High Court rules presidential advisory offices and appointments unconstitutional

The Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional the establishment of advisory offices for President William Ruto and the appointment of 21 people to these offices. The Nairobi High Court, under Justice Bahati Mwamuye, found the creation of these offices unlawful, as it ignored the Public Service Commission and Salaries and Remuneration Commission, leading to wasteful spending. Katiba Institute, the petitioner, argued the roles were duplicative and regressive. The court ordered an immediate halt to their pay, rendering all 21 advisors jobless. Prominent figures included Professor Makau Mutua (constitutional affairs), Moses Kuria (economic advisor), and Joseph Boinnet (deputy national security advisor). Others were Harriette Chiggai (women’s rights), David Ndii, and specialists in cooperatives, agriculture, and food security. Earlier reports in May 2025 listed 15 advisors, but the total grew to 21 before the ruling. Consequently, the court declared the appointments null and void from the outset, and thus legally invalid from the beginning. The court also instructed the Civil Service Commission (PSC) to conduct a comprehensive review of all offices established within the President's Executive Office since the 2010 Constitution came into force, particularly those created after August 2022. Source

High Court rules presidential advisory offices and appointments unconstitutional https://share.google/gJGdODEm2zzyuZJdh

Sexuell Harassment in Kenya Also On Men

There's a strange story in the daily newspaper "Taifa Leo." It reports that a man was sexually harassed. The man shocked many after reporting that he was sexually harassed by a woman who walked past his seat on a train. The incident occurred in public and sparked a broader debate about sexual assault against men. The police have released CCTV footage, so this story is true. The woman is being asked to come forward or assist with the investigation. Officials emphasize that sexual assault is a serious crime, regardless of gender. Activists called on all victims to report such incidents without fear. Sexual harassment on Kenyan public transport—especially on matatus (minibuses), buses, and at bus stops—is a widespread problem, primarily affecting women and girls, but also some men and non-binary passengers. The spectrum ranges from verbal abuse, lewd remarks, and sexual harassment to unwanted touching, groping, and coercion by drivers, conductors, and fellow passengers. Sexual harassment in public spaces, including public transportation, is recognized as a crime in Kenya under the Sexual Offenses Act. The 2006 Act also falls under the comprehensive provisions on gender-based violence. Studies in Nairobi show that a large proportion of harassment incidents occur on mid-sized minibuses (“manyangas”) and other forms of public transportation. A survey in Nairobi revealed that approximately 36% of commuters who experienced an assault or harassment took no action, while only about 30% reported the incident. This reflects fear, stigma, and inadequate prosecution. Women report that harassment occurs at night and that conductors are often identified as the primary perpetrators. Sexual harassment of men in Kenya is a serious but often overlooked or taboo problem. Kenya has laws against sexual harassment that theoretically protect all genders (Sexual Offences Act 2006, Employment Act 2019). In practice, however, men are often not recognized as "typical" victims, which makes legal prosecution difficult. Strong cultural taboos and traditional notions of masculinity make it hard for men to talk about harassment. Male victimization is often ridiculed or considered "unmanly." Many men do not report incidents due to shame, fear of stigmatization, or mistrust. This is especially true in male-dominated industries or hierarchical structures. Prisons are a particular hotspot for sexual violence against men. Young male students can also be affected. Legal protection is virtually nonexistent in the informal sector. The consequences are severe. Male survivors often struggle with severe psychological consequences (PTSD, depression). There is a lack of specific support services for men. Necessary measures include: 1. Raising public awareness and destigmatizing the issue. 2. Training for police, judicial, and healthcare personnel. 3. Establishing gender-sensitive support services. 4. Research and data collection that includes male experiences. 5. Strengthening legal mechanisms for all genders. The situation demonstrates that, despite legal progress, deeply ingrained gender norms continue to hinder the protection of all survivors of sexual harassment in Kenya. A holistic, gender-inclusive approach is essential for effective prevention and support. Report immediately: Use available hotlines (e.g., gender-based violence hotlines, county gender offices, or NTSA contacts) and, if possible, note the vehicle's license plate number and the time. Take advantage of safe seating options or women-friendly initiatives. Some routes and vehicles now have "safe seats" or women's seats in the front passenger seat; staying close to the driver or in designated safe zones can reduce the risk. Document and report. Taking photos (where safe), gathering witness contacts, and sharing experiences with support organizations can initiate systemic change.

Aviation Exhibition 2026 Ethiopia

The Ethiopian Aviation Exhibition 2026 is a major international event currently underway, celebrating the 90th anniversary of the Ethiopian Air Force. Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed inaugurated it on January 23, 2026, emphasizing its importance in positioning Ethiopia as Africa's leading aviation center. The Ethiopian Air Force was founded in 1929 by Emperor Haile Selassie I, making it one of the oldest air forces in sub-Saharan Africa. Its first aircraft were a Potez 25-A2 and two Brequet 19s, purchased from France. The Ethiopian Air Force participated in the Italo-Ethiopian War (1935–1936). from the 1960s, the IEAF was heavily engaged in counter-insurgency operations against Eritrean separatist guerrillas; during the war against Somalia, the Soviet Union orchestrated a massive airlift of equipment and Cuban personnel; throughout the 1980s, the air force (now often called the Ethiopian Air Force, EAF) was engaged in relentless campaigns against Eritrean and Tigrayan rebels; as the rebel advances (Derg 1991) culminated, the EAF's infrastructure was overrun; This conflict - Eritrean-Ethiopian War (1998–2000) - acted as a major catalyst. Ethiopia purchased Sukhoi Su-27s (Flankers) and MiG-21s from Russia, and Su-25s from Georgia. The Su-27s, flown by Russian and Ukrainian contract pilots, achieved air superiority over Eritrea's MiG-29s, a significant milestone; the EAF supported AU peacekeeping missions (AMISOM in Somalia) and conducted counter-insurgency operations domestically; Tigray War (2020–2022); the air force faces significant challenges due to U.S. sanctions (stemming from the Tigray War), which limit access to Western technology and spare parts, leading to maintenance and readiness issues. Its development reflects Ethiopia's shifting foreign policy: from French/Swedish to American and Soviet, and finally to a multipolar dependence on Russia, China, and other powers. The crucial role of the air force is that in every major conflict—the Ogaden War, Eritrean independence, the 1998–2000 war, and the Tigray War—air superiority has been a decisive, often war-deciding, factor. The air force has been destroyed and rebuilt multiple times, underscoring its strategic importance to the Ethiopian state. The Tigray War confirmed the central role of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in modern African conflicts—a trend that Ethiopia has embraced. The Ethiopian Air Force remains a central institution, crucial for national sovereignty, regional influence, and internal security in a historically unstable region. The exhibition, featuring the Black Lion Air Show, will take place from January 23 to the end of January 2026 in Bishoftu (near Addis Ababa). Modern aircraft, drones, and aviation technologies will be showcased by international participants, including companies from the United Arab Emirates, Russia, China, India, and South Africa. Under the motto "Flying into the Future, Building a Shared Future" (a nod to the Air Show's theme, "Where Lions Rule the Skies"), the exhibition promotes technological advancement, the training of skilled professionals, and regional cooperation. The event attracts local and international stakeholders to strengthen Ethiopia's leadership in aerospace. The Expo's theme is "Let's Build Future Aviation Capabilities Together."

https://youtu.be/JOcksxlZIvM?si=VVAYydxsI3jSU21f https://www.mae.ro/sites/default/files/file/expo2025/documentatie/14%20GL2-1-3etc.%20Guidelines%20for%20the%20use%20of%20the%20Association%20IP%20(non-commercial%20use).pdf https://www.ena.et/web/eng/w/eng_8175308 https://en.sputniknews.africa/20260124/1082784790.html https://www.etaf90years.com/etn/aviation-expo-black-lion-air-show-2026/ https://www.ebc.et/english/Home/NewsDetails%3FNewsId=4011 https://www.eyeradio.org/ethiopian-pm-opens-historic-aviation-expo-for-fdre-air-force-90th-anniversary/

The Role of the US and France in Africa

The Role of the US and France in Africa US intervention in Africa, particularly in East Africa and the Democratic Republic of Congo, was and remains a complex web of geostrategic, economic, and ideological interests. Support for certain "pillars of the state" often came at the expense of democracy, human rights, and long-term stability. The Cold War was the primary driving force (1960s–1980s). The primary goal was to contain Soviet influence. Pro-American, often authoritarian regimes were supported regardless of their domestic policies. Mobutu Sese Seko (DR Congo/Zaire, 1965–1997) is the prime example. He received massive military (including CIA), financial, and diplomatic support. After the assassination of Lumumba (with Western complicity) and the Congo Crisis, Washington saw Mobutu as the strong, anti-communist leader who could stabilize the vast, resource-rich country and keep it within the Western bloc. Mobutu established one of the most corrupt and repressive dictatorships in Africa. US support enabled him to maintain his regime for over three decades while the economy and the state deteriorated. Siad Barre (Somalia, 1969–1991) received massive military and economic aid in the 1980s. After the Ogaden War against Soviet-backed Ethiopia (under Mengistu), Barre switched sides. The US saw him as a strategic partner in the Horn of Africa. Barre, too, ruled with increasing repression and clientelism. His Western support contributed to the prolongation of his rule, the collapse of which in 1991 led to the complete disintegration of Somalia. Jomo Kenyatta and Daniel arap Moi (Kenya) received consistent diplomatic and economic support, as well as military cooperation. Kenya was considered a stable, pro-Western "anchor" in East Africa. Under Moi (1978-2002), the regime became increasingly autocratic and corrupt, but the US downplayed its criticism due to Nairobi's strategic importance (including its role as a base for US troops after 1998). Post-Cold War & "War on Terror" (from 2001 onward). After 1990/91, the anti-communist motive faded, and new priorities took center stage: combating terrorism, securing resources, and containing regional conflicts. Yoweri Museveni (Uganda, from 1986 onward) is one of the largest recipients of US military aid in sub-Saharan Africa. Uganda is a key partner in the US Combined Joint Task Force – Horn of Africa. Initially celebrated as a reform-oriented "New Leader," Museveni became increasingly autocratic. The US overlooked domestic repression and the lifting of the presidential age limit because Uganda is a reliable military partner in the fight against al-Shabaab in Somalia and has a stabilizing effect regionally (also in South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo). Paul Kagame (Rwanda, from 1994/2000) received strong diplomatic backing and substantial military aid. Kagame was praised for economic growth and stability. The US viewed him as an efficient, albeit authoritarian, partner, who was also seen as a stabilizing force in the unstable Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). This support continued despite serious human rights allegations and Rwandan interference in the Congo. Governments in the DRC (post-Mobutu): US policy became inconsistent but often pragmatic. After the wars (1996-2003), the US supported Joseph Kabila's government, primarily to maintain a degree of state order necessary for combating armed groups in the east and for access to critical minerals (e.g., for electronics). However, this support was less personalized than under Mobutu. Continuities and Criticism Short-term regional stability and security cooperation are often prioritized over democratic reforms and human rights. Access to strategic minerals (cobalt, copper, coltan in the Congo) and competition with China and Russia for influence are playing an increasingly important role. Supporting authoritarian regimes that themselves fuel discontent through repression can, in the long run, promote precisely the instability and extremism that one seeks to combat (e.g., in Somalia under Barre or currently in parts of eastern Congo). The US no longer openly supports individual dictators as it did during Mobutu's era, but rather cooperates with regimes considered "strong partners" in difficult regions, even if their leaders undermine democratic principles. Conclusion: Historical and current US policy in East Africa and the DRC is characterized by profound pragmatism. During the Cold War, anti-communist dictators were the preferred partners; in the "War on Terror," it is regimes that offer security cooperation. The long-term costs of this policy – ​​state collapse, ongoing conflicts and human rights violations – have often been accepted or are seen as a necessary evil in pursuit of overriding foreign policy goals. What legal violations can be attributed to the US and France? Did the US kill Muammar al-Gaddafi? This is an important question to consider in relation to the US role in Africa. The US did not directly kill Muammar al-Gaddafi. Gaddafi died on October 20, 2011, in Sirte, Libya, during the civil war. NATO forces, including US drones and fighter jets, attacked a convoy carrying Gaddafi, leading to his overthrow and capture by Libyan rebels. The rebels subsequently abused and killed him, as shown in videos and reports from Human Rights Watch. The US supported the NATO operation to enforce UN Resolution 1973, which mandated civilian protection measures and a no-fly zone. While Gaddafi's opponents are held directly responsible for his death, the NATO attacks facilitated his capture. Who Killed Thomas Sankara? Thomas Sankara, President of Burkina Faso, was assassinated in a coup on October 15, 1987. His closest confidant and successor, Blaise Compaoré, is considered the main person responsible for ordering the assassination. In 2022, a military court in Burkina Faso sentenced Compaoré in absentia to life imprisonment for complicity in the murder, attacking state security, and concealing a body. Gilbert Diendéré and Hyacinthe Kafando were also sentenced to life imprisonment as direct perpetrators. The immediate perpetrators came from Compaoré's inner circle, including members of his bodyguard; the assassination squad set out from his estate. There is evidence of French involvement, as agents deleted phone conversations after the assassination that implicated Compaoré and others. Sankara was shot dead during a cabinet meeting, along with 12 close associates. Survivor Alouna Traoré reported that Sankara sacrificed himself. Autopsies confirmed gunshot wounds. The role of the US and France in presidential overthrows in Africa is historically and politically complex and varies depending on the country and context. Here is a detailed analysis based on the available information: Role of the USA The USA has also intervened militarily and politically in Africa on several occasions, often as part of counterterrorism operations or to support specific governments. One example is the overthrow of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Haiti, where the USA played a significant role, but similar interventions have also occurred in other African countries. The USA has often attempted to protect its interests through military presence, economic support, or political influence, sometimes leading to instability or changes of government. In some cases, the USA has withdrawn troops or supported new governments after the overthrow of a president in order to pursue its strategic objectives. Both France and the USA are often criticized because their interventions in Africa have not always been in the interest of the local population, but have often been driven by geopolitical or economic motives. In some cases, these interventions have led to instability, conflict, and a power vacuum, which has created further problems. The role of both countries is viewed controversially in international debate, as they aim to promote security and stability on the one hand, but are also perceived as engaging in neo-colonial power interventions on the other. Conclusion The US and France often play a significant, yet ambivalent, role in the overthrow of presidents in Africa. They intervene militarily, politically, and economically to secure their interests, which can have both stabilizing and destabilizing effects. The precise circumstances depend heavily on the specific country and situation. Conclusion https://www.suedwind-magazin.at/spaete-gerechtigkeit-fuer-thomas-sankara/ https://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/burkina-faso-thomas-sankara-100.html https://de.euronews.com/2021/10/11/historischer-prozess-wer-hat-thomas-sankara-vor-34-jahren-getotet https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sankara https://www.akweb.de/politik/burkina-faso-prozess-zum-mord-an-thomas-sankaras-die-idee-eines-freien-afrikas/ https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/krieg-in-libyen-usa-gaddafi-laesst-leichen-an-westliche-angriffsziele-bringen-1.1077798 https://www.wsws.org/de/articles/2011/10/gadd-o22.html https://www.focus.de/politik/ausland/neue-details-zu-gaddafis-tod-im-blutrausch-der-rebellen-gab-es-ein-massaker_id_2252841.html https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internationaler_Milit%C3%A4reinsatz_in_Libyen_2011 https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/internationaler-strafgerichtshof-gaddafis-tod-war-moeglicherweise-kriegsverbrechen-a-804077.html [ https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/gaddafi-ts-126.html France's Role France has traditionally maintained a strong military and political presence in many African countries, particularly in its former colonies. There have been several interventions in which France has been directly or indirectly involved in political upheavals, for example, through military operations or support for specific political groups. One example is Operation Azalée in 1995 in the Comoros, in which France intervened to prevent the overthrow of President Ange-Félix Patassé's government by insurgent soldiers. However, France's influence has declined in recent years, as evidenced by current conflicts such as in Niger, where France's military presence and political role are the subject of critical debate. President Emmanuel Macron has in the past maintained France's military presence in several African countries, which is often seen as an attempt to secure France's influence in the region.

Murkomen warns the police.

Murkomen warns the police.

The government has reaffirmed its commitment to combating police brutality. Home Affairs Minister Kipchumba Murkomen declared that officers who violate human rights would be held accountable. So far, little has happened; one only needs to look at what happened in the case of Albert Ojwang. In Kenya, officers who violate human rights are rarely held accountable, but in the case of blogger Albert Ojwang in June 2025, concrete steps were taken. Several police officers were suspended, arrested, and charged. The trial began in January 2026, using CCTV footage and protected witnesses as evidence. It was recently paused due to missing CCTV material; the next hearing is scheduled for January 27, 2026. This demonstrates limited progress on accountability amid ongoing protests against police violence. Kipchumba Murkomen is a prominent Kenyan politician and lawyer who serves as Cabinet Secretary for Home Affairs and National Administration. In Kenya, human rights organizations and government officials have been demanding for years that officials—especially police officers—be consistently prosecuted for human rights violations, as this currently only happens in isolated cases. Security forces (police, military, intelligence services) are regularly held responsible for unlawful killings, enforced disappearances, torture, and excessive use of force, for example, during counter-terrorism operations or the suppression of protests. The 2010 constitution promises strong fundamental rights and state accountability, but systemic impunity has meant that many perpetrators in uniform never face justice. Following the large-scale protests of 2024 and 2025 against the financial laws, police and other security forces were linked to killings, shootings of demonstrators, and enforced disappearances; human rights groups are demanding that those responsible—including commanders—be held accountable. The Independent Police Oversight Authority (IPOA) has investigated several deaths, but only a few cases have actually gone to court, a fact that has drawn sharp criticism from NGOs. There has been no single large-scale "purge" in which many officers were suddenly punished; rather, there has been a growing number of calls and political pledges to hold officers accountable for human rights violations. In a few isolated cases, police officers have been brought to trial for fatal violence against civilians, something that has been very rare in Kenyan history for a long time and is therefore seen as a step toward greater accountability. Murkomen said that concerns about police brutality have increased. It first emerged in Nairobi but then spread to other parts of the country, prompting closer scrutiny of police actions. The National Police Service has taken steps to address the problem through discussions with senior leadership. https://www.the-star.co.ke/news/2026-01-21-murkomen-cops-who-violate-human-rights-will-be-held-accountable

Sixty-five years ago, Congo's freedom fighter Lumumba was assassinated

Sixty-five years ago, Congo's freedom fighter Lumumba was assassinated. Patrice Lumumba, sometimes also called Patrick Lumumba, was the first Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo after its independence from Belgium in June 1960. Lumumba was born on July 2, 1925, in Onalua, Belgian Congo, and rose from humble beginnings through self-education and political activism. In 1958, he co-founded the Congolese National Movement (MNC), which campaigned for independence and unity to combat tribal conflicts. Lumumba advocated for a united, pan-African, and truly independent Congo, free from Belgium's continued economic and political control. His famous, uncompromising Independence Day speech on June 30, 1960, in which he denounced Belgian colonialism before King Baudouin, made him a hero to many Africans and a destabilizing figure in the eyes of Western powers and Belgian interests. Lumumba became Prime Minister amidst great hopes for a united Congo, but immediately faced crises such as mutinies in the army and the secession of Katanga led by Moïse Tshombe. Initially, he sought help from the United Nations, but in frustration, he turned to the Soviet Union, alarming the Western powers. In September 1960, Patrice Lumumba was dismissed by President Kasavubu and later arrested by Joseph Mobutu's troops. On January 17, 1961, he was flown to Katanga, where he was tortured and executed by the Katangan authorities with Belgian involvement. Belgium apologized for its role in 2002. An apology is insufficient, as Belgium played a significant role in the assassination of Patrice Lumumba on January 17, 1961, through military intervention, political pressure, and direct logistical support of his opponents in the secessionist Katanga regime. Shortly after independence in July 1960, Belgium sent troops to the Congo, ostensibly to protect its own population, but in reality to strengthen Katanga province, where Lumumba's opponents held power with the support of Belgian mining companies like Union Minière. Belgian officials facilitated Lumumba's transfer from Kinshasa to Katanga, even though they knew this endangered his life. The execution was overseen by Belgian police commissioner Frans Verscheure; the firing squad also included the Belgian mercenary Julien Gat. Gérard Soete, another Belgian police commissioner, later admitted to exhuming Lumumba's body and dissolving it in sulfuric acid to destroy evidence. The Belgian government financed anti-Lumumba politicians, propaganda, and opposition media—to the equivalent of €6.2 million today—and pressured President Kasa-Vubu to dismiss him. Prime Minister Gaston Eyskens and his advisors orchestrated the efforts to remove Lumumba from political life, fearing his Soviet sympathies during the Cold War. A Belgian parliamentary inquiry in 2001 established "irrefutable" responsibility for the events that led to his death. In response, Foreign Minister Louis Michel apologized in 2002 for the government's "moral responsibility." More recent developments include plans to prosecute Belgian officials in 2025 and a planned court hearing in 2026 regarding the indictment of a diplomat. Belgium is currently deciding whether former diplomat Étienne Davignon will face trial. Former Belgian police commissioner Gérard Soete recounted what happened after the execution. The body was exhumed. Soete had dismembered the body with a saw and then dissolved it in sulfuric acid. He kept some bone fragments and teeth. All of this happened 65 years ago. On January 20, a court hearing will take place in Belgium for the first time. The court is to decide whether the last surviving Belgian, allegedly complicit in the events, will stand trial: Étienne Davignon, then a young diplomat, later a pillar of the Belgian political establishment. Étienne Davignon was a high-ranking insider in the Belgian government who feared and was hostile to Lumumba. Decades later, as a respected statesman, his testimony before a parliamentary inquiry committee helped Belgium acknowledge and confront its historical responsibility for Lumumba's tragic fate. Davignon represents the Belgian state apparatus of 1960, while Lumumba embodies its most significant Congolese adversary. Their fates are inextricably linked by the decolonization crisis, the Cold War, and a political crime that shaped the destiny of Central Africa. Patrice Lumumba was the victim, a symbol of the African liberation movement, which was extinguished through Belgian involvement. In June 2025, the Belgian Federal Prosecutor's Office requested the opening of proceedings. Is Davignon guilty of complicity in "war crimes," as Lumumba's murder is classified? Is he also guilty of the illegal arrest and transfer of a prisoner of war who was treated inhumanely and denied his rights? Lumumba's family had already filed a corresponding lawsuit in 2011. There is strong historical evidence that the USA was involved in the murder of Patrice Lumumba in January 1961. The CIA developed plans to poison Lumumba's toothpaste or food and supported his political opponents as well as Belgian colonial interests. CIA Director Allen Dulles described Lumumba as a "grave danger" as long as he lived. Although the USA did not directly carry out the execution, it created the conditions by removing Lumumba from his post, funding rebels, and pressuring local actors. Investigations and evidence. The US Church Committee (1975/76) and Belgian investigations confirmed the role of the US and Belgium; documents from the Kennedy archives reveal Eisenhower's order. Lumumba's death was carried out by separatists, but with the knowledge and support of Washington. Sources: https://taz.de/Mord-an-Patrice-Lumumba/!6146805/ https://youtube.com/shorts/dm9fp9HtDZY?si=CyGli-vGWrGRR9p1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrice_Lumumba https://www.brusselstimes.com/363758/today-in-history-belgium-acknowledges-role-in-assassinating-congolese-leader-lumumba https://www.lachambre.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/comm/lmb/conclusions.pdf https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jul/29/lumumba-everlasting-belgium-marks-congos-slain-leaders-100th-birthday-with-exhibition-and-possible-trial https://www.ecchr.eu/en/case/crimes-during-liberation-wars-the-lumumba-murder/ https://www.brusselstimes.com/685809/truth-and-justice-in-the-assassination-of-patrice-lumumba https://retrospectjournal.com/2025/02/09/the-assassination-of-patrice-lumumba-and-the-legacy-of-neocolonialism-in-the-congo/ https://www.dw.com/en/who-killed-patrice-lumumba-dr-congos-first-prime-minister/a-72949990 https://www.britannica.com/biography/Patrice-Lumumba https://news.un.org/en/spotlight/patrice-lumumba-brian-urquhart https://www.zinnedproject.org/news/tdih/patrice-lumumba-executed/

A “Historic” Step for the Sovereignty of the Sahel States

AES Bank: A “Historic” Step for the Sovereignty of the Sahel States

, According to an Economic Expert The establishment of the Confederal Bank for Investment and Development marks a break with institutions like the IMF, which attach conditions to their financing, explained Mohamed Diakité. The AES (Alliance of the Sahel), consisting of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, has taken a historic step toward securing its sovereignty by withdrawing from ECOWAS. This “ban” is being hailed as groundbreaking for independence from Western influence and regional autonomy. The alliance was formed in September 2023 in response to sanctions and threats from ECOWAS following military coups in the three countries. In July 2024, it was expanded into a confederation to jointly strengthen security, the economy, and sovereignty. The formal withdrawal took place on January 29, 2025, despite ECOWAS's offers of extension, and was celebrated in Ouagadougou. The states criticize ECOWAS as a tool of external influence and are now prioritizing decisions made internally by AES. Introduction of a common Sahel passport from January 2025 to facilitate mobility. Establishment of a 5,000-strong unified army to combat jihadism. Tariffs on ECOWAS imports (0.5%) to promote the domestic economy. At a summit in Bamako at the end of 2025, leaders such as Assimi Goïta and Ibrahim Traoré emphasized security as a prerequisite for development and warned against destabilization attempts ("Black Winter"). AES is diversifying partnerships and launching its own media outlets, such as AES Television. What is changing? The bank is not profit-oriented but rather "aligned with the realities of the Sahel" and can finance restructuring projects, according to the expert. He lists the following sectors: Energy Transportation Agricultural Industry Local Processing Value-Added Mining Projects Pharmaceutical Basics Industry “The BCID-AES can play a catalytic role by reducing risks, mobilizing co-financing, and directing investments toward the local transformation of resources and regional economic integration,” Mohamed Diakité concludes.