In northern Togo, geopolitical rivalries overshadow the urgent needs of the population

In the northern reaches of Togo, a quiet yet intense geopolitical struggle is unfolding. Security developments indicate that more than 300 operatives from the Russian African Corps the state-backed successor to the Wagner Group are currently operating within the country. Concurrently, Turkey is expanding its own security footprint, notably through entities linked to the private military contractor SADAT.

This dual presence signals a fundamental transformation in the defence policy of Togo. Rather than engaging in temporary, targeted military cooperation, the country is increasingly becoming a strategic battleground where external powers compete for long-term influence, contracts, and intelligence access.

The price of externalising national defence

This influx of foreign security actors raises critical questions regarding the role of the Togolese Armed Forces. Togo possesses a structured national military with highly trained officers who have graduated from prestigious international academies. Consequently, the growing reliance on external partners cannot be explained by a lack of domestic capacity.

Instead, this strategy reflects a political choice that carries significant risks. Relying heavily on foreign entities for equipment, intelligence, and training builds a deep-seated dependency. When foreign actors control the flow of intelligence and operational training, they inevitably gain leverage over national decision-making, ultimately compromising the nation’s sovereign control over its own defence policy.

Demanding transparency in military agreements

The shift towards externalised security has occurred with minimal public oversight. Crucial details remain undisclosed: What are the terms and durations of these contracts? How much do they cost the Togolese taxpayer? Under what chain of command do these foreign forces operate, and which judicial system holds them accountable in the event of abuses?

These questions are particularly urgent because these foreign elements operate in sensitive areas where civilians are directly exposed to conflict. Without continuous investment in domestic military training, border surveillance, and local intelligence, Togo risks falling into a dependency loop where national weaknesses justify further foreign intervention.

Addressing the root causes of instability

The threat posed by armed groups like the JNIM in northern Togo is undeniable. However, counter-terrorism must not serve as a blank cheque for opaque security arrangements. A sustainable security strategy requires more than military hardware; it must integrate border control with regional cooperation and socio-economic development.

Securing a border with weapons alone is ineffective if the surrounding communities remain trapped in poverty, unemployment, and administrative neglect. While the government negotiates with foreign capitals, the daily struggles of citizens such as inflation, lack of healthcare, clean water, and education—continue to mount. Neglecting these social realities creates the very vulnerabilities that armed groups exploit.

Protecting the state versus protecting the regime

This military buildup coincides with a tightening of the domestic political space. Recent constitutional reforms and institutional changes have intensified debates over the concentration of power and the erosion of democratic opposition in Togo. When security logic dominates governance, legitimate political dissent is too easily treated as a threat to state stability.

A national army exists to defend the territorial integrity of the country and protect its citizens, not to secure the survival of a political system. Confusing the protection of the state with the preservation of a regime risks turning foreign military assistance into a tool for domestic political control.

Situated strategically on the Gulf of Guinea, Togo must navigate its foreign relations without sacrificing its autonomy. The true strength of the nation does not lie in how many global powers compete on its soil, but in how effectively its institutions serve and protect its own people.