What to do about the Sahel? Nothing.

I recently returned from a week in France. There journalists and others wanted my opinion about what was going on in the Sahel and what “we” could or should do about it. By “we” they meant France and the United States. My answer satisfied nobody.

“Nothing,” I said. “We should do nothing.

First of all, the Sahel is not “ours” to manage. Second, roughly 20 years of Western efforts to shape outcomes in the Sahel and help Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger have come to naught, and it’s not as if “we” are prepared to do anything more than we have already done, even if these countries or their people would let us. We provided aid they did not value, or they simply wanted what we would not give them. Moreover, they are right to want what they want; we are right to refuse.

Two examples come immediately to mind: Mali has long wanted to obtain the military strength to alter the balance of power vis-à-vis northern separatists and ultimately take them on. France and the U.S. wanted no part in their conflict with northern Malians. We imposed a framework for negotiations that, we hoped, would lead to a political settlement. Meanwhile, we focused on jihadist terrorist groups and only provided Mali with limited military assistance such that they would be able to fight terrorist groups but do no more. Russia, in contrast, gives them precisely what they want, even if that means killing civilians or attacking the north. Burkina Faso, meanwhile, has seized upon the idea of mobilizing a portion of its citizenry in the “volunteers for the defense of the fatherland,” or VDP in French. This is the cornerstone of their strategy for defeating jihadists. Once again, we have refused, primarily because we see the VDP as instruments for slaughtering Fulani citizens. They are right to want to arm the VDP. We are right to keep our distance. Meanwhile, Russians have begun arriving in Burkina Faso. It is not hard to imagine what they will be doing.

We could, of course, alter course and help the VDP. I have made the case for doing so in print. But we won’t. We could provide ample aid to Niger’s military. We never did this before Niger had its coup d’état in 2023, and we certainly won’t do so now. We can and do lecture these countries about the virtues of civilian rule and democracy, but they are not listening. We have backed sanctions against their governments, but they do not work. We could have stopped any of the coups d’état that took place in these countries, but we did not. Maybe we should have, but now it’s too late, and no serious person argues for attempting regime change. Washington wants to pressure them to make progress toward a transition to civilian rule. In vain.

The governments of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger have made their choices. They will succeed or fail. Russia benefits, but there is nothing we are prepared to do to prevent that. Besides, do we really want them to fail? Do we want the three governments to fail? I do not. Better pro-Russia autocracies than Al Qaeda or Islamic State. Right?