Follow us on social

google cta
US troops heading back to Chad?

US troops heading back to Chad?

After less than four months, the troubled African country wants us back. Washington should think twice.

Analysis | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

In an interview with Voice of America on Thursday, United States Major General for Africa Command Kenneth Ekman said that the United States and Chad have agreed on the return of a “limited number” of U.S. Special Forces personnel. Details of the agreement have not yet been made public.

The incumbent leader of Chad, Mahamat Deby, who led the country first as president of the Transitional Military Council from 2021 to 2022 and then as Transitional President from 2022 until he won the presidential election earlier this year, has decided to allow the reentrance of U.S. troops into Chad. Mahamat Deby serves as the country’s first elected president since his father, Idriss Deby, was killed in a military offensive by a rebel group in northwest Chad in 2021.

What changed his mind is so far unclear. It wasn’t so long ago, in the lead-up to the Chadian presidential election on May 6, that Deby asked the United States to remove all military personnel from the country. The United States complied with his request, withdrawing 75 U.S. Special Forces personne, many of whom had been stationed at a French military base in the capital of N’Djamena. At the time, there was no indication that the U.S. military would be given the green light to come back.

Their reported return runs counter to the recent trend across the Sahel in which national governments have asked Western forces to leave after years of failed counterinsurgency efforts. At the end of 2023, France withdrew its forces from Niger at the demand of the country’s junta government, which took power in a military coup in July 2023. The military junta in Niger similarly asked the U.S. to leave. Washington just recently completed its full military withdrawal from the country.

Tensions in the region are high, with national governments increasingly wary of institutions traditionally backed by Western countries. The recent formation of the Alliance of Sahel States between Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso is seen as a move to form a partnership in direct opposition to regional, continental, and global diplomatic and economic communities, such as the regional economic body ECOWAS and the African Union, as well as Western-backed institutions that many in these countries see as the offspring of colonialism.

Bringing troops back to Chad risks further entangling the United States in a web of expanding insurgent activity that neither Washington nor local military forces have been able to repel. Despite a decade of counterinsurgency operations by Western states — most notably France and the United States — in conjunction with local and regional military bodies across the Sahel, militant groups are only growing in strength and expanding further across the region.

Armed groups originally based in North Africa and the Sahel are now moving further south, where they are threatening the security of the coastal states of Benin, Togo, Ghana, and Cote d’Ivoire, among others. Security challenges are also partially responsible for the dramatic rise in coup attempts in countries across the region in recent years, including Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, Chad, and Guinea. All of this has occurred despite years of American and French military presence in the region.

Rather than commit more troops to a failed counterinsurgency fight, the U.S. would do better to focus on diplomatic engagement and coordinated intelligence sharing with the countries of the region. Restationing troops in Chad risks U.S. military personnel suffering an attack at the hands of armed groups, which would further drag Washington into this unshakable conflict.


Chadians and Americans participate in the Closing Ceremony of Medical Readiness Training Exercise held at the Military Teaching Hospital in N'Djamena, Chad, May 18, 2017. (U.S. Army Africa photo by Staff Sgt. Shejal Pulivarti)

google cta
Analysis | QiOSK
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports
Top image credit: A large oil tanker transits the Strait of Hormuz. (Shutterstock/ Clare Louise Jackson)

Iran says ‘no ship is allowed to pass’ Strait of Hormuz: Reports

QiOSK

Hours after the U.S. and Israel launched a campaign of airstrikes across Iran, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is warning vessels in the Persian Gulf via radio that “no ship is allowed to pass the Strait of Hormuz,” according to a report from Reuters.

The news suggests that Iran is ready to pull out all the stops in its response to the U.S.-Israeli barrage, which President Donald Trump says is aimed at toppling the Iranian regime. A full shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz would cause an international crisis given that 20% of the world’s oil passes through the narrow channel. Financial analysts estimate that even one day of a full blockade could cause global oil prices to double from $66 per barrel to more than $120.

keep readingShow less
Ro Khanna Jon Fetterman
Top photo credit: Ro Khanna (creative commons/WebSummitt ) and Jon Fetterman (shutterstock/EB Photos)

Fury and fanboys: US, world leaders react to US-Israeli war on Iran

QiOSK

The reactions are already coming in following the early morning attacks on Iran by U.S. and Israeli forces in what is being called "Operation Epic Fury." The reports are fluid, but as President Trump announced on his Truth Social, the U.S. is taking aim at Iran's military and senior leadership and hopes to raze both so that the Iranian people can take over. "When we are finished the government is yours to take. Your hour of freedom is at hand."

For some, like U.S. Senator Jon Fetterman, a Democrat who represents the people of Pennsylvania, this is the greatest thing to happen since the last time the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran in June. "President Trump has been willing to do what’s right and necessary to produce real peace in the region. God bless the United States, our great military, and Israel."

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

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.