When Defenders of Sovereignty Are Branded as Threats: The Hypocrisy of General Langley’s Words on Burkina Faso

When General Michael Langley, head of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), labels Captain Ibrahim Traoré—the leader of Burkina Faso—as a “threat to his own people,” we must pause and ask: Who truly threatens Africa’s future—its sovereign leaders or foreign generals stationed thousands of miles away?

Let’s not ignore the facts: Captain Traoré has already survived multiple assassination attempts since taking power—an all-too-familiar fate for African leaders who reject Western control and fight for true independence. History tells us that when an African leader dares to stand on sovereignty, reclaim natural resources, and unite with neighboring nations against foreign influence, he becomes a target, not because he endangers his people, but because he threatens global interests.

Captain Traoré’s so-called “crime” is daring to reclaim Burkina Faso’s gold—not for multinational corporations or foreign banks, but to empower his nation. His bold plan to use the country’s wealth to fund infrastructure, development, and self-reliance exposes the uncomfortable truth: Africa’s poverty is manufactured, maintained by those who profit from its resources while keeping its people in chains of dependency.

But Traoré is not alone. Burkina Faso has joined forces with Mali and Niger to form the Alliance of Sahel States—a mutual defense pact designed to protect their sovereignty from both terrorist threats and foreign intervention. Together, these nations have expelled French troops, rejected Western military dictates, and charted a course toward self-reliance. This regional unity represents a direct challenge to AFRICOM and the broader neo-colonial grip on West Africa.

And that is why General Langley and others are sounding alarms.

The late Muammar Gaddafi wasn’t just demonized for his internal policies—he was targeted because he dared to dream beyond Libya’s borders. Gaddafi envisioned a United States of Africa, a continent united under one government, with a gold-backed currency designed to break free from the IMF, World Bank, and Western financial exploitation. That vision posed an existential threat to those who profit from a divided and dependent Africa.

Picture of  Muammar Gaddafi with all the African Presidents on it to show his unity and support for a United States of Africa

So, like Thomas Sankara before him—who called out Western debt traps and fought for African dignity—Gaddafi was labeled a dictator, destabilized, and ultimately assassinated. His nation was left in ruins, and his dream of African unity was buried under NATO bombs.

It’s only a matter of time before Western media outlets begin saturating headlines with familiar phrases:

• “Authoritarian rule in Burkina Faso”
• “Human rights concerns under Traoré”
• “Democracy at risk in the Sahel”

These narratives aren’t about protecting African citizens—they’re about justifying sanctions, covert operations, or even military action to regain control over a region slipping from Western hands.

We must remember how similar rhetoric was deployed to:

• Justify NATO’s destruction of Libya.
• Excuse France’s decades-long exploitation through the CFA franc.
• Cover up the failures of AFRICOM, whose presence has coincided with a dramatic rise in terrorism across the Sahel.

When African leaders choose sovereignty over submission, Western powers don’t respond with respect—they respond with regime change tactics, both economic and military.

Captain Traoré’s vision, alongside Mali and Niger, represents more than national pride—it’s a blueprint for African independence. And that’s precisely why he’s being labeled a threat.

The true danger isn’t Traoré or the Alliance of Sahel States—it’s the desperation of foreign powers unwilling to let Africa control its own destiny. General Langley’s statement is not a defense of human rights—it’s a defense of geopolitical interests.

As media narratives intensify, Africans and the global diaspora must stay vigilant. Question the headlines. Follow the money. Recognize the patterns.

Africa doesn’t need AFRICOM’s protection.
It needs the freedom to determine its future—without being punished for daring to do so.