A series of military coups have occurred in Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mali and, in July, Niger. Western countries, led by France and the United States, are firmly opposed to these coups, and see the overthrow in Niger as one too many. Both countries have suspended their development aid to the country; they have also supported the idea of a possible military intervention by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), although the United States seems to be backing down on the subject.

The prospect of military intervention and sanctions has angered young people in Niger and neighboring countries – remember that 40% of the African population is aged 15 or under. In this sense, the local population's support for coups is more an anti-Western stance than a vote of confidence in the military regime.

Indeed, on the continent, social media is full of anti-Western rhetoric. Calls for the immediate withdrawal of the foreign military presence and the CFA franc – which crystallizes resentment – have gone viral. In return, Western commentators have denounced Russian propaganda aimed at fueling this resentment: it certainly plays a role, but it is the emergence of a new generation of vehemently nationalistic Africans – but also pan-Africanists, echoing the sentiment that prevailed at the start of independence – that helps explain the reaction against Western influence. In their eyes, this influence is "holding back" the continent.

This was expressed by Ibrahim Traoré, the young captain and interim president of Burkina Faso, when he told the Russia-Africa summit in July that his generation wondered why their continent was so economically poor yet so rich in natural resources. He blamed Western imperialism and the many African leaders who usually turn to it for help. For the captain, it's time for Africa to take its destiny into its own hands and seek new partnerships for development. His message resonated with the youth of Burkina Faso, and, following his declaration, Traoré was greeted as a hero.

Yet African countries gained independence over 60 years ago. Beyond the persistence of the colonial legacy, which could be endlessly debated, we need to understand why African countries perceive their room for maneuver over their destiny to be so limited. Studying the intertwined nature of the political and economic transformations at work since independence can help explain the situation.

When relatively weak states embarked on a process of democratization that gave leaders the illusion of solid legitimacy, a vicious circle was set in motion. After the first elections, they quickly realized that this electoral legitimacy was short-lived. Unsure of their power, these leaders, some of whom became authoritarian, opted for a close alignment with Western powers in terms of security, but also in the exploitation of mineral resources and other sources of revenue.

You have 40.95% of this article left to read. The rest is for subscribers only.