Follow Us on Google
The exit of three West African nations of Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso, and with immediate effect from the Economic Community of West African state, raise serious concerns about how the regional bloc had addressed itself to its founding ideals and philosophy. This, I believe, should be the concern of commentators, especially, those who see the action of the three nations as a vote of no confidence on it leadership by President Bola Tinubu of Nigeria.
For emphasis, ECOWAS was formed on May 28, 1975 following what became known as the ‘Treaty of Lagos’. Its mandate, at formation was “to promote economic integration in all fields of activity.” Also, it was to “foster the ideal collective self-sufficiency for its member states,” and as a trading union, it was also “meant to create a single, large trading bloc through economic cooperation.” as stated in its documents, “the vision of ECOWAS is the creation of a borderless region where the population has access to its abundant resources and is able to exploit same through the creation of opportunities under a sustainable environment.” Implication of this vision is that ECOWAS was to become “a region where the citizens enjoy free movement, have access to efficient education and health systems and engage in economic and commercial activities while living in dignity in an atmosphere of peace and security.”
Some of the fundamental principles of ECOWAS include, but not limited to non-aggression between member-state, equality and inter-dependence of members states, solidarity and collective self-reliance, maintenance of regional peace, stability and security through the promotion and strengthening of good neighbourliness; accountability, economic and social justice and popular participation in development; promotion and consolidation of a democratic system of governance in each member state as envisaged by the declaration of political principles adopted in Abuja on July 6, 1991 among others.
To realise these ideals, ECOWAS created specialised agencies like West African Health Organisation (WAHO), West African Monetary Agency (WAMA), Inter-governmental Action Group Against Money laundering and Terrorist Financing in West Africa (GIABA), ECOWAS Gender and Development Center (EGDC), ECOWAS Youth and Sports Development Center, ECOWAS Water Resources Coordination Center, West African Power Pool, ECOWAS Regional Center for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (ECREEE), ECOWAS Regional Electricity Regulatory Authority (ERERA), ECOWAS Infrastructure Projects Preparation and Development Unit (PPDU), and ECOAS brown card Scheme. These agencies and their functions are not known to most of the population in West Africa because their impacts are not felt by the people.
However, the Military leaders of Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso, in their simultaneous national addresses, accused ECOWAs of deviating from its foundational ideas and tilting more towards neo-colonial powers and aggression than good neighbourliness and protection of member states against terrorism and insecurity. They jointly accused ECOWAS of imposing “illegitimate, inhuman and irresponsible” sanction against them in the bid to force their hands against what has become a popular uprising against the elected governments of their different countries which they described as taking the destinies of their countries into their own hands.
The Malian, Nigerien and Burkinabe leaders believe that ECOWAS is now a tool in the hands of neo-colonials (the West) and also, a puppet used to push new colonial ideologies that frustrate the economic development of their countries. For them, ECOWAS serves no useful purpose especially as they believe that their former colonial master, France, may be nudging ECOWAS on more sanctions against the juntas. Though they announced immediate withdrawal, the ECOWAS secretariat said it will take up to one year for the countries to fully exit the bloc. Before then, according to ECOWAS, they must fulfill their obligations to the body.
The sentiments expressed by Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso, are logical. Those three leaders may not be the first to express such views. Many had done so in the past especially with regards to poor leadership and governance which had led to great lack of political commitments especially as it regards democratic governance, elections and respect for constitutional term limits. Many have also accused ECOWAS states of creating administrative restrictions that frustrate free movement of goods and services within the region despite the foundational ideals of free access among states. There are also issues about civil wars in the region which, collectively, ECOAS has been handicapped at addressing much the same way that it has failed to address issues of terrorism, money laundering, gun running and theft of solid minerals which are daily destabilizing economies of West African states.
One area which ECOWAS has failed woefully is with regards to democratic governance and institutionalisation of systems that would work to promote good governance. The way ECOWAS has carried on suggests that the bloc is a gathering of political leaders who are afraid to leave the stage. For instance, the military coup in Guinea was roundly welcomed by Guineans and even some African leaders close to the civil government in the country because of the abuse of the constitution on term limits. The Military coups in Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso were all roundly celebrated as popular uprisings against the civilian governments because of the failure to translate governance into deliverables that empower the citizens. In Niger for instance, the people celebrated the coming of the military and joined hands in chasing away French colonialists who had lived on their natural resources from the 1960s. Successive governments in that country did as much as nothing to recalibrate governance and make the nation’s wealth to work for it and its people.
This same scenario played out in other West African states where leaders see themselves as entitled to the presidential office for life. ECOWAS has also been lame duck in tackling insecurity in the region. This is one area where ECOWAS, as a commission, had demonstrated inefficiency and lack of capacity. This has increased risks to life and living in the region just as the group’s failure to achieve a drive towards good education and health, jobs and livable wages drives its citizens on the annual dangerous and suicidal boat voyage across the Mediterranean into Europe.
Considered against the reasons given by the three nations for quitting the bloc, ECOWAS founding ideals are far from being achieved any bit almost 50 years after it was established. Though Mauritania had quit ECOWAS and later sought a level of cooperation with some ECOWAS state, the Nigerien, Malian and Burkinabe exit is a litmus test for ECOWAS leaders to recalibrate their understanding of the ideals of the bloc and seek much practical ways of creating them as democratic deliverables for the people of the region.
Put on the scale of 1-10, all the founding ideals of ECOWAS will score less than two. For a region in urgent need of development and radical socio-economic change, the leadership of the bloc ought to sit back to re-examine the reasons these three nations adduced for their action rather than see it as a vote of no confidence on Tinubu, or, as an attempt by the Russian federation to expand hostilities in the west using West Africa as a test ground. I am tempted to argue that if the ideals of ECOWAS are being achieved, foreign infiltration may not be as easy as it now seems.
