Armenia dreams of replacing Burkina Faso in France’s colonial policy Review by Nasibova

A military junta seized power for the second time this year as a result of a military coup in Burkina Faso, a small country in West Africa. This is the third former French colony in which a government loyal to Paris is removed from power due to mass protests. Similar events occurred in Mali and Guinea.

According to the world news agencies, in Burkina Faso, the military overthrew interim president Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba, froze the country's Constitution, dissolved the cabinet of ministers and closed the borders.

For reference: the kingdom of Yatenga, Tenkodogo and Fada N’Gourma have been on the territory of modern Burkina Faso since the 14th century. From the 14th to the 16th century, the Yatenga state conquered part of the territories of neighbouring Mali and Songhai. The colonisation of lands by the French conquerors began at the end of the 19th century. They smashed Yatenga’s army in 1895, Fada N’Gourma recognized the protectorate of France in 1897. Upper Volta was part of the French colony of Upper Senegal and Niger from 1904 to 1919, and then was created as a separate colony. The country gained autonomy in 1958 and gained independence in 1960. It has been called Burkina Faso since 1984.

Probably, the military-political cataclysms (which happened twice a year) in Ouagadougou, besides the failure of the authorities acting there, also confirmed the failure of France's post-colonial policy in Africa, from where Paris is once again removed. Two important nuances are obvious. The collapse of the post-colonial French policy in the former colonies, firstly, greatly reduces the traditionally strong influence of Paris on the entire African continent, and secondly, deals a big blow to the image of France, which positions itself as the leading European country in world politics and as an international mediator capable of resolving regional conflicts.

In particular, there is the Armenian-Azerbaijani confrontation, given Armenia's constant glances toward the West. Such a “multifaceted” feature of French politics allows drawing parallels between Burkina Faso, a country that wants to completely exclude the influence of France on its state system, and “sovereign” Armenia, which dreams of becoming an outpost of Paris. In other words, Armenia claims the status of a new colony of France and Paris is very pleased.

Even during the first protests in Burkina Faso (in January 2022), people took to the streets of Ouagadougou chanting “We don’t want France anymore” and “Paris has done nothing to ensure our security”. Armenia openly comes out with anti-Russian slogans urging to invite French troops into the country. When the coup d'etat in Burkina Faso demonstrated the intransigence of a small African country, where the influence of Paris on the political course was not so great, Armenia is trying to shift the responsibility for the future of its own country to Paris. Even this indicative fact confirms Armenia’s flawed policy and its destructive position towards its neighbours in the region.

Theoretically, the aspirations of the Armenian authorities towards France are allegedly a strategic partnership, alliance, and so on. It is possible to call it whatever you like. In reality, Armenia is trying to change its pro-Russian course to a pro-Western one. It seems that this country is in great need of being constantly controlled from the outside.

It is unclear whether Yerevan will be able to become another outpost of Paris or Washington in the foreseeable future. Russia which is a traditional owner of Armenia has no doubts that the Armenian current authorities are making efforts for this because Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan called for the deployment of international missions on the border with Azerbaijan, ostensibly to resolve the conflict situation in the region, thereby demonstrating distrust towards the Russian side.

While speaking at the UN General Assembly in New York on September 22, Pashinyan announced the "aggression" of Azerbaijan and proposed to have an international mission on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. He addressed the French president with the same request on September 26 during the talks in Paris. The fact that the French side’s reaction to Armenia’s initiative turned out to be positive is not surprising. France has been demonstrating a biased pro-Armenian position in the Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict for many years.

Therefore, it was quite predictable that while speaking recently about the idea of having international observers on the border between Azerbaijan and Armenia, French Ambassador to Yerevan Anne Louyot assured the Armenian public that France and the US are actively working on this issue.

"We support this idea, we are working in this direction, we are negotiating with other countries," the diplomat said.

However, one way or another, the scenario of the arrival in Armenia and the deployment of French and US military personnel on its territory seem possible only in case of a complete cessation of cooperation between Yerevan and Russia. For this purpose, Armenia must make a political decision to withdraw from the CSTO, to withdraw the Russian military base from its territory with all the ensuing consequences. It is a big question whether the Armenian leadership is ready for a final break in relations with Russia. Here Moscow’s position and concrete actions are unambiguously important. At least for now, the Russian Federation only voices the messages to an unlucky ally through the Kremlin.

Thus, while commenting on Pashinyan’s statement on the need to deploy a mission of international observers on the border with Azerbaijan, Spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry Maria Zakharova last week clearly and unequivocally stated that Russia stands for the full and strict implementation of all agreements that were concluded by the three countries to resolve the protracted conflict which broke down many times.

“There is a lot planned to be done. There is both theory and practice. There is a statement of what happened and a plan for the future. These documents [tripartite statements made by the presidents of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia] are agreed upon not only between the mediator and each individual country, but between countries that are part of this long conflict. That is why they are valuable, and they are a real, rather than an imaginary road map,” Zakharova added.

Proceeding from Zakharova’s statement, Moscow is clearly hinting to Yerevan that the efforts to deploy an international mission on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border are unacceptable for Russia and that, most likely, it will not allow the substitution of genuine agreements.

“A lot of people, namely, politicians, public figures want to replace with themselves or with their ideas what they agreed on. They promise a lot, they can only promise. They have not done much over the years, there were no special results. However, the results that were really developed and did not remain on paper, they are being implemented step by step. Not everything is implemented in a desirable way (because the maximum is always required), but at the same time, it works. Therefore, it is impossible to replace the real with something imaginary,” the spokesperson added.

As a continuation of this topic, Zakharova's formulations regarding Armenia's possible withdrawal from the CSTO deserve special attention. She points out that Russia's interaction with Armenia within this organisation can be characterised as effective and that the upcoming annual CSTO summit (scheduled for November 2022 in Yerevan) will consolidate the results of this organisation's activity for 20 years. This can be regarded as Russia's ignoring the possible withdrawal of Armenia from the CSTO. This means that Yerevan's attempts in this sphere do not bring positive dynamics to the settlement of relations with Baku.

Thus, Moscow once again diplomatically brought to Armenia’s attention that not much time is left before the November CSTO summit, as well as in general for revising Yerevan’s current position. It is time for Armenia to think about it because the deployment of international mediators on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border will inevitably lead to regional instability, and this is not in the interests of Baku, Moscow and even Yerevan itself. After all, the West is unlikely to miss the opportunity to use Armenia as a bargaining chip in the already planned political adventure in the Caucasus.