WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. will remove all its forces and equipment from a small base in Niger this weekend and fewer than 500 remaining troops will leave a critical drone base in the West African country in August, ahead of a Sept. 15 deadline set in an agreement with the new ruling junta, the American commander there said Friday.
Air Force Maj. Gen. Kenneth Ekman said in an interview that a number of small teams of 10-20 U.S. troops, including special operations forces, have moved to other countries in West Africa. But the bulk of the forces will go to Europe, at least initially.
Ekman and other U.S. military leaders have said other West African nations want to work with the U.S. and may be open to an expanded American presence. He did not detail the locations, but other U.S. officials have pointed to the Ivory Coast and Ghana as examples.
They are low on bombs, morale, and their military is stretched thin and already instigating a 3-front WW3 (with 2/3 fronts already active). And they’re also incredibly low on international support- the entire world is united in horror of their actions, whether it be due to morality (what’s going on in Palestine, or their support of Nazis and terrorist attacks against Russia), to self-preservation of their people (aforementioned WW3), or their finances (weaponization of SWIFT, ever-increasing debt, blatant thefts/seizures of Russian state and private assets, the west essentially trying to destroy the modern international economy to revert it back to their monopolies). And domestic support is also abysmal, material conditions are collapsing for the vast majority of the population, people are horrified at the genocide and threat of WW3, and the former POTUS who they have been waging unprecedented lawfare against is coming back with a vengeance.
All that, and it’s election season. Also, things are just as bad or worse across the rest of the Anglosphere and western Europe. And to top it all off, Russian troops are already receiving a warm welcome in Niger.
Can the US bomb Niger? Sure it can. But it’ll pull in the neighboring countries, enrage public sentiment across Africa and the entire global south, might even pull in Russia, and will only serve to make the US more of a pariah, make it clear it has nothing to offer the world but terrorism and slavery (more than it has already) thus pushing more nations firmly into the arms of BRICS (the vast majority of humanity is already either in BRICS, or trying to join it- and anyone with sense is bit by bit, divesting from the unreliable, unstable, and untrustworthy west). And it’ll be just another black mark against the US domestically as well.
What would be the end result? Even if they just used a few bombs as a symbolic, spiteful measure (so as not to divert from Operation Ukraine, the occupation of Palestine, and encirclement of China), they would only serve to further outrage an already hostile population- any return of the west to Niger will have to be through official or unofficial occupation, akin to Afghanistan and Iraq. And they can’t sic ECOWAS against Niger/Burkina Faso/Mali (France already tried), it would be deeply unpopular and serve to further destabilize those comprador countries which follow such commands- though there’s considerable reason to believe many at this point wouldn’t, as they’re wisely divesting from the west as-is. Will the US then spitefully try to bomb those countries too, when they reject being puppets and slaves of the west when push comes to shove?
Meanwhile, global sympathies- and even perhaps, arms or even troops (as in the case with Russia) or aid would come from the rest of the world. And the longer the west stays in Niger, the more it will become a drain- on their finances, on their international reputation, etc… during a time when these things are already shot to hell, and the entire world is moving past them.
The US can certainly bomb Niger. Just like they can certainly bomb most of the countries that are rising up or shuffling away from them. But the contradictions of the empire have already reached such a critical mass, that any action they take to attempt to do so will only ensure that the western demise accelerates and increases in severity, and will only serve to further empower the coalition rising up to defend themselves from western terrorism and exploitation. If they bomb Niger today, tomorrow they’ll have to bomb Burkina Faso, Mali, and perhaps even Senegal, Nigeria, etc. as well. But they’ll never be welcome back, in fact they’ll only serve to strengthen local resolve and solidarity against western occupation, meanwhile due to their actions BRICS will only continue to increase in popularity and strength.
As of now a lot of the world population still buys the idea that the US/west are good and things like that. Even with what is happening in Palestine that hasn’t drastically changed yet. But as you say, each country they bomb is a new country that gets to see the US for what they are, and the same would be somewhat true for the neighbours of these countries and the rest of the world, and who knows, they might be one country being bombed by them away from this mass reaching a critical mass.
For example, if Niger gets bombed by them then Niger’s neighbours at first and then the rest of Africa might come to better understand the situation and try to help Niger as they can and that would likely reverbarate globally, through images and impacts to the global economy, pushing more and more to the same anti-imperialist side.