On January 8, 2026, the Alliance of Sahel States issued a statement condemning the United States' capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro as an "illegal abduction" and a violation of international law. The three-nation bloc—comprising Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger—positioned itself alongside Venezuela in denouncing what it characterized as American interventionism. The statement itself was unremarkable in its rhetorical content, echoing familiar anti-imperialist language. What made it significant was its timing.
Just one day earlier, Burkina Faso's military junta had publicly announced it had foiled a major coup and assassination plot against Captain Ibrahim Traoré, allegedly planned for January 3—the same day US forces launched "Operation Absolute Resolve" in Caracas. The junta blamed former transitional president Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba and unspecified "foreign sources," with implicit accusations directed at neighboring Côte d'Ivoire. By pivoting immediately to Venezuela, the AES juntas crafted a narrative bridge: what happens in Caracas could happen in Ouagadougou, Bamako, or Niamey. The message was clear—internal challenges to their authority are not domestic political contestation, but extensions of a global imperialist project.
Diplomatic theater as regime insurance
The AES statement on Venezuela represents a calculated expansion of the juntas' political survival strategy. For three years, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger have built legitimacy narratives around reclaiming sovereignty from France and ECOWAS, framing their coups as popular uprisings against neocolonial structures. Their withdrawal from the Economic Community of West African States, expulsion of French forces, and pivot toward Russian security partnerships positioned them as champions of regional autonomy.
The Venezuela intervention marks a rhetorical leap from regional to global anti-Western alignment. By defending Maduro—a sanctioned, isolated leader facing international criminal charges—the AES juntas signal their entry into a broader club of states positioned against American hegemony. This is not mere ideological solidarity; it is diplomatic infrastructure-building. Joining Russia, Iran, and Venezuela in condemning US actions creates potential pathways for alternative security, economic, and diplomatic support that bypasses Western conditionality around governance, human rights, and democratic transitions.
The timing relative to the Burkina coup plot reveals the domestic utility of this global framing. Traoré's government claims the conspiracy included plans to attack a strategic drone base used in counter-terrorism operations. By immediately pivoting to Venezuela, the junta could preemptively frame any future internal challenge—whether from disgruntled military factions, civil society, or political opponents—as foreign-backed regime change operations comparable to what they allege occurred in Caracas. The Venezuela statement functions as narrative armor: it transforms the foiled coup from a symptom of internal fragility into evidence of external threat.
Members are reading: How the juntas' Venezuela gambit reveals a structural paradox where regime survival imperatives directly undermine the counter-terrorism legitimacy they claim.
Instrumentalizing instability
The AES's Venezuela statement should be read as a signal to multiple audiences simultaneously. Domestically, it reinforces the narrative that challenges to junta rule are foreign plots, justifying repression and emergency powers. Regionally, it positions the alliance as ideologically distinct from ECOWAS and its Western-aligned members. Globally, it courts patronage from states willing to provide support without governance conditionality.
Yet this strategy carries compounding risks. The very act of globalizing their anti-Western rhetoric reduces room for diplomatic maneuver should security conditions deteriorate further. It locks the juntas into alignments with states that may offer limited tangible support beyond rhetorical solidarity. And it does nothing to address the core security challenges—jihadist expansion, inter-communal violence, economic collapse—that created the conditions for military takeovers in the first place.
The foiled coup in Burkina Faso and the Venezuela statement together reveal a pattern: foreign policy increasingly functions as an extension of domestic survival strategy. Whether this calculus enhances or undermines long-term stability in the Sahel depends on whether the juntas can convert anti-imperialist rhetoric into functional security partnerships. For now, the evidence suggests they are more effective at globalizing grievance than delivering security.
Subscribe to our free newsletter to unlock direct links to all sources used in this article.
We believe you deserve to verify everything we write. That's why we meticulously document every source.
