ISRAEL AND USA TRY TO DETERMINE INTERNAL LEBANESE POLITICS

On January 14, 2025 By rebelbreezeIn Current Affairs Comment, French Colonialism & Neo-Colonialism, Imperialism, Middle East, National Liberation, Political Analysis, US Imperialism, ZionismLeave a comment

Qassam Muaddi (Reprinted from Mondoweiss 12/ 11/ 2024) with current introduction by Diarmuid Breatnach)

(Reading time: 7 mins.)

INTRODUCTION:

Imperialist and Zionist intervention in Lebanon continues after the recent war as it did before, although the IOF failed thoroughly in its attempted invasion before the truce (if we can call it that, with near 500 recorded IOF ceasefire violations to date).

The USA’s envoy Hochstein’s claims the IOF will pull out at the fast approaching 60-day date stipulated in the ceasefire agreement.

Apart from decoupling Hezbollah from active support for the Resistance in Gaza, where the genocidal war may continue and possibly even intensify, the war against Lebanese sovereignty will continue, albeit in the shadows.

When the victorious powers in the imperialist World War I sat down to divide up the spoils, chiefly between the UK and France, the latter’s share included what is now Lebanon and Syria. The present constitution of the Lebanese state bears an unmistakeable French imprint.

The ‘international’ negotiators of the ceasefire sought by Israel therefore, France and USA, were the old French colonial imperialists of the region and their new supplanters, the US imperialists.¹ These will continue their efforts to bring Lebanon firmly under imperialist control.

And ‘Israel’ will assist them in particular through its intelligence services: recall Netanyahu’s public attempt on 8^th October to encourage political forces hostile to Hezbollah in Lebanon to rise up against the Resistance while simultaneously the IOF bombed Lebanese civilians!

The cavalier attitude of the head of Lebanon’s army, Josef Aoun, towards the Lebanese parliament last November seemed an early indication of this shadows war and, considering the importance of the Army in Lebanese politics, may bode ill for the future.²

*New President of Lebanon, Michel Aoun (incorrectly elected while still head of the Army), reviewing troops as formal inauguration procedure.* (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

In his first speech as the new Secretary General of Hezbollah, Naim Qassem said that the US Ambassador to Lebanon had been meeting leaders of Lebanese political parties opposed to Hezbollah.

According to Qassem, the Ambassador was trying to convince them that Hezbollah’s collapse in the face of Israel’s offensive was imminent, urging the Lebanese parties to oppose Hezbollah.

Two weeks earlier, a group of anti-Hezbollah parties gathered in the town of Maarab in Mount Lebanon, the headquarters of the “Lebanese Forces” — a far-right Christian party headed by its chairman, Samir Geagea.

The parties in attendance issued a joint statement that indirectly blamed Iran for pushing Lebanon into a war it had no stake in, hijacking the decision of peace and war in Lebanon, and recruiting Lebanese citizens and using them as soldiers and “human shields.”

The latter phrase was a veiled reference to Hezbollah, its social support base, and the people of southern Lebanon in general. The parties in Maarab also called for the election of a new president to the country.

Heading the meeting was Samir Geagea, a Maronite Christian known for his brutal suppression of Palestinian and Lebanese adversaries, including Christian rivals, during the Lebanese Civil War that took place between 1975 and 1989.

*Samir Geagea, Lebanese anti-Hezbollah politician, photographed in days of membership of the fascist Christian Lebanese militia, proxy of the Israeli occupation of Lebanon.* (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

He is also known for his collaboration with Israeli occupation forces in Lebanon after 1982 and for having spent 12 years in a Syrian prison on charges of collaboration with Israel.

Geagea has also been openly voicing his will to run for the Presidency of Lebanon, which under the Lebanese constitution must be held by a Christian Maronite. The president’s chair has been vacant for two years now, as the opposing political forces have failed to agree on a candidate.

The president in Lebanon is elected by the parliament and thus needs a degree of consensus between represented parties, which has been absent since the latest president, Michel Aoun, finished his term in October 2022.

*Former Lebanon President Michel Aoun, ally of Hezbollah*. (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

Michel Aoun was an ally of Hezbollah and represented an important trend of Christian community support for the resistance group in Lebanese politics since 2008.

During his presidency, Hezbollah’s adversaries in Lebanon, like Geagea, continued to accuse the resistance group of taking over the state, especially during the height of the Syrian Civil War, in which Hezbollah was actively involved in defending the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Asad.

After Michel Aoun’s presidency, several political parties were unwilling to accept a president close to Hezbollah and its allies, entailing a vacancy to the recent election when Hezbollah’s preferred candidate Frangieh pulled out of the contest and endorsed Josef Aoun⁴‘s successful candidacy.

Diarmuid Breatnach

Why the Lebanese presidency is important for Israel

When Israel began its offensive on Lebanon with the exploding pager and electronics attacks in mid-September, some Lebanese politicians seemed to have sensed that the influential role of Hezbollah in Lebanese politics was approaching its end.

Calls to elect a new president increased, as the U.S. envoy, Amos Hochstein, brought his plan for a ceasefire.

Hochstein’s proposal included the retreat of Hezbollah’s fighting units north of the Litani River, essentially clearing Hezbollah’s stronghold in the south, and deploying more Lebanese army forces along the provisional border between Israel and Lebanon.

*Plotting on the dining terrace: US Ambassador Lebanon Dorothy Shea and White House Adviser Amos Hochstein in Beirut on 30 August 2023.* (Photo cred: *Cradle @ amos hochstein*)

Hochstein’s plan, however, included another component — he called for electing a new president for Lebanon, even considering it a priority before a ceasefire with Israel.

The president in Lebanon is also the commander-in-chief of the army, which is why many army chiefs of staff were elected to the presidency in the past.

Historically, the president’s relationship with the army’s command influenced the role played by the armed forces, and this relationship has been especially crucial in the case of Hezbollah.

In the last years of Hezbollah’s guerrilla campaign against the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon between 1998 and 2000, the Lebanese army played a role in covering safe routes for Hezbollah’s fighters in and out of the occupied area and in holding key positions.

This support by the army to Hezbollah’s resistance was the result of the direction and influence of the country’s President, Emile Lahoud, who had served as Chief of Staff of the army a few years earlier and refused to obey orders to clash with and disarm Hezbollah’s fighters.

The position of the Lebanese president, his influence on the army’s performance, and his relationship with the resistance have always been at the heart of Israeli and U.S. attempts to intervene in Lebanese politics.

It is not the first time that the U.S. and Israel have pressured for the election of a new Lebanese president as it is under Israeli attack. The presidency ploy is a worn U.S. tool for attempting to change Lebanon’s political landscape and to make it more Israel-friendly.

When Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982 and occupied its capital, Beirut, after the withdrawal of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the Lebanese parliament met to elect a new president — quite literally, under the watchful eye of Israeli tanks.

The parliament building was non-functional, and the Lebanese representatives had to meet with an incomplete quorum in the building of the military school to elect Bashir Gemayel as president.

Gemayel was the leader of the far-right anti-Palestinian Phalange party, or Kataeb. The Phalangists had helped Israel plan the invasion of Lebanon and fought on Israel’s side in the 1982 war.

Pierre Gemayel, strong man of the fascist Lebanese Christian sector and ally of Israel, elected by inquorate parliament literally under Israeli tank guns, whose assassination halted the slide towards Lebanese alliance with (under) Israel. (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

Gemayel had travelled to Israel several times to meet with Israeli leaders and committed to signing a peace treaty with Israel as soon as he became president.

Gemayel was the strongman of the anti-Palestinian Lebanese Right, and he was the only leader with enough support and force to carry out Israel’s strategy in Lebanon.

His assassination 22 days after his election and before he was sworn in was one of the most devastating blows to Israel’s plans to bring Lebanon under Israeli influence.

In revenge for Gemayel’s death, the Phalangist militias entered the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila in the periphery of Beirut under Israeli cover. There, they committed the now infamous Sabra and Shatilla Massacre, slaughtering between 2,000 and 3,500 Palestinian refugees.³

Following the end of the Lebanese Civil War in 1989, the parties who had fought against each other entered into a power-sharing arrangement.

Meanwhile, the nascent Lebanese resistance group, Hezbollah — which started as an offshoot of the Shiite Amal militia during an episode of violence called the War of the Camps — increased its popularity and political influence.

This influence grew exponentially after Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied Lebanese south, which marked the first victory of an Arab resistance force against Israeli occupation.

By the beginning of the 2000s, Hezbollah had become a political party that ran for elections, secured parliamentary representation, and forged alliances with other Lebanese forces.

Political divisions in Lebanon began to appear once again on both sides of the question of the resistance, often attributed by its antagonists to Syrian, and later Iranian, influence in the region.

The identity of Lebanon’s president became a central issue again, especially after the 2006 Israeli war on Lebanon, during which Emile Lahoud’s presidency provided strong political support for Hezbollah. Lahoud finished his term the following year amid strong political division.

The state of fragmentation in Lebanese politics was so endemic that the president’s chair remained vacant for an entire year. The crisis was partially resolved with the election of the army’s chief of staff, Michael Suleiman, in 2008, who remained neutral.

Forty-two years after the first election of a Lebanese president at the behest of Israel, not much has changed. Lebanon is again under attack, and the resistance continues to be a central point of division over the future of the country and its position in the broader region.

Although Hezbollah insists that its resistance is tied to the genocidal Israeli war on Gaza, both Israel and the U.S. continue to look for ways to neutralize Lebanon through internal divisions and political disagreements.

As Israeli army officials begin to voice their demands to end the war — a war that was hitting a wall in the villages and mountains of southern Lebanon — it seems that Hezbollah’s adversaries continue to bet on Israel’s military capacity to bring about a “day after Hezbollah.”

Perhaps more confidently than Israel itself.

Qassam Muaddi

FOOTNOTES:

1 The condemnation by the USA of the UK/ France/ Israel attack on Nasser’s Egypt in 1956 was clearly an admonition that the old colonial rulers of the Middle East (and of much of the World) now had to give way to the new ruler – US imperialism — and the old ways of gunboats and invasion had to be replaced by suborning the local middle classes and control through finance and trade. Of course as time went on the USA too resorted to invasions and gunboats (or at least aircraft carriers). — DB

2 See https://thecradle.co/articles/beirut-in-the-dark-about-lebanese-armys-deployment-plan-for-south-lebanon-report

3 16–18 September 1982, its anniversary is not long past – RB.

4 ¹Not a close relation of Michel Aoun.

SOURCES:

Naim Qassem’s first speech as leader Hezbollah, November 2025: https://www.palestinechronicle.com/hezbollahs-new-leader-made-first-speech-today-this-is-what-he-said/

Israel ceasefire violations: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/-lebanon-reports-4-more-israeli-violations-of-cease-fire-deal/3448885

Hezbollah’s preferred candidate Frangieh endorsed Josef Aoun: https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/lebanese-parliament-tries-for-12th-time-to-elect-new-president-1715733.html²Hezbollah’s preferred candidate Frangieh endorsed Josef Aoun: https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/lebanese-parliament-tries-for-12th-time-to-elect-new-president-1715733.html

ANOTHER AFRICAN FRENCH COLONY REBELS

On August 30, 2023 By rebelbreezeIn Africa, Current Affairs Comment, French Colonialism & Neo-Colonialism, History, Imperialism, National Liberation, Political Analysis2 Comments

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time main text: 4 mins.)

News reaches us that military forces in Gabon, yet another colony (say neo-colony) of French imperialism in West Africa, have carried out a coup, deposed the titular President and put him under house arrest.

Actually, some of the reporting called it “an attempted coup” which seems strange: the military in control of its own bases, national broadcastings stations and with the former leadership under arrest seems a lot more than an “attempt”.

*Map of African states and cities* (By: GISGeography Last Updated: August 9, 2023). *Gabon is located on the west coast (down from Cameroun and up from Angola)*.

Given recent nationalist military coups in a number of former French colonies, a lot of speculation is taking place as to whether this case is a harbinger of future uprisings against French imperialism and also as to whether the new apparently nationalist administration of Gabon has a future.

CENTURIES OF SCRAMBLE FOR AFRICAN RESOURCES

Throughout the 17^th, 18^th19^th centuries, European colonial powers scrambled for control of African natural resources, including slaves (and slave-like labour after the abolition of slavery). Vast resources of oil, valuable metals, minerals and gem stones are still being extracted from Africa.

Much of Africa was conquered and occupied by French colonialism¹ and in most of those countries French is a ‘national’ language of the state and sometimes the only one so recognised. After “independence” France continued to extract natural resources and labour power from the regions.

Recently² the military of some of those neo-colonies carried out coups and overthrew their France-aligned rulers, accusing them of being effectively administrators of French neo-colonialism. Niger was the most recent in July 2003, Burkina Faso in January 2022 Mali in August 2020.

There have been others too but those three countries border one another and have also declared an alliance against any invasion, such as that threatened by the pro-imperialist alliance of ECOWAS³ of which the dominant member is Nigeria.

NEO-COLONIALISM

There have been historically more than one method of effectively colonising a country. It may be invaded and resistance crushed, the administration (taxation etc) henceforth being managed directly from the invading country or from a government dependent on the invader.

The system may include large-scale settlement of land (as in Ireland and Algeria) but in any case the cities will include enclaves of invader settlers and administrators, charitable, religious and educational institutions, nearly always teaching a curriculum based on the occupiers’ culture.

*Deposed President Ali Bongo Ondima in Residence Libreville 30 September 2023* (Photo cred: *BTP Advisors to the President via AP*)

There were also ‘protectorates’, such as Palestine for example, under British control and accepted so by other powers, without a direct system of colonial occupation or administration.

Ireland had the colonial-settler-parliament system under the British occupation until 1800 when by bribery and self-interest, the Irish Parliament⁴ dissolved itself and almost immediately joined the United Kingdom, Irish elected MPs then having to attend parliament in Westminster.

In 1921, that system continued for the British colony of the Six Counties but control of the rest of Ireland was exercised a distance through the governments and State departments of the majority section of the Irish national capitalist class, the Gombeens.⁵

That system was developed by British imperialism throughout its Empire, piece by piece. The French followed but the ruling classes of Belgium, Holland and Portugal were slower to adapt. After WWII, the USA used the system increasingly in Latin America⁶, Africa and Asia.

GABON HISTORY

Gabon of course has a long history before Africa was ever occupied and settled by European powers. Africa after all is the cradle of humanity.

Bantu migrants settled the area in the early 14th century. In the late 15^th century Portuguese explorers and traders arrived in the area and in the 16th century the coast became a centre of the transatlantic slave trade with European slave traders arriving to the region.

France occupied Gabon in 1885, but did not administer it until 1903. In 1910 Gabon became one of the four territories of French Equatorial Africa. On 15 July 1960 France agreed to Gabon becoming an independent state but the reality was that it became one of France’s neo-colonies.

Unexpectedly perhaps, there was a WWII battle there: in November 1940 Free French forces were sent by De Gaul to take the area from the Vichy-loyal administration there. The Battle of Gabon lasted four days and ended in victory for De Gaulle’s forces.

WHERE TO NOW?

Whether Gabon’s neighbours would invade remains to be seen and the country is separated by over 2,000 km distance from Niger, the nearest one of the three Sahel French colonies in rebellion, a shortest distance that traverses the currently hostile major state of ECOWAS, Nigeria.

*Crowds celebrating the army coup in Libreville, capital of Gabon, 30 August 2023* (Photo cred: *Al Jazeera*)

The three Sahel colonies themselves seem somewhat more secure in so far as they can support one another⁷ and also in so far as the clients of the Western powers are reluctant to take military action against them, a reluctance already demonstrated by the failure of ECOWAS to invade to date.⁸

Overall, these developments cannot but have given heart to national liberation forces, including revolutionary ones, across Africa and even beyond. French client regimes will be looking over their shoulder but so too will the client regimes of the British and the USA.

End.

FOOTNOTES

1For an indication of how Africa was carved up for exploitation by European powers even in the 1940s, see the map https://omniatlas.com/maps/sub-saharan-africa/19401108/

2Not so recent was Algiers, where the people fought a hard and bitter struggle against the colonists and France and declared independence in 1954. Some other countries also declared independence but were subverted or imperial client regimes came to power in them, often also by coup.

3Economic Community of West African States.

4For most of its history since the Reformation, only Anglican MPs had been admitted to this Parliament and for much of that time too, only Anglicans could vote. Progressive national bourgeoisie such as Grattan and Tone had failed to overturn this exclusiveness and it was that which convinced Wolfe Tone and other United Irishmen that a revolution was necessary. They rose unsuccessfully in 1798 and again in 1803.

5Na Gaimbíní, the Irish capitalist class that arose under British occupation to which it was subservient. Some at least of the wealth accumulated by this class was through gaining control of lands abandoned or having to be sold at a loss by their occupants during the Great Hunger of 1845-1849. The name has now passed on to describe the foreign-dependent client capitalist class of the Irish state, first subservient to British colonialism, then to US imperialism and finally to EU imperialism.

6As we recognise USA dominance of Latin America today through invasions, sponsored coups and financial controls, we are likely to be surprised to find that Latin America was largely a British imperialist preserve through much of the 19^th Century and up until WWII, when it had to cede much of it to the USA in exchange for war material support.

7And perhaps be supported by nearby Algeria.

8Despite the deadline the organisation issued for reinstating Niger’s deposed President having long passed.

SOURCES AND USEFUL LINKS

https://www.breakingnews.ie/explained/the-wealthy-dynastic-leader-of-gabon-who-believed-he-could-resist-a-coup-1521039.html

https://omniatlas.com/maps/sub-saharan-africa/19401108/

Gabon history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Gabon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gabon

Niger Coup leaders learn from French history?

On August 22, 2023August 22, 2023 By rebelbreezeIn Africa, Current Affairs Comment, Executions, France, French Colonialism & Neo-Colonialism, History, National LiberationLeave a comment

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time: 3 mins.)

The leaders of the Nigerien coup of 31^st July, breaking the bondage of the country to its neo-colonial French masters, may be applying lessons from French history all the same.

Not from the Liberté, Egalité et Fraternité of the French Revolution of 1789¹, however.

No, instead they may be remembering the history of the Paris Commune on 18^th March 1871, the first city in the world to come under a revolutionary socialist regime.²

*The final battle in defence of the Paris Commune 1871* (Image sourced: *Internet*)

regime.²

In the midst of a crisis impelled by the defeat of France by Prussia under Bismark and Paris being under siege, along with crushing armistice terms for France accepted by Chief Executive Adolphe Thiers, Paris was experiencing much social and political unrest.

The authorities under the leadership of Thiers moved to disarm the people by removing canon that had been paid for by popular subscription. Crowds refused to allow this and protests grew into insurrection as soldiers of the National Guard³ joined the demonstrators.

The Communards overthrew the authorities in Paris but failed to prevent many of their enemies leaving the city.

Advised by General Vinoy, Thiers ordered the evacuation to Versailles of all the regular forces in Paris, some 40,000 soldiers, including those in the fortresses around the city; the regrouping of all the army units in Versailles; and the departure of all government ministries from the city.

Thiers set up his government in Versailles where he and his advisors plotted the retaking of Paris and the defeat of the Commune, which showed all the signs of becoming permanent.

However, Thiers lacked sufficient armed forces to fight through the Prussians. In the end he reaffirmed their crushing armistice terms in defeat and begged the Prussians to allow his armed forces (partly composed of released POWs) through the Prussian encirclement to attack Paris.

Bismark agreed and the French troops under Marshall Mahon⁴ (who had himself escaped from Paris) were given safe conduct towards Paris and through the besieging Prussians so that they could attack the city.

After fierce fighting but often under inefficient military leadership, the Commune was defeated by French troops on 28^th May 1871, with wounded defenders bayoneted and prisoners executed en masse or, in the cases of some leaders, tried and executed or exiled.⁵

*Plaque in Paris at the scene of many of the French executions of Communards* (Image sourced: *Internet*)

NIGER TODAY

The Niger coup leaders today are holding the former elected President, Mohamed Bazoum, the neo-colonial puppet of the French, along with his family, under house arrest. Western leaders call for their release, which no doubt seems humanitarian, but the coup leaders refuse.

*Nigerian military including coup leaders and civilian administrators* (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

Certainly the coup leaders are treating their captives better than have been many leaders of former regimes overthrown by coup or invasion.

General Franco’s regime tortured and murdered around 200,000 civilians in his military-fascist coup 1936-1939, most of them after the war in Spain.

Nationalist elected President Patrice Lumumba of the Congo was murdered in 1961 by the Belgian-USA puppet Moise Tshombe’s forces.

When South Vietnam’s USA-friendly President Ngô Đình Diệm began to show tendencies towards independence in 1963, he was murdered in a coup by General Dương Văn Minh with CIA collusion. Salvador Allende was murdered in the 1976 CIA-masterminded coup in Chile.

National leader of Iraq Saddam Hussein⁶ (2006) and Muammar Ghadaffi of Libya (2011) were murdered by internal but USA-allied forces.

*Mohamed* *Bazoum, deposed President of Niger and Emmanuel Macron, President of France, photographed in happier days for them both* (Photo cred: *Ludovic MARIN / AFP*)

Mohamed Bazoum is alive and under house arrest with his wife and son, reportedly with canned food but without electricity and running water, though he is permitted regular contact with the West and recently met with the premier of Chad on 31^st July.

Although Niger is a land extremely rich in natural resources including oil, gold and uranium being exploited by foreign companies, 80% of the population ruled under Bazoum’s presidency have never had electrity or domestic running water.

Despite demands from the Western powers, the coup leaders, perhaps remembering the history of the Paris Commune, refuse free Mohamed Bazoum, perhaps to act as a figurehead to lead a western-supported army back to ‘liberate’ Niger and to ‘restore democracy’.

End.

FOOTNOTES

1 These principles were of course not applied to France’s colonies, as the sad history of Haiti demonstrates. The African slaves there took the principles seriously but Napoleon waged war upon them and eventually, through the treachery of captains of Toussaint L’Ouverture, leader of the successful slave insurrection, delivered L’Ouverture and his family to end their days in French dungeons. Haiti was returned to French rule, where it remained until eventually overthrown again but under French neo-colonial, later USA neo-colonial dominion where it remains today.

2 Among the decrees were:

separation of church and state;
remission of rents owed for the entire period of the siege (during which payment had been suspended);
abolition of child labour and night work in bakeries;
granting of pensions to the unmarried companions and children of national guardsmen killed in active service;
free return by pawnshops of all workmen’s tools and household items, valued up to 20 francs, pledged during the siege;
postponement of commercial debt obligations, and the abolition of interest on the debts;
right of employees to take over and run an enterprise if it were deserted by its owner; the Commune, nonetheless, recognised the previous owner’s right to compensation;
prohibition of fines imposed by employers on their workmen.

3 The National Guard had defended Paris while the French Army was in the field and became the army of the Commune.

4 Patrice de Mac Mahon, of part of the Mac Mathúna/ Mac Mahon clan from Ireland emigrated to and settled in France (14 members of the family served in the army).

5 The national forces killed in battle or quickly executed between 10,000 and 15,000 Communards, though one unconfirmed estimate from 1876 put the toll as high as 20,000. Fifteen thousand were tried, 13,500 of whom were found guilty. Ninety-five were sentenced to death, 251 to forced labor, and 1,169 to deportation (Wikipedia).

6 Saddam Hussein at least had a trial and the question is not whether, if one agrees with a death penalty, he deserved to die but that it was the ‘justice of the victor’, in this case that being the USA, certainly guilty of many more murders and tortures than was Hussein. Ghadaffi was murdered most painfuly without any trial by his captors.

AFRICA – MILITARY COUPS & DEMOCRACY

On August 9, 2023 By rebelbreezeIn Africa, Current Affairs Comment, France, French Colonialism & Neo-Colonialism, Imperialism, National Liberation, Official Corruption, Political Analysis3 Comments

News & Views No.6 Diarmuid Breatnach (Reading time: 4 mins.)

The media has alerted us to a military coup taking place in an African country most of us won’t even have heard of: Niger.

Apparently Niger had a democratically-elected leader overthrown by the coup and many states, including France and the US, are very concerned about this. Naturally so. Military juntas are surely no fit replacement for democracy.

*Map of much of Africa showing Niger in green and surrounding states* (Source: *Wikipedia*)

But it turns out that the USA and France have other reasons to be concerned apart from questions of democracy: both states have military stationed there, the USA including in fact a major military installation producing and operating drones, some of which are armed.

But why are they there? Well, to defend Niger against fundamentalist Muslim jihadists. That’s good, right? Helping the Nigerien people. It’s true that some unkind (and possibly ungrateful) people accuse the US of having given birth to the islamist fundamentalists originally, but, well …

We learned just recently two very strange facts, side by side: 1) Niger is one of the poorest countries in the world and 2) it is the seventh-largest exporter of a highly-valuable material: uranium.

Niger also has gold mines (two years ago 18 people were killed in a mine collapse) but curiously, Niger has no gold reserves at all. France, on the other hand, which has no gold mines whatsoever had 2,437 tonnes of the metal in their reserves at the end of the second quarter of this year.

Uranium is valuable because it is used in the production of nuclear power which, in turn, in many parts of the world, is used to generate electricity. France being one of those countries, where 80% of its uranium comes from … Niger. And 20% of the EU’s electricity likewise.

Hmm. So there might be reasons apart from restoring democracy for France being so upset at the coup, especially when the coup leaders say they want to break with France.

*Urban scene in Niger, exact location and date unknown* (Source: *Internet*)

But going back to this country being one of the poorest in the world, at least they must have plenty of generated power, right? Well, no. It turns out that 80% of the people have no electricity supply whatsoever. Democratic government or not, that can’t be right, can it?

Anyway, France has ordered the coup leaders to reinstate the deposed president with a deadline of last Sunday or it would take stern action. The deadline has passed quietly without an invasion or other attack.

Niger was a colony of France and became independent in 1960 so it’s kind of strange that France has such a grip on the country still.

Another five states border Niger including Mali and Burkina Faso, also ex-French colonies, also under recent military coup juntas. Their leaders have said any attack on Niger would be considered an attack on them.

Algeria was also a French colony and fought a very hard liberation struggle for independence, since when it has friendly relations with Russia. Algerian armoured vehicles have moved to the border with Niger, in what will be understood as a warning to other states not to invade.

Chad is another ex-French colony in the region but it made some threatening noises against the military coup leaders in Niger; Senegal too is an ex-French colony loyal to France.

Senegal’s political opposition leader Ousmane Sonko is on hunger strike in jail and his lawyer Juan Branco, extradited from Mauritania is in jail too for defending Sonko but nobody seems to be shouting about Senegal’s lack of democracy – not that we can hear, at least.

The west-friendly (some say neo-colonial) state of Nigeria, the leading state in the pro-western African alliance COWAS has imposed sanctions and threatened to invade Niger if the previous regime is not reinstated. Nigeria is huge and with extremely valuable resources, including oil.

In 1995, in defence of British Petroleum’s operations, Nigeria hanged peaceful environmental activists in the Delta region, the Ogoni Nine. As many as 4 in 10 Nigerians live below the national poverty line with 133 million living in poverty, according to its own national statistics.

Regarding Africa and coups, we Irish have cause to remember the Congo where Irish UN peacekeeping soldiers were killed, after a military uprising in a province against the elected patriot Patrice Lumumba was carried out in support of Belgian mining interests, supported by the USA.

And Uganda’s military rule under Idi Amin was generally OK with the western powers until he began to throw his weight around against the British, who had trained and supported him, so they had to bring him down.

*Supporters in Niger of the military coup there demonstrating.* (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

Elsewhere, for example in Latin America, military coups in many countries including Brazil, Chile and Argentina have been supported by the western powers or indeed instigated by them. As in what is now Iran, when the British overthrew the Shah in 1941 to replace him with his son.

Dictatorship from 1965 in Indonesia was widely seen by the western powers as necessary to stop the spread of socialist and national liberation ideas and, as in most such coups, the toll in massacres and torture by the new regime was huge. None such in Niger though, at least so far.

If we were citizens of Niger would we think ourselves better off under a military junta rather than a democratically-elected President? We might initially be more concerned as to whether the riches of our country were to be used to lift us from such poverty.

To give us education, hospitals, medicines, food, work, clean water, refuge from heat, power … or instead extracted and shipped out to some other country.

And what would we think of France, possibly backed by other NATO countries and their client states, coming to invade our land and bring back the old state of affairs?

End.