified defiance of what is right based on someone’s perceived power over another individual. In other words, it is some sort of a bully’s manifesto which determines the actions a political bully takes against perceived opponents even though they did not commit any infractions against the law or the state. It comes from an idea that “I have power to make your life difficult and that’s just what I’ll do, no one can stop me.”
As such self-destructive actions of the state unfold, some citizens pay attention to the injustices it is perpetrating against individuals or communities. Some among this few initial observers will start talking about the excesses of the state. At this stage, a wise civilian authority will pause and review its actions. Where necessary, it will take steps to rectify or at least to provide a convincing explanation about such actions. But in many instances, since the civilian authority who decides to not follow the norms of power and observe the rule of law, will be incensed to demonstrate that it is in charge of power and therefore can use it any way it likes, without giving account to anyone.
Civilian authorities eventually persist in their matai rule. Gradually, their excesses turn more and more people against them. As this continues, at some point, majority of citizens will come to despise them for their outright injustices against individuals or communities. In a more rational political setting, this should be the time when such civilian authorities should pause and redirect their excessive actions and uncivil state behavior, and follow the rule of law.
But the challenge is that when civilian authorities reach the matai stage of rule, they are completely intoxicated with power and they act under the influence of its senseless direction. The security apparatus of the state, the judiciary and every branch of government is mobilised to inflict different forms of malpractices against individuals or communities. At this point, the rule of law is a complete alien phenomenon for the state and majority of its civilian authorities. Power that has no conscience is sweet to use. However, any time power that has no conscience strikes, it is disastrous. The idea of accountability of power becomes foreign. This instigates a reaction in citizens. They also copy the attitudes of the state and become rebellious against the state.
To counter the disorder that state practices and actions have instigated in society, the state resorts to various repressive measures to try to regain some balance in its relationship with society. However, this process is a steep downhill chase, which due to the logics of velocity will end in some booming crash at the bottom of the hill. The citizens more and more give their back to the state. They disrespect its authority and they are willing to take chances to challenge it at every turn possible.
Meanwhile, the military is watching and entertaining their own lust for replacing the misbehaving civilian authorities. Eventually, they strike and when successful, a coup is born. So, in fact, to avoid military coups in West Africa, civilian authorities must ensure they run the state just like how a proper state should be managed. Otherwise, in adopting matai rule, they are gradually preparing the military to intervene, and when they do, it is with a round of applause from the citizens that once voted for the ousted civilian authority.