US Military Adjusts Messaging in Africa, Urging Allies to Self-Reliance

TAN TAN, Morocco — The narrative around U.S. military involvement in Africa is undergoing a profound transformation. Traditionally, the emphasis has been on promoting good governance and addressing the root causes of insurgency. However, recent developments indicate a newfound focus on empowering African allies to stand on their own. This shift was especially evident during the African Lion exercise—America’s largest joint training operation on the continent. “We need to be able to get our partners to the level of independent operations,” General Michael Langley articulated in an interview with The Associated Press, highlighting the urgent need for resilience among these fragile allies.

As the sun set on the month-long exercise, with troops from over 40 countries rehearsing a range of tactical maneuvers—from drone operations to simulated close-quarters combat—it became clear that the U.S. military’s messaging had evolved significantly. Previously, the focus was on a multi-faceted strategy that combined defense, diplomacy, and development. Now, the priority appears to be shifting towards fostering self-sufficiency within African nations, a strategic pivot that General Langley cited as a necessity for the current administration, reflecting President Donald Trump’s defense strategy.

“We have our set priorities now — protecting the homeland,” Langley stated. This quotation encapsulates the changing priorities of U.S. foreign policy. There’s a growing expectation for other nations to contribute in regions experiencing global instability, which he mentioned while referencing U.S. support for Sudan.

This transition reflects a broader reorientation within the U.S. military, which is moving toward a leaner, more lethal force structure. This includes potential cuts to military leadership roles in areas like Africa, a move perceived as necessary amidst increasing Chinese and Russian engagement in the region. China has initiated its comprehensive training programs for African militaries, while Russian mercenaries are steadily redefining their roles as preferred security partners across North, West, and Central Africa. The geopolitical landscape is evolving at an unprecedented rate.

Reflecting back to conversations from a year ago, Langley was a staunch advocate for what U.S. military officials deemed a “whole of government approach” to counterinsurgency. The notion seemed grounded in a deep understanding of regional complexities. “Force alone can’t stabilize weak states,” he reasoned. This perspective was particularly poignant when considering the layered threats posed by climate change and extremist organizations.

However, today, that holistic approach seems to have lost its prominence in the official narrative. While Langley acknowledges that comprehensive efforts have made a positive impact in places like Ivory Coast—where a combination of defense and development contributed to a decline in attacks from jihadi groups—he admits that such results aren’t the norm. “I’ve seen progression and I’ve seen regression,” he remarked, honestly reflecting the tumultuous nature of regional stability as he prepares to exit his position later this year.

Compounding this complexity is the fact that many African military forces remain ill-equipped while insurgent groups are expanding their reach. Just recently, a high-ranking U.S. defense official highlighted Africa’s precarious position by stating, “We see Africa as the epicenter for both al-Qaida and ISIS.” With both groups establishing regional affiliates, the risk of violence bubbling over into neighboring countries becomes an alarming reality.

Despite Africa not being a top priority for the Pentagon historically, the U.S. has invested hundreds of millions in security assistance, maintaining a presence of approximately 6,500 personnel on the continent. However, the shift in rhetoric from the U.S. — from a “whole of government” strategy to one emphasizing burden-sharing — raises questions about the adequacy of support given the rising levels of violence and the expanding influence of militants.

It’s a troubling scenario. Research from the Institute for Economics and Peace reveals that more than half of the world’s terrorism victims in 2024 fell in the West African Sahel, a region plagued by military juntas and instability. Similarly, Somalia continues to rank as one of the deadliest spots for terrorism in Africa, accounting for 6% of worldwide terrorism-related deaths outside the Sahel.

Under the Trump administration, airstrikes targeting ISIS and al-Shabab in Somalia have escalated. However, General Langley candidly acknowledged that despite this military support, the Somali National Army is still grappling with the complexities of maintaining security. “They are trying to find their way,” he disclosed, hinting at the army’s ongoing struggles for effectiveness on the ground after numerous setbacks.

In West Africa, the horizon appears equally grim. Experts like Beverly Ochieng, from Control Risks, argue that local states lack the capacity to sufficiently address these threats. Western military support has dwindled, either strained or reduced by hostile governmental changes in the Sahel region. “Many do not have strong air forces,” Ochieng noted, stressing the logistical challenges faced by these armies as they attempt to monitor insurgent activities across challenging terrain.

Amid shifting ideologies, rising violence, and a more complex global landscape, one must ponder: Is the empowerment of African nations enough to turn the tide against an evolving threat? As the U.S. military reevaluates its commitments, the journey toward sustainable security in Africa remains fraught with challenges.

Edited By Ali Musa
Axadle Times International – Monitoring.