In all earnestness, as someone who isn't too aware of Nigerian politics - why shouldn't the elected government be helped back into power? What reasons do we have to believe that the junta has the best interests of the Nigerian working class more than the previous regime?
I don't know much about Nigerien politics (btw Nigerian refers to Nigeria), but I've been trying to read up since the coup. It seems the coup government enjoys a lot of popular support, as opposed to the previously "elected" government. I've seen people claim that the previous elections were a sham, with the winning candidate straight buying up votes with US and French funds, though I don't have proof for this claim (but seems plausible).
As an outsider looking it, it certainly seems to me that a government that wants to oust French economic and political influence from the country will be far better in improving Nigerien people's lives rather than a government that is in favour of maintaining French influence in the country.
Niger is a prime example of Parenti's view "there are no poor countries, there are over-exploited countries". Niger has rich deposits of Uranium, Gold, precious stones, Oil, and rare minerals.
The reason it has become such a headline is that Niger is France's prime supplier of Uranium, and France acquires that Uranium at 20% its regular price. France is the EU's largest producer of electricity from nuclear powerplants. And it sells this electricity at quite a profit. France should have the cheapest electricity in the EU by far, but it actually sells it at the average EU price, which means all that difference is pure profit. It also exports a lot of this electricity, primarily to Belgium and Germany.
Long-story short, if France loses Niger as a Uranium supplier, its economic rating WILL go down from AA to A, which, along with everything else going on, will trigger a major recession. Germany's energy needs will also be directly impacted, especially since they are cut off from Russian gas.
So I don't know much about the Junta in Niger and their intentions, beyond what they've already announced publicly, but I do know that France has a vested interest in exploiting Niger. Therefore, any Nigerien government that France doesn't like, is probably good for the people of Niger.
And lastly, we should remember that what is branded as military coups by the West are sometimes socialist revolutions led by the military. Examples: Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Thomas Sankara in (the neighbour of Niger) Burkina Faso.
It seems the coup government enjoys a lot of popular support, as opposed to the previously "elected" government.
I fully expect it to if they publicly frame it as a response to widespread grievances but they'll have to quickly move to address them lest they lose that support. Junta and "protest" generally don't mix.
branded as military coups by the West are sometimes socialist revolutions led by the military
True, but Sankara seized powers from other military rulers, not a civilian government. Chavez also won elections before rewriting the Constitution. The "military coups" in Venezuela were generally to ensure democratic institutions and processes were followed since the Venezuelan right wing engages in subverting Bolivaran Constituonal processes.
Not to mention the "democratic" president in custody belongs to a certain arab tribe, which doesn't even make up 0.1% of the population. This arab tribe was also used by france as foreign mercenaries to beat down any rebellions which happened. This tribe is also immensely rich and powerful. So in sort these guys claim to be democratically elected, but once again the entire democratic process favours this particular group and in return, these guys give wealth to france for them to keep being in power.
I could see similar conditions existing in Niger as in Venezuela and Burkina Faso. As I said, I don't know much about Niger politics. They do enjoy up to 80% support from their people (according to the Grayzone), which is an extremely high approval rate. I don't think the previous government was that democratic to begin with.
Next elections weren't supposed to be until 2025. I hope the military government moves that up.
Semi-related, the idea that a constitution can be suspended via unilateral action in the first place fascinates me. It seems like it relies on weak and dysfunctional courts in order to work.
In all earnestness, as someone who isn't too aware of Nigerian politics - why shouldn't the elected government be helped back into power? What reasons do we have to believe that the junta has the best interests of the Nigerian working class more than the previous regime?
I don't know much about Nigerien politics (btw Nigerian refers to Nigeria), but I've been trying to read up since the coup. It seems the coup government enjoys a lot of popular support, as opposed to the previously "elected" government. I've seen people claim that the previous elections were a sham, with the winning candidate straight buying up votes with US and French funds, though I don't have proof for this claim (but seems plausible).
As an outsider looking it, it certainly seems to me that a government that wants to oust French economic and political influence from the country will be far better in improving Nigerien people's lives rather than a government that is in favour of maintaining French influence in the country.
Niger is a prime example of Parenti's view "there are no poor countries, there are over-exploited countries". Niger has rich deposits of Uranium, Gold, precious stones, Oil, and rare minerals.
The reason it has become such a headline is that Niger is France's prime supplier of Uranium, and France acquires that Uranium at 20% its regular price. France is the EU's largest producer of electricity from nuclear powerplants. And it sells this electricity at quite a profit. France should have the cheapest electricity in the EU by far, but it actually sells it at the average EU price, which means all that difference is pure profit. It also exports a lot of this electricity, primarily to Belgium and Germany.
Long-story short, if France loses Niger as a Uranium supplier, its economic rating WILL go down from AA to A, which, along with everything else going on, will trigger a major recession. Germany's energy needs will also be directly impacted, especially since they are cut off from Russian gas.
So I don't know much about the Junta in Niger and their intentions, beyond what they've already announced publicly, but I do know that France has a vested interest in exploiting Niger. Therefore, any Nigerien government that France doesn't like, is probably good for the people of Niger.
And lastly, we should remember that what is branded as military coups by the West are sometimes socialist revolutions led by the military. Examples: Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Thomas Sankara in (the neighbour of Niger) Burkina Faso.
I fully expect it to if they publicly frame it as a response to widespread grievances but they'll have to quickly move to address them lest they lose that support. Junta and "protest" generally don't mix.
True, but Sankara seized powers from other military rulers, not a civilian government. Chavez also won elections before rewriting the Constitution. The "military coups" in Venezuela were generally to ensure democratic institutions and processes were followed since the Venezuelan right wing engages in subverting Bolivaran Constituonal processes.
Not to mention the "democratic" president in custody belongs to a certain arab tribe, which doesn't even make up 0.1% of the population. This arab tribe was also used by france as foreign mercenaries to beat down any rebellions which happened. This tribe is also immensely rich and powerful. So in sort these guys claim to be democratically elected, but once again the entire democratic process favours this particular group and in return, these guys give wealth to france for them to keep being in power.
I could see similar conditions existing in Niger as in Venezuela and Burkina Faso. As I said, I don't know much about Niger politics. They do enjoy up to 80% support from their people (according to the Grayzone), which is an extremely high approval rate. I don't think the previous government was that democratic to begin with.
Next elections weren't supposed to be until 2025. I hope the military government moves that up.
Semi-related, the idea that a constitution can be suspended via unilateral action in the first place fascinates me. It seems like it relies on weak and dysfunctional courts in order to work.