Firebrand Florida congressman Matt Gaetz, in a March 2023 hearing of the US Congress’ House Armed Services Committee, cornered General Michael Langley, commander of the US Africa Command (AFRICOM), with a seemingly unanswerable question: “Why should US taxpayers be paying to train people who then lead coups in Africa?”

Gaetz was referring to Mamady Doumbouya and Assimi Goïta, who overthrew the governments of Guinea and Mali, respectively, in 2022. The two coup leaders happen to have met while taking part in a so-called “train and equip” programme conducted by the United States in Burkina Faso in 2018.

Train and equip missions are the backbone of America’s military operations in the Sahel. By training and equipping the militaries of embattled countries, and providing the occasional tactical support, America gets to minimise its direct involvement in fighting, while at the same time bolstering the ongoing effectiveness of its partners. Though often criticised, it’s an approach with few downsides for America.

However, recent events in Niger, where the leaders of another American-allied military have overthrown their government, will no doubt be seen by many in Mr Gaetz’s corner as yet further evidence of America’s wasteful failure in the region. Indeed, why should the US keep cooperating with armed forces whose members end up overthrowing their governments?

Non sequitur

As it happens, Gaetz’s question to Langley wasn’t exactly unanswerable. Unfortunately, the good general, whether out of fatigue (Gaetz’s questioning started 1h41m into the hearing) or just plain inability, so fumbled his responses that Mr Gaetz got a moderately popular five-minute YouTube video out of the exchange (which was likely the main purpose behind his line of questioning).

The answer is pretty simple: unless it directly induces them to overthrow their governments, the US isn’t responsible for the actions of foreign soldiers who take part in its training programmes and later decide to topple their governments. What’s more, there is no way for the United States to predict that some of the soldiers it trains will go down this ignominious path; the vast majority don’t.

Not only did the US oppose the coups in all three countries, but it also conditioned its continued cooperation on the restoration of civilian government. Importantly, America chose this approach despite the fact that it not only opens the door for its foes, like Russia, to sidle into even more capitals in the region, but also exposes it to accusations of, on the one hand, interfering with governments in the region and, on the other, abandoning these countries at their most vulnerable hour.

And that’s to say nothing of the fact that the US has a compelling reason to maintain a military presence in the Sahel. Over the last decade, the region has eclipsed the Middle East to become the global hotspot of jihadist terror. In that period, the three most afflicted countries – Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger – have together lost over 40,000 people to jihadist violence. Millions have been displaced.