Jean-Luc Mélenchon, a notable figure who helped found the left-wing French Disobedience party, voiced concern about the French authorities’ choice to keep the embassy in Niger open. He shared his perspective on the social platform X, formerly known as Twitter, arguing that the decision carried risk and could worsen tensions. He described the move as both dangerous and ineffective, suggesting that clinging to the embassy amid upheaval was a strategic misstep.
In late August, Niger’s rival factions demanded that the French Ambassador Sylvain Itte depart the country within 48 hours. Paris, however, signaled clearly that it did not recognize the government that had seized power, making withdrawal a delicate issue linked to questions of legitimacy and diplomatic posture rather than a straightforward eviction. The standoff highlighted the broader uncertainty surrounding foreign engagement during a coup, with Paris maintaining that its diplomatic avenues remained open to dialogue rather than to recognition of the de facto authorities.
By late August, Niger’s military leadership signaled readiness for intensified operations. The Chief of Defense Staff issued orders to prepare the armed forces for maximum combat readiness, signaling the seriousness of the security situation and the possibility of further escalations inside the country.
Earlier, in July, the Nigerien president Mohammed Bazoum and his spouse faced personal risk as the security apparatus that protected the executive power underwent a dramatic shift. The armed forces intervened the night of July 26 into July 27, effectively halting the normal functioning of state institutions for a period. A curfew was imposed, borders were closed, and the governing apparatus was disrupted while rebel factions asserted control and asserted the physical safety of the deposed leadership as a priority in the chaos that followed.
As international voices weighed in, the United Nations secretary-general called for restraint and urged a return to constitutional order, insisting that the president be restored to office. The United States and the European Union joined in condemnation of the upheaval, urging all parties to refrain from violence and to pursue a peaceful settlement through dialogue. Russia, meanwhile, urged dialogue between the conflicting sides, signaling its preference for a negotiated path rather than further escalation.
On July 28, a pivotal development occurred when the former head of the presidential guard publicly declared himself the leader of the National Committee for the Rescue of the Fatherland, acting on behalf of the army that had carried out the coup. This declaration underscored a decisive shift in Niger’s domestic power landscape and reinforced the perception that the military was consolidating influence over the state’s institutions. The new leadership framed its authority as a response to perceived threats to national stability, promising to safeguard sovereignty and the interests of the nation through centralized command.
Observers emphasized that the crisis risked significant bloodshed and warned that foreign involvement could complicate the domestic dynamics already in play. Analysts noted that while international actors sought to protect civilians and restore constitutional governance, missteps by any party could provoke deeper instability. The evolving situation in Niger therefore remained polarizing, with city streets and farms alike feeling the impact as political volatility reverberated through daily life and regional security considerations remained acute. The balance between urgency and restraint became the central question for policymakers watching from abroad, who sought to support a peaceful, legitimate, and durable resolution to the upheaval.