“It Was More of a French Operation with Nigerian Colours” – Mazi Chika Austin Reacts to Nigeria’s Military Intervention in Benin

Abuja, Nigeria – December 8, 2025

Nigeria’s rapid military response to the attempted coup in Benin Republic has triggered intense scrutiny at home, where citizens are questioning why the same decisiveness has never been applied against the Fulani terrorist networks ravaging communities across Nigeria.

The contrast, swift precision strikes in Cotonou but years of excuses within Nigeria, has reignited long-standing accusations of double standards, external influence, and a political class unwilling to confront terrorism within its borders.

Political activist Mazi Chika Austin captured the sentiment in a sharp critique that has since gone viral. According to him, two fundamental realities explain Nigeria’s sudden efficiency:

“The first is that the bombs the Nigerian Air Force dropped, and all the related logistics, were paid for by France. It was more of a French operation with Nigerian colours.”

Austin argued that France, eager to preserve its strategic and economic interests in Francophone West Africa, mobilised regional assets while presenting the intervention as an ECOWAS-coordinated effort led by Nigeria.

He described the operation as one in which Nigeria played the visible role, while France handled the financial and technological backbone.

He continued:

“Secondly, using Nigerian fighter jets consistently against bandits is capital-intensive. Nigerian politicians would rather loot the funds than ‘waste’ it on securing the ordinary citizens who are daily victims of terrorism. And with strong advocates for the Fulani terrorists, like Sheikh Gumi, heavily influencing the political class, decisive action at home becomes practically impossible.”

Austin’s comments align with a growing narrative: that Nigeria is more willing to deploy military might on foreign soil, especially when Western partners stand behind the operation, than to confront militants within its own territory.

Security Alerts and International Concerns

Following reports of explosions, gunfire and military aircraft over Cotonou, several foreign embassies, including the French and U.S. missions, issued urgent advisories warning their nationals to avoid affected areas and obey local security instructions.

With the situation fluid and the risk of sporadic violence high, Nigerians and other foreign residents in Benin were advised to maintain a low profile, avoid public gatherings, and closely monitor official embassy communication channels.

Debate Over Legality and Sovereignty

Critics on social media, civil society groups, and commentators have accused the Nigerian government of overstepping its boundaries, arguing that any military action on Beninese soil requires clear, publicly disclosed consent from Benin’s government or explicit authorisation from an international body.

Although both the Nigerian and Beninese presidencies insist that the intervention was triggered by Benin’s “formal request for assistance” and executed under ECOWAS rapid-response frameworks, scepticism remains high.

Political observers say the operation appears less like a multilateral initiative and more like a joint Franco-Nigerian incursion, one executed under the banners of Nigeria-controlled ECOWAS and the France-influenced African Union.

While official reports emphasise “coordination,” many analysts argue that the speed and scale of the deployment suggest prior strategic arrangements rather than spontaneous continental cooperation.

A Region Reshaping Itself Through Coups

The Benin incident comes amid a sweeping regional shift: West Africa has witnessed a wave of military coups applauded by much of the population.

In several countries, Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso, Guinea, citizens have openly rejected Western-aligned democratic models, accusing them of producing insecurity, corruption, and economic stagnation.

Benin, once considered a stable democracy, has in recent years struggled with Rising insecurity in the north, largely attributed to cross-border Fulani terrorists from Nigeria, Controversial domestic reforms that critics say weakened democratic institutions, Deepening economic distress that has eroded public confidence in the civilian leadership.

The swift foreign intervention is being interpreted by many as a sign of French desperation to maintain influence in a region increasingly rejecting its post-colonial footprint.

Public Sentiment: A Coup Many Saw as Liberation

Several videos circulating on social media show Beninese citizens celebrating the attempted coup, describing it as the “beginning of liberation” from external political control.

Many residents openly declared that it was time to dismantle what they call “Western democracy”, which they accuse of entrenching insecurity, economic hardship, and neocolonial manipulation.

For these citizens, the coup was not a breakdown of democracy, it was a rebellion against a system they believe has failed them.

In the end, the intervention in Benin raises pressing questions:

Who truly authorised it?

Whose interests did it serve?

And why can Nigeria mobilise such force abroad, yet remains paralysed in the fight against terrorism at home?

Until these questions are answered, Austin’s assertion will continue to gain traction: that the skies over Cotonou were lit not by Nigerian sovereignty, but by a French operation painted in Nigerian colours.