FES PSCC TALK: Regional Integration and Cooperation in West Africa: How to Envision the Future Together?

Since the announcement of the AES countries' decision to withdraw from ECOWAS, West Africa appears to be at a crossroads with a direct threat of disintegration. For now, the two blocs seem opposed, and a split appears imminent, even though the terms and contours of this separation have not yet been defined. Despite mediation efforts initiated by ECOWAS under the aegis of Senegal and Togo, the likelihood of AES rejoining the organization seems very low.

Discussions about the subregion’s future are gaining interest, despite the risk of losing significant achievements in peace, stability, and especially regional integration and cooperation.

A. From ECOWAS' Lack of Support in Combating Insecurity to AES Countries' Desire for Political Sovereignty: What Went Wrong?

While the reasons for the split with ECOWAS may appear strategically surprising, they reflect AES countries' determination to redefine new approaches to combating insecurity and a desire for political sovereignty, freeing them from community rules. Over the past decade, Sahel countries have faced the threat of terrorism and uneven development, sources of socio-political tensions that have led to coups.

The lack of support and solidarity from ECOWAS for these countries (Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger) in their fight against insecurity, combined with the harsh sanctions imposed after coups, has tarnished ECOWAS' role and shifted perceptions from a "community of people" to a "community of heads of state influenced by foreign powers."

Although this perception might be inaccurate, it has served as a primary argument for these military regimes to justify the separation, resulting in a loss of trust and legitimacy in the organization. Despite 50 years of existence and significant progress in economic integration and people’s mobility , ECOWAS seems headed for a split, the consequences of which cannot be measured in the short or medium term.

Despite tensions and uncertainty, both blocs would benefit from finding common ground and agreements to maximize efforts and preserve the significant achievements of integration.

Ultimately, the multiple crises within the community have weakened the organization and its legal framework, which needs reform to align with current realities and ensure its survival. Considering the possibility of future coexistence between the two blocs, it is essential to harmonize political frameworks and promote upward integration of civil society. Strengthening bilateral partnerships toward a more robust multilateralism, considering other institutions such as the AU (via the Zelenkaf), is also necessary.

B. Putting Citizens at the Heart of Processes (ECOWAS x AES)

Looking back at the region's challenges reveals an insufficient inclusion of citizens' voices in decision-making processes. While ECOWAS' creation was initially driven by the desire for economic and people-centered integration, the organization seems to have drifted from this mission in the eyes of some citizens.

Decision-making power remains exclusively in the hands of heads of state, with little involvement or consultation of civil society actors. Although ECOWAS has a parliament intended to represent its people, it is seen as a superficial body with no influence on major decisions.

Yet, ECOWAS' legal frameworks are advanced in this area, notably through the commission, which plays a crucial role in maintaining balance. However, this commission appears entirely subordinate to the will of the heads of state. Future reforms within ECOWAS should include changing appointment rules within the commission and addressing institutional inconsistencies.

The parliament, an asset whose role is currently underutilized, should be strengthened to foster greater inclusion in decision-making processes. The Council of Elders, a mechanism provided by the ECOWAS protocol, should also be emphasized and better valued.

The six-month extension granted by ECOWAS presents an excellent opportunity to give citizens a voice and involve them in addressing the region's future.

C. Possible Short- and Medium-Term Scenarios for the Region

Although the terms and modalities of this separation are not yet defined, three scenarios seem plausible to outline the region's future in the short and medium term:

First Scenario: AES and ECOWAS move toward peaceful, coordinated coexistence, with harmonized economic policies and strengthened security cooperation. Free movement of people and goods is also guaranteed between the two areas, governed by ECOWAS' current legal frameworks.

Second Scenario: Persistent tensions and a complete breakdown of political and diplomatic relations between the two blocs (difficult coexistence, threats to the free movement of people and goods, severed economic ties, absence of security cooperation, exacerbation, and spread of terrorism to coastal countries).

Although this scenario is less likely due to the interdependence of economies between Sahel and coastal countries and the ethnocultural continuum between nations, it remains a possibility that must be considered.

AES's current stance, if maintained, could lead to regional, continental, and international isolation. One consequence could be its exclusion from the African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA), as AES is not recognized by the AU as a regional economic community. This would impact strategies for combating insecurity and could further diminish multilateral cooperation.

Third Scenario: A potential rapprochement between AES and ECOWAS following the return of civilian governments in AES countries after elections. The return of civilian rule, if it occurs, could soften the current stance and encourage reconciliation with ECOWAS for a negotiated return to the organization. However, public opinion in AES countries could pose an obstacle to this project due to negative perceptions of ECOWAS.