Additionally, Mali, Burkina Faso and Algeria announced they would defend Niger in case of invasion by western colonial powers or their ECOWAS puppets in the region.
The operational range of any combat air craft is limited by how far their fuel will take them, and for France to launch sorties 3000km away (and also come back!) is already a significant challenge even without having to fly a massive detour. It’s why the US puts up bases everywhere. And who else is going to let them through? Morocco is a NATO ally but they would still need to go through Mali if they go that way, and Mali is very anti-French at the moment. Libya? With how destabilized that country is would it even be safe to go that route? And the Libyan government, or what exists that calls itself that, has already made some comments that hint at them not being exactly supportive of any more European interventions in Africa, afaik there were even rumors that they asked the Russians to help them get rid of the rest of the Western presence in Libya.
The only real path to Western intervention in this region is doing air strikes, since they are neither willing nor able to get involved with ground troops in any meaningful quantity. Those strikes would be used to support African proxies like ECOWAS, most likely from Nigeria, who would be the ones going in with boots on the ground doing the fighting and dying on behalf of the West, just like the Ukrainians are. Without that air support which needs to come from a significant air base most likely somewhere in Europe and which can be blocked if enough North African countries decide not to cooperate, an intervention attempt is pretty much going to turn into a debacle, especially if a significant number of regional countries refuse to participate or outright oppose it.
The US has some pretty large drone bases in the region but if they get directly involved they lose the degree of separation that they would have if they let France do the dirty work for them, and it would alienate them even further with the countries in this region which risks them eventually losing their bases and thereby whatever leverage they currently still have. Plus, it’s France’s immediate financial interests that are the most under threat from losing access to the resources and the effective colonial tax they rake in by controlling the currencies of francophone West Africa.
Right now their best hope of undoing the coup while still in the narrow window of opportunity when that is possible is to exert enough economic pressure with sanctions and threats of sanctions on neighboring countries to fall in line and then hope that they can organize some kind of color revolution scenario using whatever network of CIA backed NGOs they have in Niger that can mobilize enough people in support of the ousted government. Their hope is that this would create a possible fracture in the military itself such that the coup government is intimidated and willingly steps down. Because if they have to launch an all out war it will not go well, the best they can do is turn it into another destabilized mess full of lawless extremist strongholds and a new wave refugees heading for Europe.
And an additional problem to intervention from regional proxies is that these are themselves not completely stable either, for instance they still haven’t solved the problem of Boko Haram and if a regional conflict starts that could exacerbate problems in Nigeria. The West purposely keeps all of these sorts of low intensity conflicts going in Africa because the threat of withdrawing military support and unleashing this precariously pent up chaos on these countries gives them significant leverage. But it also is a downside because it makes their proxies much less able to act from a position of strength.
Additionally, Mali, Burkina Faso and Algeria announced they would defend Niger in case of invasion by western colonial powers or their ECOWAS puppets in the region.
I don’t expect direct military action from Algeria, but it won’t sit around.
If Algeria closes its airspace to the French air force an intervention in Niger becomes all but impossible.
How will they do that? Will they be shooting down French warplanes?
We’ve done it before
Fair enough
Yeah, just like how it did with Mali
OOTL, why can’t the French Air Force fly through a different country?
The operational range of any combat air craft is limited by how far their fuel will take them, and for France to launch sorties 3000km away (and also come back!) is already a significant challenge even without having to fly a massive detour. It’s why the US puts up bases everywhere. And who else is going to let them through? Morocco is a NATO ally but they would still need to go through Mali if they go that way, and Mali is very anti-French at the moment. Libya? With how destabilized that country is would it even be safe to go that route? And the Libyan government, or what exists that calls itself that, has already made some comments that hint at them not being exactly supportive of any more European interventions in Africa, afaik there were even rumors that they asked the Russians to help them get rid of the rest of the Western presence in Libya.
The only real path to Western intervention in this region is doing air strikes, since they are neither willing nor able to get involved with ground troops in any meaningful quantity. Those strikes would be used to support African proxies like ECOWAS, most likely from Nigeria, who would be the ones going in with boots on the ground doing the fighting and dying on behalf of the West, just like the Ukrainians are. Without that air support which needs to come from a significant air base most likely somewhere in Europe and which can be blocked if enough North African countries decide not to cooperate, an intervention attempt is pretty much going to turn into a debacle, especially if a significant number of regional countries refuse to participate or outright oppose it.
The US has some pretty large drone bases in the region but if they get directly involved they lose the degree of separation that they would have if they let France do the dirty work for them, and it would alienate them even further with the countries in this region which risks them eventually losing their bases and thereby whatever leverage they currently still have. Plus, it’s France’s immediate financial interests that are the most under threat from losing access to the resources and the effective colonial tax they rake in by controlling the currencies of francophone West Africa.
Right now their best hope of undoing the coup while still in the narrow window of opportunity when that is possible is to exert enough economic pressure with sanctions and threats of sanctions on neighboring countries to fall in line and then hope that they can organize some kind of color revolution scenario using whatever network of CIA backed NGOs they have in Niger that can mobilize enough people in support of the ousted government. Their hope is that this would create a possible fracture in the military itself such that the coup government is intimidated and willingly steps down. Because if they have to launch an all out war it will not go well, the best they can do is turn it into another destabilized mess full of lawless extremist strongholds and a new wave refugees heading for Europe.
And an additional problem to intervention from regional proxies is that these are themselves not completely stable either, for instance they still haven’t solved the problem of Boko Haram and if a regional conflict starts that could exacerbate problems in Nigeria. The West purposely keeps all of these sorts of low intensity conflicts going in Africa because the threat of withdrawing military support and unleashing this precariously pent up chaos on these countries gives them significant leverage. But it also is a downside because it makes their proxies much less able to act from a position of strength.
Thanks for the explanation!