Follow us on social

Rand Paul: Why do we still have troops in Niger?

Rand Paul: Why do we still have troops in Niger?

The Kentucky senator also demands to know how many countries the US military is operating in, under what authority, and why.

Reporting | QiOSK

There are 1,016 U.S. troops still in Niger — a virtual powderkeg of political and military unrest since an armed junta overthrew its president and locked him and his family in the basement of the government palace in late July.

As a result, regional governments under the banner of ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) is threatening to intervene militarily until the still-imprisoned leader is restored to office. The coup leaders have responded by rallying the people to their cause, as well as other armed juntas in the region.

One of the Niger junta leaders, by the way, Brig. Gen. Moussa Salaou Barmou, trained with U.S. military forces at Fort Benning, Georgia and the National Defense University in Washington, D.C.

In fact, the U.S. military has been in Niger and training Nigeriens since 2013 when Washington signed a status of forces agreement with Niger to conduct “non-combat” operations in the country. Since then the U.S. has built a strategic drone base there from which to conduct its counterterrorism operations in that part of the world.

What are U.S. troops actually doing there now besides training future coup leaders? Under what authority does the administration and the Pentagon continue to rotate American servicemembers in and out? Is it the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force, designed to fight al Qaeda and “associated forces,” or the secretive authorities that are far more off the books and do not require as much Congressional review?

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., asks this question and several more in a letter sent to Secretary of Defense Loyd Austin yesterday. Like:

How many countries is the U.S. military operating in under the 2001 AUMF? How many are operating under Sections 333 and 127e of the U.S Code, and who specifically is receiving aid and training in those countries? How much money went to Niger?

Aside from the tragic deaths of four American soldiers in October 2017 in an ambush, how many service members have come under fire in Niger since 2013? Under what authorities are being used to keep a U.S. military footprint there now?

Maybe Paul will have more luck than investigative journalist Nick Turse, who has been thwarted at all attempts to get a record of the military’s African trainees, particularly those associated with the region’s many coups in the last decade since Washington has been pouring military assistance into the region. He had to file a Freedom of Information request to find out how many 127e operations the U.S. had across the globe — it turns out, 23 from 2017 to 2020. Just the tip of the iceberg, no doubt.

Last year, the Brennan Center issued a report on the Section 127e and 333 authorities, stating plainly that there is no transparency and Congress knows very little about where the money and personnel are actually going:

The Department of Defense provides congressionally mandated disclosures and updates to only a small number of legislative offices. Sometimes, it altogether fails to comply with reporting requirements, leaving members of Congress uninformed about when, where, and against whom the military uses force. After U.S. forces took casualties in Niger in 2017, for example, lawmakers were taken aback by the very presence of U.S. forces in the country.

Paul says this is unacceptable. Let’s see if a U.S. Senator on the Foreign Relations Commitment can get a little more light on the situation.

“As citizens of a Constitutional republic,” said Paul in his letter, “Americans must be informed of hostilities involving the Armed Forces so that the people can participate in national debates over war and peace. “


Rand Paul (Gage Skidmore/Creative Commons) and General Abdourahmane Tiani, who was declared as the new head of state of Niger by leaders of a coup,July 28, 2023. (REUTERS/Balima Boureima)
Reporting | QiOSK
Trump Netanyahu in Washington
Top photo credit: Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu (Joshua Sukoff / Shutterstock.com)

Netanyahu returns to DC — in triumph or with more to ask?

Middle East

On Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu will arrive in Washington for his third visit of Trump’s second term. Today also marks 21 months of Israel’s war on Gaza. The purpose of the visit remains unclear, and speculation abounds: will Trump and Netanyahu announce a real ceasefire in Gaza? Will Syria join the Abraham Accords? Or might Trump greenlight even broader Israeli action against Iran?

Before Netanyahu’s visit, Trump posted an ultimatum on Truth Social, claiming Israel had agreed to a 60-day ceasefire. He urged Hamas to accept the terms, threatening that “it will only get worse” if it doesn’t. Although Trump intended to pressure Hamas, reiterating a longstanding narrative that portrays the group as the obstacle to peace, Hamas has long maintained that it will only accept a ceasefire if it is part of a process that leads to a permanent end to Israel’s war and its complete withdrawal from the enclave. Netanyahu, for his part, remains adamant that the war must continue until Hamas is eliminated, a goal that even the IDF has described as not militarily viable.

keep readingShow less
POGO The Bunker
Top image credit: Project on Government Oversight

Yes to 'Department of War' name change

Military Industrial Complex

The Bunker appears originally at the Project on Government Oversight and is republished here with permission.

keep readingShow less
Bidenites make soft landing in heart of lucrative war industry
Top photo credit: Brett McGurk (Kuhlmann /MSC/Wikimedia Commons) and Lloyd Austin ((DoD Photo by U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Jack Sanders).

Bidenites make soft landing in heart of lucrative war industry

Military Industrial Complex

In 2021, Ret. Gen. Lloyd Austin declared he had “no intent to be a lobbyist.” On June 3, less than six months after leaving office, former President Joe Biden’s Secretary of Defense announced that he would be launching a new strategic advisory firm called “Clarion Strategies.” Some Senators allege this is simply lobbying by another name.

A pitch deck obtained by Politico noted that Clarion Strategies’ name is a “nod to its aim to equip clients with the clarity they need to navigate geopolitical upheaval driven by the war in Ukraine, advancements in defense technology like AI and unmanned systems, global trade shifts and emerging alliances among U.S. adversaries like Russia, China, North Korea and China.” In other words, the new firm is very much hoping to court clients from the defense industry.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.