Since General Abdourahamane Tchiani seized power in Niger Republic, the country has grappled with mounting economic pressures, the latest being the worsening fuel shortage gripping its towns and cities. Once a relatively stable supply hub, Niger is seeing long queues at petrol stations, soaring black market prices, and a collapsed transport system. The fuel crisis, exacerbated by sanctions, governance disruptions, and strained regional ties, is fast becoming a litmus test for Tchiani’s military regime—a stark reminder that seizing power is one thing, but sustaining a nation’s lifeline is another.
This development came barely six months after Tchiani led a successful coup. In a move that stunned West Africa and the world, Tchiani formally withdrew Niger from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). The withdrawal came as Mali and Burkina Faso, Niger’s Sahelian neighbors, also exited the regional bloc, highlighting a profound shift in West Africa’s political landscape. However, Niger’s case is particularly notable given its central role in the Sahel’s counterterrorism strategies, and reliance on Western security partnerships. Niger is at the heart of the region, sharing borders with Nigeria, Algeria, Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad, Libya, Mali, democratic bulwark Senegal, and economic over-performers Cote d’Ivoire. Niger provides a compelling lens through which to view the broader crisis of regional governance.
To understand Niger’s drastic move, we need to look beyond the surface of sanctions and military threats, and look to foreign policy theories of realism and dependency theory.
In Niger’s case, these theories of realism and dependency help to explain why the Tchiani–led military junta framed its withdrawal from ECOWAS as more than a response to sanctions or external pressure. Rather, Tchiani presented the decision as a sovereign act, and a deliberate effort to assert control over the country’s political future, by pushing back against neocolonial influence, and challenging a regional bloc seen to be enforcing external interests.
A Battle over Sovereignty and Influence
When ECOWAS demanded the reinstatement of President Mohammed Bazoum and threatened military intervention, Niger’s military rulers responded defiantly. They cited foreign manipulation through ECOWAS, their failure to resolve regional security crises, and unfair sanctions that were hurting ordinary citizens. At the heart of this standoff: sovereignty.
From a realist perspective, states act primarily to secure their national interests, prioritising power, security, and autonomy over cooperation. For Niger, ECOWAS’ intervention was seen as an infringement on its sovereignty, where the regional bloc was acting as an external force attempting to dictate internal affairs. However, arguably Niger and other member states have repeatedly, willingly agreed to Supranational Charters ceding some level of their sovereignty, including the Accra 2022 statement, 2000 Lome Declaration and the 1999 Algiers Declaration. Specifically in relation to ECOWAS, the 1999 and 2001 Protocols, which Niger had agreed to, stipulates that sanctions and the threat of military intervention, can be deployed to promote constitutional governance and used as mechanisms to address unconstitutional changes. Despite this, recent attempts at intervention were an infringement too far on Niger’s sovereignty for Tchiani.
Niger’s military leadership, by rejecting ECOWAS’s authority and withdrawing from the bloc, challenged the regional norms established by these institutions. This move raises the question of when and why national interest supersedes supranational or regional protocols.
Through the lens of realism, it is argued weaker states must assert their independence to survive in a competitive, anarchic global system. Moreover, Mearsheimer’s offensive realism theory argues that there is no central authority above states, therefore, every state is responsible for its own survival. This reasoning is evident in Niger’s withdrawal, as they accused the regional bloc of becoming a threat to its member states and its population. Furthermore, the influence Niger wields with large mineral resources cannot be overstated in the context of the regional and international economic space. This realist stance is corroborated by the military junta’s move to take over the control of one of the world’s largest Uranium deposits, which had been under the control, mined and extracted by Orano, a French nuclear firm.
Challenging Neocolonialism: The Dependency Theory Angle
As compelling as the realism lens is in this case, it is myopic and only tells part of the story. Niger’s decision also aligns with dependency theory. Dependence theory argues that former colonies remain economically and politically subjugated to ex-colonial powers as a result of colonial legacies. In this case, until recently, Niger remained largely dependent on France, their former colonial master. France’s lasting mark is evident in Niger’s previous official language, French, the major players in their extractive industry, including France’s Orano, and French military bases in Ouallam and Niamey.
Moreover, ECOWAS, while a regional body of developing nations, has recently been perceived as and accused of channeling foreign influence which continues to shape local politics. Niger’s leadership may have seen it to be necessary to leave ECOWAS and forge new alliances, notably with Russia and other non-Western actors. This move was not just an assertion of sovereignty, but a rebellion against a postcolonial system seen as perpetuating economic dependency and political subordination. Every move since the removal of Bazoum, however, remains undemocratic, so this assertion of political liberty by the Tchiani-led military regime appears not to have extended to Niger’s citizens.
Deeper Regional Dynamics: Why ECOWAS is Losing Grip
Niger’s withdrawal cannot be seen in isolation. It is part of a larger political transformation sweeping West Africa, which is fueled by security failures, disillusionment with regional politics, and resentment over sanctions.
In citing security failures, the Niger military ruler argued that the country, along with Mali and Burkina Faso, has faced years of insecurity, including jihadist insurgencies, humanitarian crises, and development stagnation. ECOWAS’ inability to deliver tangible improvements, increasingly apparent corrupt practices, combined with rising citizen frustration, has created fertile ground for military takeovers. These military rulers believe a move away from ECOWAS will better equip them to restore security and maintain order, yet security tensions, violence and human rights abuses have only increased.
Niger’s junta and some citizens viewed ECOWAS as increasingly disconnected from the realities on the ground, in what would be described as ‘ECOWAS of Heads of State’, rather than ‘ECOWAS of the People.’ Political leaders and heads of state can decide to stay or withdraw from the bloc, whereas withdrawal has far-reaching economic consequences and humanitarian crises for the people, who are unlikely to have a say in the matter.
Ultimately, their resentment over sanctions could be seen in Niger’s response to ECOWAS’ imposition of border closures, and threats of military intervention. Rather than incentivising dialogue, these actions hardened anti-ECOWAS sentiment and strengthened the military regime’s domestic legitimacy. Critics argue that ECOWAS’ reliance on these sanctions, the strictest the bloc has ever imposed on an errant member state, exacerbated tensions and accelerated the breakaway.
However, a larger issue is the question of the power and capability of a regional body like ECOWAS that does not have its own sovereignty or autonomy. This poses an institutional limitation for the bloc, making them incapacitated in following through on their mechanisms and sanctions. For instance, a country like Niger that is privy to the agreement where ECOWAS is mandated to sanction any member nation under military rule, should not have the option to withdraw from the same regional bloc, now that the sanction is imposed on them. Moreso, the incapacity of ECOWAS is evident given they are relaxing those sanctions while Niger’s military rulers are not showing signs of returning to democratic rule, nor reneging their decision to secede ECOWAS.
What Lies Ahead? Implications for Niger and the Region
Niger’s bold move carries significant consequences for the military junta, its people, ECOWAS, and for West Africa. For Niger and Nigeriens, the economic sanctions increased their isolation, cutting them of from ECOWAS’ trade and financial networks, making it harder to import goods and maintain stability. In addition, many will argue that the security vulnerabilities are now more evident as the withdrawal could weaken collective efforts to combat terrorism, leaving Niger more vulnerable to cross-border threats.
For ECOWAS, the exit of three member states raises questions about ECOWAS’ supranational power, its ability to maintain unity and promote democratic norms. The issue becomes more complex considering that these countries recently launched the Alliance of Sahel States (AES) — a new regional grouping designed to reflect their priorities and assert greater autonomy, in an already fragmented region. These exits become more worrisome amidst shifting geopolitical ties and Russia’s growing influence among these three countries in the Sahel and Africa at large.
At the heart of this regional shift is an emerging wild card, Togo. There are growing speculations that Togo, a coastal state, might consider joining the Alliance of Sahel States (AES). If it does, it would grant the landlocked AES countries access to maritime trade routes and access to the Atlantic Ocean through the Port of Lomé. Such a move would strengthen AES, increasing the member nations to four, while they pivot away from ECOWAS’ frameworks of political and economic integration. If finalised, Togo’s integration into the AES would significantly shift the balance of trade and power in West Africa, accelerating the formation of an alternative regional bloc with different political, economic, and diplomatic priorities.
Conclusion: A New Political Era for West Africa?
Niger’s withdrawal from ECOWAS marks more than a diplomatic row; it reflects a deeper contest over sovereignty, legitimacy, and regional order. It is the product of long-standing frustrations with external domination, internal insecurity, and broken promises of regional solidarity. By framing its actions through the lenses of realism and dependency theory, Niger’s military regime aims to redefine the nation’s place — not just within West Africa – but in the global system. Being defiant and hellbent on maintaining the status quo indicates resiliency; however, the long-term risks are real: economic hardship, diplomatic isolation, and further instability. For ECOWAS, the urgent task is not just punishing disobedient members — it is rebuilding trust, addressing grievances, and proving the value of regional cooperation in a fast-changing world. Because of the changing regional dynamics, West Africa stands at a crossroads, and the path it chooses will shape the region’s future for decades to come.
Ahmad Aluko is a Researcher who is passionate about strengthening democratic processes and promoting good governance.
