At the expense of the population

The military coup which took place on 26 July 2023 put an end to democratically installed power in Niger leading to sanctions by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) including closure of the borders. As a response, the new leaders in Niger closed the border between Benin and Niger as well – even after the ECOWAS sanctions were lifted. These political decisions deeply disrupt the multi-secular social dynamics in existence between the people who are settled on both sides of the border and who share the same languages, cultures, and in many cases the same families, including identical traditional authorities.

The coup and the border closure

The severity of the sanctions the day after the coup d’état feels like part of an ever-growing threat to the democratic African regimes. The widely publicised feeling is that history is repeating itself because within three years Burkina Faso and Mali have fallen into the hands of military juntas which have often put forward the same arguments to overthrow legitimate power. All the western chancelleries, ECOWAS consisting of 15 countries and the African Union unanimously and vigorously condemned the coup d’état and even gave an ultimatum of less than one week to satisfy the conditions for reestablishing constitutional order, with the threat of economic sanctions, indeed even armed intervention. The closure of the land and air borders with Niger was announced on 30 July 2023 in a press release from ECOWAS.

Restricted mobility, increased prices and high risks

Following strong criticism from civil societies in Benin and Niger, Benin relaxed the restrictions and re-opened its border with Niger at the end of February 2024 after the announcement of the ending of economic sanctions. However, Niger kept its border with Benin closed, therefore prolonging the ordeal of both populations. The Protocol on the free circulation of people, right of residence and establishment of ECOWAS, which was adopted in 1979, is being severely challenged. On the day following this decision to close the border, almost 1,000 lorries, coming from the port of Cotonou, were blocked at the border between Benin and Niger. Travellers coming from one of the countries were deposited at the border and had to reach the other country by crossing the river Niger in extremely risky conditions. The crossing takes about thirty minutes and its cost increased tenfold from 500 to 5,000 CFA francs (less than one euro to 8 euros).  Products originating in Niger (onions, garlic, potatoes, dates, etc.) for the Beninese market crossed under the same conditions with the result that prices spiralled out of control, some even tripling. One garlic trader in Cotonou noticed that this product had become expensive because the price of a bag of garlic originating in Niger went up from 43,000 CFA francs to more than 130,000 CFA francs.  Benin acts as the transport corridor for goods from Niger which are usually shipped from the port of Cotonou and this also stopped being fully operational.

The reasons for the closure by Niger

The main reason stated for maintaining the closure of the border by the Niger side is the risk of the destabilisation of Niger from Benin. The Niger authorities accuse those of Benin of having allowed foreign forces, who are hostile and likely to threaten the stability of Niger, to establish themselves. The leaders of Niger also suspect Benin of playing a role in potential hostile manoeuvres in Niger, in particular in the areas around Parc W and in the département of Alibori. They clearly alluded to the existence of a French military base in Kandi and military manoeuvres in Parc W which were part of preparations to destabilise Niger. Social networks even relayed accusations of the presence of French infantry composed of black soldiers with the intention of confusing the Beninese military as they wouldn’t attract the attention of observers. This information which was mostly transmitted and supported on social networks exacerbated the crisis between the two countries to become part of the geopolitical struggle around control of the Sahel pitting the western bloc against the Russian bloc. This crisis immediately forms part of an international geopolitical dimension. Benin is considered here to be manipulated by France and the West, while Niger is supported by Russia. This is how the border is ultimately instrumentalised, at the expense of the population whose livelihoods are being destroyed.

The population's fight for survival in the crisis

Far from living helplessly through the constraints associated with the crisis, the populations on either side of the border have shown resilience. The anti-western narrative and the increasingly frequent attacks in the areas concerned finally convinced the populations who do not seem to be putting pressure on their government to open the borders. But on the contrary, they are adopting many strategies to bypass the closure, both for their own mobility and to transport goods. For example, contraband routes controlled by fishermen who are used to crossing the border by river have sprung up. The latter use their canoes to offer services to cross the border to travellers. The passengers and their luggage are therefore making an illegal crossing and are subject to the rackets run by all kinds of security forces from both the Benin side as well as the Niger side. The prices of the crossing for goods like sacks of onions and garlic have a major impact on their cost. This also applies to cereal products coming from the direction of Niger. In fact, in order to bypass the closure of the border, products from Niger travel via a formal route which crosses Nigeria. But this route involves a high additional cost and an increase in risks for the transporters of the various goods. And at the end of the chain, it’s the consumer who pays the price.

Time for diplomatic rapprochement for the sake of the population

Despite the adaptive strategies mentioned as a way of living through the crisis, it means that social groups find themselves in difficult economic circumstances. With regard to the accusations and suspicion, an improvement in the situation seems conditional on the guarantee of the safety of Nigerian territory, the involvement of the local leaders and border areas in diplomatic mediation so that the difficulties faced by the population and their proposals for establishing security are heard and a normalisation of political relationships in direct bilateral exchanges. As a matter of urgency, an exception needs to be made for essential products and food produced locally.