Download the PDF:
By Chidinma Chidoka
Director and Senior Fellow (Regional and Conflict Studies) at the Athena Centre
The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) was established in 1975 as a platform for economic integration, collective security, and political cooperation in West Africa. Since its formation, it has navigated numerous challenges, including political instability, economic disparities, and security threats.
However, recent developments which has led to the withdrawal of Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso has exposed cracks in its framework, prompting a re-evaluation of its mandate, structure, and relevance. Recent developments within the West Africa sub region have come to challenge whether ECOWAS can remain an inclusive and adaptable institution facing diverse governance models and security priorities.
ECOWAS’ founding principles were ambitious and forward-thinking. Its founding fathers such as Yakubu Gowon and Gnassingbe Eyadema envisioned a regional body to encourage economic growth through trade liberalization, ensure collective security via cooperative defence agreements, and promote political stability by supporting democratic norms. Over the decades, the organization has recorded notable successes, such as stabilizing Liberia and Sierra Leone during their civil wars, facilitating regional trade agreements, and serving as a platform for political dialogue.
Despite these achievements, the organization has struggled to address the growing complexity in the region. Economic disparities among member states, terrorism in the Sahel, and governance challenges have strained its resources and credibility. The recent withdrawal of three member states—Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso—signals the urgent need to revisit ECOWAS’s foundational principles and evaluate their applicability in today’s West African context.
Challenges to Inclusivity and Adaptability
One of the key issues facing ECOWAS is its ability to accommodate diverse governance models within its framework. The organization’s emphasis on democratic governance has come in conflict with the realities of recent military coups in Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Guinea. These countries—facing internal instability, terrorism, and economic hardships—have argued that ECOWAS’s approach is not only rigid but also disconnected from their immediate needs.
The imposition of sanctions and political isolation has been a favoured tool of ECOWAS against states deemed to contravene its democratic norms. While these measures aim to uphold the principles of democratic governance, they often worsen economic suffering and alienate affected populations, as seen in Niger following its coup. This raises questions about whether sanctions are the most effective response or whether alternative mechanisms could better balance regional solidarity and national sovereignty.
The Sahel region’s unique security challenges further expose ECOWAS’s limitations Terrorism, insurgency, and cross-border criminal activities have overwhelmed traditional security frameworks. Member states like Mali and Burkina Faso have sought alternative security partnerships, notably with Russia’s Wagner Group, a signal of general dissatisfaction with ECOWAS’s collective security mechanisms.
The Governments of Mali and Burkina Faso have expressed frustration at the perceived inability of the French Security Forces to curb the surge of violent extremism. In August 2014, France launched Operation Bakhane as a counterterrorism intervention, which encompassed former French colonies of Mali, Chad, Burkina Faso, Niger and Mauritania. Still, Operation Bakhane resulted in an unfortunate decade long occupation of the region.
Herein lies the justification of the Military Juntas of Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger for the coups and subsequent alliance with the Russian PMC, Wagner Group.Contextualized in this manner, the perceived rigidity of ECOWAS and its member states towards their embattled brothers signals an absence of inclusivity and an inability to adapt to current circumstances.This raises the question: was ECOWAS created for the member states, or were the member states created for ECOWAS?
The Implications of Proposed Exits
The departure of Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso marks a turning point for ECOWAS. It is not merely a loss of membership but a symbolic rejection of the organization’s ability to address its member states’ political, economic, and security realities. This raises critical questions about the inclusivity and adaptability of ECOWAS’s framework:
Critics argue that ECOWAS is increasingly seen as an instrument of external influence, particularly by France and Western allies. This perception undermines its legitimacy among member states that seek greater autonomy. If the three countries succeed in leaving, it sets a precedent for disengagement. These states’ withdrawal could embolden other dissatisfied members to follow suit, weakening the organization’s regional clout.
The exit will cause an erosion of collective security. The absence of key Sahelian states diminishes ECOWAS’s capacity to address transnational threats like terrorism, which require coordinated responses.
Is it necessary to rethink ECOWAS’s Mandate?
To remain relevant, ECOWAS may need to undergo structural and philosophical reforms that reflect the evolving realities of West Africa. Here are key areas for consideration:
Structural Reform
- Accommodating Diverse Governance Models: ECOWAS needs to create a framework that respects its member states’ sovereignty and unique political trajectories while upholding core principles of stability and cooperation. A dual-tier system that allows transitional governments to participate in decision-making without fully meeting democratic standards could be explored.
- Decentralized Governance: Empowering subregional blocs within ECOWAS to address specific challenges—such as a Sahel-focused body for security issues—could enhance its adaptability and effectiveness.
Economic Pragmatism
- Alternative Sanctions: ECOWAS could consider incentive-based approaches to encourage compliance with its principles instead of punitive sanctions that disproportionately harm vulnerable populations. These could include financial aid packages linked to measurable governance reforms.
- Reducing Dependency on External Powers: Strengthening intra-regional trade and investment can reduce reliance on external actors, fostering greater economic independence and resilience.
Enhancing Security Cooperation
- Localized Security Solutions: ECOWAS should prioritize capacity-building for national and regional security forces, focusing on counter-terrorism, border control, and intelligence-sharing.
- Collaborative Partnerships: Engaging non-member states and global institutions in cooperative security initiatives can complement ECOWAS’s efforts, particularly in the Sahel.
Maintaining Regional Solidarity
ECOWAS must rebuild trust among its members by positioning itself as a unifying force rather than an enforcer. This requires:
- Conflict Mediation: Strengthening its role as a neutral mediator in disputes rather than taking punitive measures that alienate member states.
- Respecting Sovereignty: Acknowledging its members’ diverse political and security contexts while finding common ground for cooperation.
- Engaging Civil Society: Involving citizens and grassroots organizations in dialogue and decision-making can enhance the legitimacy and inclusiveness of ECOWAS’s initiatives.
Broader Global Context
The challenges facing ECOWAS do not occur in isolation. External powers like Russia and China capitalise on the organization’s perceived weaknesses to expand their influence in West Africa.
Meanwhile, regional alternatives such as the Sahel Alliance could emerge as competitors if ECOWAS fails to adapt. These dynamics show the urgency of reform to ensure that ECOWAS remains the primary platform for regional cooperation.
Conclusion
The recent exits of Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso provide an opportunity for ECOWAS to reflect on its mandate and reimagine its role in West Africa. ECOWAS can reaffirm its relevance in a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape by embracing inclusivity, adaptability, and pragmatism. A reformed ECOWAS that respects diverse political ideologies and prioritizes localized solutions and economic and security resilience will be better equipped to navigate the complexities of the 21st century while maintaining regional solidarity.
Mrs Chidoka is currently a doctoral student at Howard University, Washington DC
Contact: chidinma.chidoka@bison.howard.edu