Niger says it is cutting diplomatic ties with Ukraine over Kiev’s alleged support for aggression in neighboring Mali

(Archive link)

Niger says the move is in solidarity with Mali, which has accused Kiev of backing rebels involved in deadly attacks

Niger has severed diplomatic relations with Ukraine in response to Kiev’s alleged support for militants who killed dozens of Malian soldiers and Russian Wagner Group contractors in an attack last month.

The West African state’s decision on Tuesday came just two days after Mali took the same step, accusing Kiev of supporting international terrorism. Ukrainian officials had earlier indicated that Kiev had assisted Tuareg rebels who staged an attack in the village of Tinzaouaten.

In an interview following the incident, Ukraine’s spy agency spokesman, Andrey Yusov, indicated on national TV that the insurgents had received intelligence to conduct a “successful military operation against Russian war criminals.” He warned that “there will be more to come.” Ukraine’s embassy in Senegal posted the video – now deleted – on its Facebook page along with a comment from Ambassador Yury Pivovarov, who said “there will certainly be other results.”

Niamey’s military government spokesman, Amadou Abdramane, called the remarks “indecent” and “unacceptable” in an address on state TV late on Tuesday, claiming that they characterize “acts of aggression.”

“Niger, in total solidarity with the government and people of Mali, has decided in all sovereignty […] to sever diplomatic relations between the Republic of Niger and Ukraine with immediate effect,” Abdramane said.

Since 2012, Mali has been embroiled in a jihadist insurgency that has claimed thousands of lives. A decade-long French military mission failed to quell the violence, which has spilled over to neighboring Burkina Faso and Niger. All three former French colonies, led by their militaries, have severed defense ties with Paris and formed the Alliance of Sahel States to combat terrorism.

Russia, which Bamako, Niamey, and Ouagadougou regard as a strategic security ally, has agreed to assist the troubled Sahel states in combating long-standing terrorist threats.

More coverage: “Ukraine spreading ‘terrorism’ around the world – Moscow” https://www.rt.com/russia/602260-ukrainian-terrorism-zakharova-kursk/ (archive link)

Kiev is doing the bidding of the deep states of Western nations, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has claimed

“Things will get worse in terms of Ukrainian terrorism spreading across the planet. It’s not a joke,” Zakharova warned.

People in power in Kiev have turned their country into a “terrorist gang” doing the dirty work for Western nations and their “deep state structures,” the diplomat claimed. She also asked what it would take to convince the American people that by bankrolling Ukraine, their government was sponsoring terrorism.

  • amemorablename
    5·
    1 month ago

    They have the basic groundwork laid years ahead of time, just ready to begin implementation at which point it’s probably a matter of months and the important thing is neither we nor these countries generally see the ramp-up happening until it’s too late and the machine is running.

    So yes it’s easy and it’s hard to counter without something like the great firewall and extensive laws controlling foreign NGOs, and even an extensive, well-funded, ideologically loyal intelligence apparatus to root out traitors and foreign agents.

    Again, this does not make sense as phrasing though. Laying groundwork for years ahead of time is not, by any meaning of the word, “easy”.

    This is frankly a short-sighted way of looking at things that I think shows you’re probably on the younger side as many of us are. The 1930s were awful and they pulled through. without a revolution There were real winds of change after WW2 that the US successfully defeated.

    The 1930s are not the same conditions as right now. Post WW2 is not the same conditions as right now. But if you want to compare, that period had FDR and the closest thing to that today as a reformer is Bernie Sanders, who the established party elites resoundingly rejected. In place of having a real reformer, they are saying Biden is doing meaningful work when he’s doing tweaks. Meanwhile, we have climate change and its consequences increasingly bearing down on the world, which the US is woefully unprepared for and continues to drag its feet on addressing.

    Eh. It’s not practical to war with the entire world and too unpopular domestically. They keep their hegemony and power using economic coercion and various historical and material inertia around those (colonialism and taking over from Europe after rescuing them from communist take-over at the end of WW2 being a primary one).

    Not what I meant. Economic might is unenforceable without military might behind it. Look at what the Houthis have done, for example.

    Failing infrastructure doesn’t matter.

    https://www.npr.org/2024/04/02/1242327964/the-economic-impact-of-the-baltimore-bridge-collapse

    the U.S. secretary of transportation, said last week that, normally, between $100 million and $200 million in cargo moves in and out of the port in Baltimore each day. And that affects $200 million in wages, he said. He said there’s 8,000 jobs directly affected by the port’s activities. But I want to note there’s still some business happening at the port. There’s one part of it that’s called Tradepoint Atlantic. That’s beyond the Key Bridge. But of course, the biggest business is from the really big ships, and those still can’t get in or out via the main shipping channel.

    This was from April 2, 2024, mind you. The situation may have changed by now, but the point is, it can impact a lot.

    I see hope on the horizon but nothing like certainty.

    Well then you’ve been arguing against someone who isn’t here. I’m arguing about trends here, not something set in stone. Primarily, I’m arguing against this tone I see that comes across to me as something like: “have some hope if you want, but the empire is mega mega mega powerful and it’s going to get you in your sleep if you don’t stay constantly anxious about it 24/7.” Maybe that’s an uncharitable way to put it, but you are putting so much focus on the empire in isolation with little on what anyone else is doing and downplaying the empire’s failings (such as in infrastructure). Don’t eat the onion on believing it to be more powerful than it actually is. Furthermore, you want to push back on the details that’s perfectly valid, but bringing age into it is silly. It is not out of reach to examine the conditions back in the 1930s and living through them doesn’t guarantee anyone being more politically literate about the empire’s power.