The Unfiltered Truth Between Traoré And The West As Other African Leaders Remains Dumb.

Thousands Rally for President Traoré Amid U.S. Criticism

Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso – On May 4, 2025, thousands of Burkinabè citizens flooded the streets of Ouagadougou in a powerful show of support for President Ibrahim Traoré, exactly one month after U.S. Marine Corps General Michael E. Langley, Commander of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), branded him a “criminal” during a Senate hearing on April 3. The protests, marked by chants of “Long live Captain Traoré!” and banners denouncing foreign interference, reflect a growing resistance to external narratives aimed at discrediting African leaders. But beneath the surface, critical questions linger: What drives this targeted vilification of Traoré? Why are African presidents remaining silent? And what does this mean for African sovereignty?

What Motivated General Langley’s Senate Statement?

General Langley’s accusation, made during a U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, claimed that Traoré was misusing Burkina Faso’s gold reserves—valued at over $4 billion—to protect his junta rather than benefit his people. Langley framed Traoré as a threat, alleging that the leader’s actions, alongside Burkina Faso’s partnerships with Russia and China, undermine U.S. interests in Africa. However, many analysts see this as a strategic move to delegitimize Traoré, whose policies directly challenge Western influence. Since taking power in 2022, Traoré has expelled French troops, nationalized gold mines, and prioritized local processing of resources, moves that have bolstered Burkina Faso’s GDP from $18.8 billion to $22.1 billion. These actions threaten the historical dominance of Western corporations over African resources, prompting what critics call a “textbook smear campaign” to justify intervention, reminiscent of the prelude to Libya’s destruction in 2011.

Why Are African Presidents Silent?

The conspicuous silence of African leaders amid this controversy has sparked debate. Is it jealousy, fear, or intimidation? Some argue that jealousy plays a role—Traoré’s popularity, especially among the youth and Pan-Africanist circles, positions him as a revolutionary figure akin to Thomas Sankara, potentially overshadowing other leaders. However, fear and intimidation seem more plausible. The Alliance of Sahel States (AES), formed by Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, has openly defied Western hegemony, expelling foreign troops and aligning with Russia. This bold stance may deter other African presidents, wary of economic sanctions or military repercussions from Western powers, from publicly supporting Traoré. The memory of Muammar Gaddafi’s fate looms large—his vision for a united Africa was met with a NATO-led intervention that left Libya in ruins. African leaders may be calculating that silence is safer than solidarity.

What Are the Broader Geopolitical Dynamics at Play?

The vilification of Traoré is not an isolated incident but part of a larger struggle over Africa’s future. The U.S., through AFRICOM, views the continent as a battleground to counter Russia and China’s growing influence. Langley’s Senate testimony emphasized stopping these powers, framing Traoré’s leadership as a hurdle. Meanwhile, Burkina Faso’s shift toward self-reliance—building its first gold refinery, renegotiating mining contracts, and boosting local agriculture—threatens the neo-colonial economic order that has long benefited foreign powers. Protesters in Ouagadougou echoed this sentiment, with one demonstrator stating, “We will not let the West create another South Sudan or Congo here.” The unrest in those nations, often exacerbated by foreign interference, serves as a cautionary tale for Burkina Faso, fueling fears that Traoré’s defiance could provoke similar destabilization.

What Does This Mean for African Sovereignty?

This controversy underscores a critical question: Who controls Africa’s narrative and resources? Traoré’s leadership, while not without flaws—his junta struggles with security, with over 60% of Burkina Faso outside government control—represents a push for self-determination. The protests signal a broader African awakening, with citizens rejecting external interference. However, the silence of African leaders highlights a fractured continent, where unity against neo-colonialism remains elusive. As Traoré navigates these challenges, his fate may determine whether Africa can truly chart its own path or remain subject to foreign agendas.

This looks more like an unfiltered truth about Africa’s fight for sovereignty.