Religious Freedom Institute | Scott Morgan | June 5, 2020
When asking about the root cause of the insurgencies plaguing the Sahel region of West Africa, and specifically Mali and Burkina Faso, one will hear multiple answers. Nevertheless, as with other spots of crises around the world, each explanation has an element of truth.
The most apparent explanation is Muhammar al-Gadaffi’s removal from power and Libya’s subsequent collapse. It is widely recognized that there is Libyan influence on regional events that continues to this day. One key example under Gadaffi was his and the Tuaregs in Mali. Gaddafi often acted as a mediator when fighting erupted against the Malian government. Various groups have sought haven in Libya, taking advantage of the civil war that shows no sign of ending at this time.
The second possible root cause one hears about is that the region is the desired base of operations for the Islamic State. Shortly before his death in 2019 –during a raid by the U.S. Military– the leader of the group, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, issued a video calling for attacks against Crusader France and its allies in the region. Within days their operations began in earnest, with one of the earliest targets being a Catholic Church in Dolbel, Niger. In Burkina Faso dozens of Christians have been killed in a series of attacks that analysts consider to be inspired by the remarks of Al-Baghdadi. It is clear that the French and their allies present an obstacle to their vision of how West Africa should be governed.
Recently the United States appointed a Special Envoy to deal with the crisis in the Sahel region. During some remarks to religious freedom advocates the envoy posed an interesting question: “What role does the concept of militant secularism have in the inability of these governments to address these insurgencies?”
First of all, how is militant secularism defined in this context? Secularists want to maintain a separation between religion and state, which means there is no official state religion. However, some actors have championed this intending to ensure those who practice religion no longer have a voice and are excluded from public life. Could this create issues where extremists will now seek to exploit this desired aim for their own political agenda?
When considering the constitutions of the three nations that are most affected by militants, it is clear that each of them values religious freedom to some extent. The Constitution of Niger prohibits religious discrimination and provides for freedom of religion, consistent with public order, social peace and national unity. However, it does ban religious political parties. It also prohibits open-air proselytization events and the wearing of burqas. Such actions and policies could lead to actors who feel disenfranchised and who will respond by lashing out against the government.
The Constitution of Burkina Faso states that it is a secular state. Both the constitution and other laws provide for the right of the individual to choose and change their religion and to practice their religion of choice. In a country whose population is equally divided between Christians and Muslims this is an especially unusual distinction. Nevertheless, this has failed to prevent the violence that was encouraged by the Al-Baghdadi’s remarks.