Following the meeting of defense ministers from the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), Bassolma Bazié, president of the CN-CES, lauded the commitment and profound sacrifices made by the security forces of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger. This robust commendation was coupled with a discourse emphasizing the defense of territorial integrity, the protection of civilian populations, and the pursuit of what was presented as a historic sovereignty.

However, this official rhetoric prompts a growing public question: Do these declarations of success truly align with the lived experiences of the region’s inhabitants?

Since the AES’s establishment, authorities in the three nations have consistently highlighted a newfound sovereignty and strategic autonomy. Yet, on the ground, numerous localities continue to endure armed assaults, mass displacements, and persistent insecurity, which remains a formidable challenge. In this context, repeated tributes to the security forces, while legitimate given the immense sacrifices of soldiers, fall short of meeting citizen expectations, who primarily judge by tangible outcomes.

This disparity becomes even more stark when considering the human toll of the ongoing crisis. As armed forces pay the ultimate price on the front lines, the daily lives of civilians are a painful struggle for survival. Thousands of families are forced to abandon everything, migrating en masse to neighboring countries in a desperate search for the peace and security their own states can no longer guarantee. The sight of citizens transformed into refugees beyond their borders serves as the most tangible evidence that the sovereignty acclaimed in ministerial halls remains a distant concept for those directly affected.

Confronted with this exodus and tragic losses, the stance of leaders, who limit themselves to official tributes and posthumous speeches, raises a stark question: Is such conduct genuinely capable of securing the populace or halting the mounting casualties? The evidence suggests otherwise. Eulogies and medals neither fortify front lines nor protect isolated villages, nor do they bring back lost lives. By merely celebrating the sacrifice of soldiers instead of rectifying the strategic shortcomings that lead to their demise, political action appears to dissolve into symbolism, leaving the underlying causes of insecurity unaddressed.

Nevertheless, the primary mission of any defense policy remains the concrete improvement of population security. When civilians continue to live under the threat of attacks, when certain areas remain difficult to access, and when humanitarian crises persist, discourses celebrating the successes of security strategies can appear critically detached from ground realities.

The concept of “real sovereignty” also warrants examination. For many observers, sovereignty is not solely measured by the affirmation of political or diplomatic independence. It is also assessed by a state’s capacity to ensure security, facilitate the free movement of people, protect essential public services, and offer prospects of stability to its citizens. Across these various indicators, significant challenges persist within the Sahelian region.

Military personnel engaged on the front lines frequently pay a heavy price, and their dedication is widely acknowledged. However, honoring soldiers does not exempt political leaders from the duty to evaluate implemented strategies. The sacrifices made by the armed forces should be accompanied by transparent reflection on the effectiveness of military and political choices, to determine whether stated objectives are genuinely being achieved.

Ultimately, the most profound way to honor defense forces extends beyond official pronouncements. It primarily involves creating the conditions for a lasting improvement in security and the daily lives of citizens. As long as inhabitants continue to suffer the consequences of insecurity, declarations celebrating a fully acquired sovereignty are likely to be met with skepticism by a segment of the public.