During his long rule Col. Muammar Qaddafi has exercised substantial influence over Africa. The Colonel has aided client regimes, helped bring rulers to power or ruin, and intervened in conflicts as participant or peacemaker. As this map shows, his influence has been particularly pronounced in Sahelian countries like Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, and Chad.
The civil war in Libya has dramatically affected the Sahel: Niger and other countries are absorbing thousands of refugees, Sahelians are being accused of serving as pro-Qaddafi mercenaries, Libyan weapons have reportedly traveled south, and money flows have been disrupted or altered. Perhaps reflecting the interlinked fates of Libya and the Sahel, the latter has been well represented in the African Union’s peace efforts, providing two of the five members of the African Union’s committee on Libya (they are President Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz of Mauritania, who chairs the committee, and President Amadou Toumani Toure of Mali). This AU group, at least initially, tried to broker a peace that would have allowed Mr. Qaddafi to remain in power.
Given all that, it is significant to see several Sahelian leaders begin to speak about – and act to bring about – a post-Qaddafi Libya. Senegal appears to have led the trend, with President Abdoulaye Wade establishing relations with the Libyan rebels in mid-May. Last week, Mr. Wade met with rebel leaders in Benghazi and said that Qaddafi should step down. Gambia also recognizes the rebels. Wade’s call for a transition was seconded last week by Mauritanian President Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz, who said that Qaddafi’s “departure has become necessary.” With this, Mr. Abdel Aziz seemed to speak for the African Union as a whole. Another Sahelian leader, Chad’s President Idriss Deby, soon added his voice to the chorus. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Chadian Foreign Minister Moussa Faki met on the sidelines of the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) forum in Zambia last week, and afterwards Clinton announced that “the Chadian government does not support Gaddafi.”
To say there is an emerging Sahelian consensus against Qaddafi would be going too far. I have not seen a statement from Malian President Amadou Toumani Toure calling for Qaddafi’s resignation, nor to my knowledge has Niger's newly elected President Mahamadou Issoufou gone beyond calling for a solution to the crisis (without stating a preference on who rules Libya). President Blaise Compaore of Burkina Faso, according to one source, has continued to proclaim solidarity with Qaddafi. And further east, Sudanese President Omar al Bashir has not demanded Qaddafi’s ouster either. So if the baseline position among Sahelian leaders three or four months ago was support for Qaddafi, or neutrality, many of them have not moved. But the movement that has occurred in the region has been toward breaking with the Colonel.
Agence France-Presse has discussed the Senegalese and Mauritanian statements in the context of a larger African shift away from Qaddafi. Attention to the Sahelian context is also important, though, as Qaddafi’s departure could affect the Sahel more than any other region in Africa. The calculated risks that Wade, Abdel Aziz, and Mr. Deby are taking indicate that the political landscape in the Sahel has already shifted even though Qaddafi still clings to power. These decisions also suggest some confidence on the part of Sahelian leaders that siding with Qaddafi’s foes is a better bet than staying neutral or continuing to support the Colonel on the chance that he might weather the storm. If and when Qadhafi does go, the relationships forged in this time of crisis, both between the Sahelian countries and the rebels as well as among the Sahelian countries themselves, will influence the direction of regional relations in the future.