The escalating tensions between the United States and France regarding security operations in the Sahel region of Africa represent a significant, potentially destabilizing, shift in global alliances and underscores the complex challenges of counterterrorism and governance in a volatile zone. The tragic death of a Kenyan Multinational Security Support (MSS) officer in Port-au-Prince, alongside growing operational discrepancies between Washington and Paris, has ignited a debate about the future of Western engagement in a region increasingly defined by state fragility and extremist violence. This divergence carries profound implications for regional security, humanitarian efforts, and the broader fight against transnational threats.
The current crisis stems from a confluence of factors, most notably a growing perception within the US government of a strategic misdirection by the French, coupled with a recalibration of American priorities. For nearly two decades, France, under successive presidencies, has maintained a robust military presence in the Sahel, primarily focused on combating jihadist groups linked to al-Qaeda and ISIS. This operation, known as Operation Barkhane, has involved direct military intervention, conducting offensive operations, and providing training and equipment to Malian forces. However, recent criticisms, fueled by reports of French involvement in supporting controversial Malian transitional government actions, coupled with a perceived lack of effective counterterrorism strategy, have prompted a reassessment of the US approach.
Historically, the US and France have collaborated on counterterrorism efforts in Africa, often through the African Crisis Response Initiative (ACRI). However, the relationship has always been fraught with differences in operational philosophy and strategic goals. The French prioritize a “boots on the ground” approach, while the US has historically favored a more indirect role, focusing on training, equipment provision, and intelligence sharing. “The fundamental challenge has always been aligning the strategic imperatives of a European power with the operational requirements of a nation deeply embedded in the African continent,” states Dr. Fatima Hassan, Senior Fellow at the Institute for Strategic Studies, in a recent analysis. “This isn’t simply a matter of differing tactics; it’s a core ideological difference regarding the nature of intervention.”
Recent developments over the past six months have dramatically exacerbated the rift. The Malian government, increasingly reliant on Russian paramilitary forces – the Wagner Group – has dramatically shifted its focus away from collaborative security operations with France. Paris has responded with a reduced operational footprint, citing concerns about the government’s legitimacy and the Wagner Group’s destabilizing influence. Simultaneously, the US, under the Biden administration, has been quietly increasing engagement with various regional actors, including Mali, offering alternative security support and bolstering diplomatic efforts. This shift is partially driven by a strategic realignment with the Gulf states, who are increasingly leveraging influence within Mali.
Key stakeholders include: The United States (through the Bureau of African Affairs and the Department of Defense), France (primarily through Operation Barkhane, now largely scaled back), the Malian Transitional Government, Kenya (leading the MSS mission), and increasingly, Russia (via the Wagner Group). The European Union is also a significant player, providing humanitarian aid and development assistance. The UN’s peacekeeping mission in Mali (MINUSMA), whose mandate is under renegotiation, adds another layer of complexity.
Data highlights the scale of the challenge. According to the Global Terrorism Index, the Sahel remains one of the most terrorist-prone regions in the world, with jihadist groups controlling significant territory and conducting frequent attacks. The number of violent incidents increased by 18% in 2024 compared to 2023, largely due to the expansion of the Wagner Group’s operations. The situation is compounded by extreme poverty, climate change, and weak governance.
“The lack of a unified, coordinated approach is creating a vacuum that extremist groups are expertly exploiting,” warns Dr. Michael Davies, a specialist in African security at Chatham House. “Without a clear, internationally agreed strategy, the Sahel risks becoming a failed zone, with devastating consequences for regional stability and global security.”
Looking ahead, the next six months will likely see continued operational divergence between the US and France. Paris is expected to further reduce its military presence, while Washington will continue to bolster security partnerships in the region. Longer-term, the potential for a complete decoupling – with the US fully supporting a Malian government aligned with Russia – is a serious possibility. Over the next five to ten years, the Sahel could become a battleground for competing geopolitical influences, with implications for Western influence in Africa and the proliferation of extremist groups.
The situation demands immediate action. A critical, and incredibly difficult, step would be a multilateral summit involving key stakeholders to establish a common framework for counterterrorism and governance in the Sahel. This framework must prioritize strengthening state institutions, addressing the root causes of instability, and fostering regional cooperation. Furthermore, the US and France need to revisit their strategic assumptions and move beyond a purely transactional approach to engagement. The future of the Sahel, and perhaps wider global security, hinges on the ability of these powerful nations to demonstrate a genuine commitment to building a more stable and secure future for a profoundly vulnerable region. The question remains: can dialogue bridge the widening gap, or will the Sahel fracture into competing spheres of influence?