Who are the militants using the Sahel as a hunting ground?
ABIDJAN: For well over a decade, terrorist violence has plagued the Sahel, a semi-arid belt stretching along the Sahara desert's southern rim from the Atlantic to the Red Sea.
Tens of thousands of people have been killed in violence that began in Mali in 2012, spread to Burkina Faso and Niger, and now threatens coastal west African states.
Two militant organizations dominate the central Sahelian region that includes Mali, Niger and Burkina: the Group for the Support of Islam and Muslims and the Islamic State — Sahel Province or ISSP.
Affiliated to Al-Qaeda, the JNIM was founded in 2017 after militant groups merged under the leadership of Iyad Ag Ghali, a Tuareg chief from the northern Malian town of Kidal.
The rival ISSP is linked to the Daesh group and was created two years earlier by Moroccan terrorist Adnan Abou Walid Al-Sahraoui, who was killed in Mali in 2021 by a French military force.
Nigeria, Niger, Cameroon and Chad — in the Lake Chad Basin — are battling two other jihadist groups: Boko Haram and its offshoot, the Islamic State in West Africa or ISWAP.
The groups mainly roam rural areas. 'Controlling the towns is very difficult for them,' International Crisis Group researcher Ibrahim Yahaya said.
From their camps in the bush, they use intimidation tactics such as abduction and killings to menace villagers and organize attacks on towns, Yahaya said.
The JNIM has a wide presence in Mali, Niger and Burkina and is increasingly extending its influence toward the northern parts of the Gulf of Guinea countries.
'The group plans to make new areas of instability on the borders of Burkina Faso with Benin and Togo,' Seidik Abba, head of the International Center of Reflection and Studies on the Sahel, said.
The ISSP is concentrated in the border area encompassing Mali, Burkina and Niger. The group 'struggles to expand' because of the JNIM which is 'militarily stronger' and has more local support, Liam Karr, analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, said.
Their ambitions differ. The ISSP follows the hard line of the Daesh group, using indiscriminate violence against civilians and soldiers with the aim of establishing an Islamic caliphate in the Sahel under Shariah law.
The JNIM also carries out deadly attacks but seeks local footholds by presenting itself as the defender of marginalized communities.
'In the JNIM narrative, there is the reference to the Islamic ideology, but linked to forms of local demands,' said Bakary Sambe, director of the Timbuktu Institute in Dakar. 'While Daesh has remained in a form of global jihad that is failing to take root in local communities,' he added.
Daesh frequently broadcasts videos showing violence committed by security forces and their allies in order to legitimize its discourse, a UN Security Council report said this month.
There is often violent rivalry between the groups.
The militant groups exploit social and ethnic tensions to enlist fighters.
The JNIM, initially composed of Fulani, a community of mainly semi-nomadic herders, and of ethnic Tuaregs, has widened its base to include other communities, in particular ethnic Bambaras.
Exact figures are difficult to estimate, but according to a UN report in July last year, the JNIM has 5,000-6,000 fighters and the ISSP 2,000-3,000.
Their weaponry comes largely from the armies of the region and was pillaged during attacks, or from arms trafficking from Libya.
Financing ranges from kidnappings, especially of Westerners, to the theft and resale of cattle and forcing locals to pay the 'zakat,' an annual tax in charity.
The militant groups use ambush, abduction, long-range shelling, improvised explosive devices and recently started using drones to drop explosives.
Civilians suspected of collaboration with the army are kidnapped or killed.
Militants also impose embargoes, burn harvests and abduct community leaders to force villagers into submission.
The response of the region's armies has proven limited as the groups are constantly on the move and feed on local grievances.
Mali, Burkina and Niger have formed the Alliance of Sahel States confederation and said they will soon set up a 5,000-strong anti-militant force.
'At a time when the Sahelian armies are killing 3,000 militants, 12,000 others are being recruited,' Abba, head of the International Center of Reflection and Studies on the Sahel, said.
'So, if we do not solve the problem of youth unemployment in these countries, they will remain at the mercy of militant groups,' he added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
4 hours ago
- Arab News
Armed men in western Niger kill 34 soldiers and wound 14, authorities say
DAKAR: Armed men killed 34 soldiers and wounded 14 others in western Niger near the tri-state border with Mali and Burkina Faso, the defense ministry said. The attack was carred out around 9 a.m. Thursday in Banibangou by attackers using eight vehicles and more than 200 motorbikes, the ministry said in a statement. The government said its forces killed dozens of attackers it called 'terrorists,' adding that search operations by land and air were being conduted to find additional assailants. Niger, along with its neighbors Burkina Faso and Mali, has for more than a decade battled an insurgency fought by jihadi groups, including some allied with Al-Qaeda and the Daesh group. Following military coups in the three nations in recent years, the ruling juntas have expelled French forces and turned to Russia's mercenary units for security assistance. The three countries have vowed to strengthen their cooperation by establishing a new security alliance, the Alliance of Sahel States. But the security situation in the Sahel, a vast region on the fringes of the Sahara Desert, has significantly worsened since the juntas took power, analysts say, with a record number of attacks and civilians killed by Islamic militants and government forces.
Saudi Gazette
3 days ago
- Saudi Gazette
20 Islamic countries, including Saudi Arabia, voice concern over dangerous escalation threatening regional security
Saudi Gazette report CAIRO — Twenty Arab and Islamic countries, including Saudi Arabia, affirmed their condemnation and rejection of the Israeli attacks on Iran. In a joint statement released by the Egyptian Foreign Ministry, foreign ministers of these countries expressed their concern over the dangerous escalation that threatens the security and stability of the region. The foreign ministers called for de-escalation with an immediate ceasefire. The signatory countries include Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Bahrain, Brunei Darussalam, Turkey, Chad, Algeria, the Union of the Comoros, Djibouti, Sudan, Somalia, Iraq, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Libya, and Mauritania. The foreign ministers expressed their condemnation and rejection of the launch of the Israeli attacks on Iran since the dawn of June 13, as well as practices that violate international law and the principles of the UN Charter. They emphasized the need to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states, the principles of good neighborliness, and the peaceful resolution of disputes. The foreign ministers stressed the importance of making the Middle East a zone free of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction in accordance with international resolutions. They urged all countries in the region to join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) without selectivity. The signatory states rejected targeting nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards, as this constitutes a flagrant violation of international and humanitarian law under the 1949 Geneva Convention. The foreign ministers called for the resumption of negotiations as soon as possible as the only way to reach a sustainable agreement on Iran's nuclear program. They emphasized the importance of respecting freedom of navigation in international waterways in accordance with international law and preventing any threat to maritime security. The Islamic countries emphasized that diplomatic solutions and dialogue are the only way to resolve regional crises, while adhering to the principles of good neighborliness and the UN Charter. They emphasized that military solutions will not contribute to resolving the crisis.
Arab News
3 days ago
- Arab News
Is the US' Syria policy empowering Turkiye?
The Trump administration's decision to withdraw 500 troops from eastern Syria in April, and its stated aim of drawing down more, appears part of a broader shift in US policy toward Syria. In the immediate aftermath of Bashar Assad's fall, Washington seemed hostile toward the new regime. Officials expressed concern about the background of Syria's new president, Ahmad Al-Sharaa, and warned Damascus about the fate of Syria's minorities and the possible resurgence of Daesh. Yet, in recent months, President Donald Trump has agreed to drop sanctions on Syria and appointed a new envoy to Damascus, as well as reducing the US' military footprint in the east. This does not necessarily indicate that the US is embracing Al-Sharaa, despite Trump's complimentary words when they met in Riyadh. Instead, it seems the White House is 'de-prioritizing' Syria: reducing both its hostility, in the form of economic and diplomatic sanctions, and its military presence. This will be welcomed by Damascus, but also by the new leadership's principal regional ally, Turkiye. Indeed, Ankara appears to be the major beneficiary of the new US approach. The de-prioritizing has three primary strands. The first was to begin lifting sanctions. After his surprising meeting with Al-Sharaa in Saudi Arabia, Trump agreed to remove the sanctions crippling Syria's economy, arguing it 'would give them a chance.' As well as granting immediate sanction relief in late May, the White House is reportedly preparing an executive order that will permanently rescind a raft of economic restrictions. The second strand is direct engagement with the new regime. After meeting Al-Sharaa in person, Trump appointed the US' ambassador to Turkiye, Tom Barrack, as special envoy to Syria. Within days, Barrack travelled to Damascus and symbolically raised the Stars and Stripes over the US ambassador's residence there, the first time it had flown since Washington closed the embassy at the height of Syria's civil war in 2012. It seems the White House is 'de-prioritizing' Syria: reducing both its hostility and its military presence Christopher Phillips The third strand is a reduction in troop numbers in eastern Syria. As well as removing 500 of the 2,000 troops in recent weeks, US forces are cutting their number of military bases from eight to one. There are further plans to lower the number of troops to under 1,000, with Trump himself keen to remove all US forces. Combined, these changes suggest Washington is, as Trump said, willing to give the new regime a chance and that it is not interested in being a prominent player in post-Assad Syria. These shifts reflect Trump's apparent change in approach to the Middle East since his tour of the Gulf in May. His general preference, as in his first term, is to reduce the US' footprint in the region, while prioritizing opportunities that increase US trade. He remains concerned with confronting Iran over its nuclear deal and offering broad protection to Israel but, beyond these core concerns, he seems willing to allow key allies like Saudi Arabia and Turkiye to take the lead in regional matters that do not interest him. Syria falls within this latter category. With the economy in a poor state, there are few opportunities for Trump to make money for now — despite the appeal of building a Trump Tower in Damascus — and, with Iran having exited the scene, staying in eastern Syria to frustrate Tehran has lost its salience. Israel remains concerned with events in Syria, having launched several raids since the fall of Assad, arguing it is concerned about protecting the Druze community. However, Trump has shown signs of frustration with Benjamin Netanyahu in recent weeks, suggesting Washington will not let Israeli opposition to Al-Sharaa direct its approach to Damascus. But if one US regional ally will be somewhat frustrated by the new approach to Syria, another will be delighted. Turkiye benefits from all three of the US policy changes. Turkiye is well placed to benefit from any Syrian reconstruction, with its energy and construction companies lined up to play a prominent role. Trump lifting the sanctions removes any barriers to Turkish companies pouring into Syria, which would provide a much-needed boost to Turkiye's flagging economy. Trump meeting Al-Sharaa gives Turkiye's ally increased legitimacy, making it easier for Syria to be reintegrated Christopher Phillips The US' engagement with Damascus is similarly beneficial. Trump meeting Al-Sharaa gives Turkiye's ally increased legitimacy, making it easier for Syria to be reintegrated into the international community, which would also benefit Ankara. Moreover, Trump's appointment of Barrack as Damascus envoy, a role he will perform alongside his ambassadorship to Turkiye, is a major boost. Barrack is believed to be sympathetic to Recep Tayyip Erdogan's government and playing the dual roles means he is more likely to view Syria through how it relates to Turkiye. But the biggest benefit for Ankara is the drawing down in the east, something Erdogan has wanted for years. The US has already put serious pressure on its eastern Syrian ally, the Syrian Democratic Forces, to integrate into Al-Sharaa's new leadership and reducing troop numbers puts them in an even more precarious position. Ankara has long sought the destruction or dissolution of the SDF, so the less US protection they have, the more the SDF's leaders will feel compelled to abandon the goals of autonomy that Turkiye so strongly opposes. Turkiye's recent forming of an anti-Daesh coalition with Iraq, Jordan and Syria is similarly part of a wider strategy to convince the US that Ankara can lead anti-Daesh operations in the region, lessening Washington's need to back the SDF. The question, of course, is whether Trump and his administration recognize that Turkiye benefits from its new position on Syria, and whether it cares. One reading is that Erdogan has skillfully manipulated Trump, who is known to like the Turkish president. But another reading is that Trump is aware of the benefits but is happy to empower Turkiye in Syria — and hold Ankara to account if things go wrong. Whatever the truth, Turkiye is reaping the rewards of Washington's new approach to Syria. However, with this power could come responsibility for Ankara if the situation worsens.
