The situation in the Sahel, particularly across nations like Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, has been steadily deteriorating for over a decade. The core issue isn’t simply a lack of resources; it’s the deeply embedded nature of the vulnerabilities – a complex interplay of desertification, weak governance, ethnic divisions, competition for scarce resources, and the exploitation of instability by extremist groups. The legacy of failed states following the Libyan intervention in 2011, coupled with a protracted and ultimately unsuccessful French military intervention, created a security vacuum quickly filled by militant organizations like Jama’at Nasr al-Islam wal Muslimin (JNIM) and the Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (ISGS). The resultant conflict has displaced millions, disrupted agricultural production, and dramatically eroded state capacity, leading to a profound crisis of governance and a critical dependence on external assistance.
## The Paradox of Intervention
Historically, interventions in regions facing similar challenges have often followed a pattern of short-term emergency aid coupled with the imposition of externally designed development programs. These programs, frequently focused on top-down agricultural modernization or resource management, have repeatedly failed to achieve lasting success. As Humphrey and others outline in their “Aid at a Crossroads” synthesis report, reliance on these technocratic models – predicated on the assumption of linear progress and universal applicability – has demonstrably exacerbated existing problems. “Conventional, technocratic models of aid are poorly suited to environments defined by uncertainty, climate shocks and conflict,” the report concludes, highlighting the critical flaw in assuming that a standardized solution can effectively address the diverse and rapidly shifting realities of the Sahel. This overemphasis on ‘fixing’ the problem, rather than supporting local resilience, has fueled resentment and undermined local agency.
Recent data from the World Food Programme reveals a significant decline in yields for staple crops in the region, directly attributable to prolonged drought and the deliberate destruction of farmland by militant groups. Simultaneously, the withdrawal of international security forces – largely driven by political considerations and shifting strategic priorities – has left a security void, enabling the expansion of extremist influence and further destabilizing local communities. The US Government’s recent reduction in counter-terrorism assistance, coupled with the European Union’s scaling back of funding for security operations, has created a demonstrable gap in the security architecture, a shift that has profoundly impacted the operational capacity of regional forces. “The decline in international security assistance has been a critical factor in the recent gains by extremist groups,” noted Dr. Fatima Diallo, a senior researcher at the Institute for Security Studies in Nairobi, in a briefing last month. “The absence of a robust security presence directly correlates with an increased ability for these groups to control territory and conduct attacks.”
## Stakeholder Dynamics and Shifting Priorities
Several key stakeholders are operating within this volatile landscape. The G5 Sahel nations – Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Senegal, and Mauritania – are increasingly reliant on Russian security assistance, primarily through the Wagner Group, reflecting a strategic realignment driven by disillusionment with Western partnerships. China’s economic footprint in the region is expanding rapidly, offering investment and trade opportunities but also raising concerns about debt sustainability and potential geopolitical influence. The United Nations, through its peacekeeping operations and humanitarian programs, continues to play a critical role, albeit often hampered by logistical challenges and security constraints. Furthermore, the African Union’s efforts to deploy a regional force are struggling to gain traction due to funding limitations and operational complexities.
The increasing competition for influence between these actors is creating a complex and potentially destabilizing dynamic. The shift in security arrangements, coupled with the erosion of state authority and the rise of non-state actors, presents a serious challenge to regional stability. Data from the International Crisis Group indicates a significant increase in cross-border violence as militant groups exploit the porous borders and weak governance structures. The next six months will likely see a continued escalation of this competition, with potentially significant implications for regional security.
## Looking Ahead: A Requiem for Technocratic Solutions
Predicting the short-term trajectory of the crisis is challenging, but several key trends are emerging. Within the next six months, we can anticipate further deterioration in humanitarian conditions, potentially triggering a full-blown famine in some of the most affected areas. The influence of extremist groups is likely to continue to expand, exploiting the existing vulnerabilities and capitalizing on the security vacuum. The long-term outcome, extending over the next 5-10 years, hinges on the ability of regional actors to build more resilient governance structures, address the underlying drivers of conflict, and effectively manage the impacts of climate change. However, relying solely on externally driven solutions – particularly those rooted in a technocratic worldview – is likely to prove unsustainable. A truly effective approach must prioritize local ownership, support community-based adaptation strategies, and focus on building long-term capacity within existing systems. “We need to move beyond simply throwing money at the problem,” argues Professor David Malone, former Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Afghanistan, “and instead, focus on empowering local communities to shape their own futures.” The Sahelian crisis demands a profound re-evaluation of the principles guiding international assistance, one that recognizes the complexities of the region and embraces a more nuanced and locally-driven approach. The question is not whether we can alleviate immediate suffering, but whether we can genuinely help the Sahel achieve lasting stability, a question that demands careful reflection and, ultimately, a commitment to genuine partnership.