The Tangwall Campagin. You explain that France itself has fueled anti-French sentiment in Africa. What did she do, concretely, to get there?
François-Xavier Freland. This is a field observation. I have been covering Africa for twenty years, I lived in Bamako in 2008, at a time when France was rather well perceived, and have returned to the Sahel a lot since. Even the colonial question was not necessarily divisive. The shift came later.
What has changed?
French speech. Since Paris, we have produced a very negative vision of our own action. Through certain public media, in particular, the French intervention in the Sahel has been presented from an almost systematically critical angle: army “neocolonial”focus on burrs, sometimes without solid verification. However, in French-speaking Africa, these media are extremely listened to. Result: the voice of France spoke ill of France.
You say that this rejection has been amplified…
Yes. On the ground, the hostility was not massive. Anti-French demonstrations brought together a few hundred people, sometimes a thousand. But from the capitals, these signals have been magnified, transformed into a general feeling. The image has been given of a unanimously hostile Africa, which is false.
You also blame some of the French elites. For what ?
Because there has been an opportunistic market for these critical speeches. Books and analyzes against “Françafrique” have multiplied. Some have improvised as specialists without knowing the field. And part of the intellectual world has imposed a decolonial reading which only retains the most negative aspects of French history in Africa.
Did foreign powers simply take advantage of the situation?
Obviously. The Russians hit where it hurt. But they only had to push us; we had already dug our own grave. The Chinese invest massively, but with their own logic, sometimes bringing their own workforce. France, however, retains its assets: language, knowledge of the field, old networks.
The fact remains that in Mali, for example, the Russians are proving powerless to contain the jihadist surge… What does this mean?
The Russians are making do with their means. Barely more than 1,000 Africa Corps mercenaries for a country twice the size of France; we see that their priorities are elsewhere, in Ukraine. They may have underestimated the determination of the FLA Tuaregs to obtain their independence in the north, what they call Azawad. Incidentally, many Malians must regret the presence of the French soldiers who had succeeded in calming ethnic rivalries and above all in containing the jihadist threat, despite the irresponsible criticism of our media, and some media attacks in Bamako.
“Let’s stop giving woke moral lessons to Africans”
Today, it feels like an entire country is collapsing. It is a repeat of 2012, when the jihadists imposed sharia law in Timbuktu, Kidal or Gao, before the French military intervention. All that for that?
What could be the consequences?
The risk is that this time, the jihadists of the Support Group for Islam and Muslims (GSIM), affiliated with Al-Qaeda and led by the irreducible Iyad Ag Ghali, former enemy number one of the French, plant their black flag in Bamako and seize Mali, with a destabilizing effect throughout the region. Two hypotheses: at best, they ally with opponents to create a more religious regime, without being “jihadist”, such as the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, or they install a sort of Islamic State, such as Mosul, which then weakens the entire region, with a risk of a domino effect. We can then fear the planning of new attacks against France, new migratory pressure at our borders… If Mali falls, it is France again that will suffer.
Can France still come back?
Yes, but differently. It is already coming back, in a more discreet way, with occasional cooperations. Countries like Benin remain in demand. But we must change our posture: we must stop giving woke moral lessons to Africans. They don’t want it.
Do French presidents have their share of responsibility?
Chirac was the last to maintain an embodied relationship with Africa, based on knowledge and respect for cultures. Then the discourse changed. From Hollande to Macron, we have entered into a logic of permanent repentance. By apologizing so much, we ended up no longer taking responsibility for what was also positive.
So you contest a solely negative vision of the French presence?
Of course ! There were mistakes, but also infrastructure, schools, state bases. Africans know it. To reduce this story to the worst is to distort reality.
