Senegal’s executive shake-up: the sonko-diomaye split

The Senegalese political arena frequently witnesses intense power struggles, whether between factions within the same party or among different political entities. As articulated by Lord Palmerston, the British Foreign Secretary in 1848:

In politics, there are no permanent enemies and no permanent friends, only permanent interests.

This enduring maxim perfectly encapsulates the current dynamics at the very pinnacle of Senegal’s executive branch.

The Sonko-Diomaye partnership, once a unified front comprising Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye and his Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko, now faces significant internal discord. These escalating disagreements culminated in the President’s announcement on May 22 of the Prime Minister’s dismissal and the subsequent dissolution of the entire government.

While early indicators of fraternal divergences emerged during the November 8, 2025, political rally, a definitive clarification arrived with discussions held on May 2, 2026. The President himself acknowledged disagreements with his Prime Minister, specifically citing an “excessive personalization” of power centered around Sonko.

The illusion of an indivisible symbolic capital: a two-headed challenge

This unique political alliance was forged when Sonko designated Diomaye as his successor following the invalidation of his own presidential candidacy. Initially, their partnership was built on a foundation of political complementarity: one managed the state apparatus, while the other provided robust political legitimacy during their initial months in power.

However, the grand political gathering of Les Patriotes africains du Sénégal pour le travail, l’éthique et la fraternité (PASTEF), the ruling party, on November 8, 2025, exposed the limitations of this two-headed illusion, largely championed by Sonko. Sonko himself declared that “the period after November 8” represented a critical juncture for the ongoing institutional collaboration between the President and him. Today, their relationship is undeniably deadlocked, marked by disagreements over the choice of the ruling coalition’s coordinator, differing visions for governance, and divergent preferences for political allies.

Consequently, the once unifying slogan “Sonko mooy Diomaye” (Sonko is Diomaye, in Wolof), initially a survival strategy for PASTEF against the former regime of President Macky Sall, has begun to wane. In its place, slogans like “Sonko est Sonko” or “Ousmane est Sonko” have emerged. Observations by journalist Sidy Diop corroborate this shift, highlighting that “the proclaimed unity has dissolved. It gives way to a now visible, almost embraced duality, where roles are being redefined and ambitions are asserted.”

The sentiment “Diomaye n’est plus Sonko. Sonko n’est plus Diomaye” now prevails. Yet, from the perspective of symbolic domination and reproduction theory, which allowed Sonko to generate a “proxy capital,” their symbolic fusion had previously cultivated a “unique partisan habitus.” This led the homopastefien and supporters of the “Project” to perceive them not as two distinct representatives, but as a single, indivisible political force.

This executive duality is the inevitable outcome of their initial “complementarity” upon entering the political landscape. The presidential nature of Senegal’s political system mandates a clear distinction where the President’s authority is not shared. The constitutional prerogatives of the President and the Prime Minister, outlined in articles 42 to 52, inherently transformed their initial fusion into a “soft rivalry.”

President Diomaye frequently adopts a reserved posture, positioning himself as the guarantor of institutions, while Prime Minister Sonko maintains his characteristic style of popular mobilization and disruption. This aligns with what French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu described as the “position occupying the man,” where the institutional role dictates an individual’s actions, language, and demeanor, rather than the reverse. The presidential function imposes a “sovereign” habitus that inherently contrasts with the “party leader” habitus of the Prime Minister. This distinction, adhering to an ethical separation between the roles of Head of State and party leader, prompted Diomaye to resign from his position as Secretary-General and all leadership bodies within the PASTEF party.

Furthermore, an invisible yet tangible boundary between the President and his Prime Minister lies in the transition from informal street communication, such as “Diomaye is Sonko,” to formal institutional communication, where the President’s image takes precedence according to protocol. Where Sonko propelled Diomaye to power, Diomaye now wields discretionary authority, including significant appointment powers, thereby fostering a political bipolarization between pro-Diomaye and pro-Sonko factions.

The inherent limits of duality in power

In physics, the mechanics of fluids dictate that when two bodies of differing masses share a common enclosure, the one with greater mass compresses the other. Applied to Diomaye and Sonko, this illustrates that power is not static, much like human nature itself.

Through an upward flow of influence, his charisma, and control of the party, Ousmane Sonko injects popular legitimacy into Bassirou Diomaye Faye. Conversely, through a downward flow of influence, Bassirou Diomaye, via his state decrees and decisions, materializes the aspirations of the “Project” by embedding them within Senegalese positive law. Thus, if Sonko becomes too prominent, his influence encroaches upon Diomaye’s institutional territory.

Consequently, the President risks appearing to be under tutelage. Conversely, if Diomaye isolates himself excessively, he risks losing the vital vein of legitimacy that Sonko represents. They exist within a system of mutual dependence and potential self-destruction. Power continuously oscillates between the presidential office and the Prime Minister’s residence, a dynamic that perpetuates this soft rivalry.

By mimicking each other’s desires, they become antagonistic doubles. The more they resemble one another, the deeper their divergence becomes, as each sees their own ambition mirrored in the other. Both political figures covet the same objectives: power, the presidency, and ultimate leadership. Sonko aspires to hold executive power; Diomaye seeks to solidify his position.

The current power struggle at the highest echelons serves as a stark reminder that in politics, a “gentlemen’s agreement” remains a myth for idealists. It is the relentless re-emergence of the “number two syndrome.” The presumptive successor, initially loyal and competent, climbs the ranks only to turn against their leader when the latter commands all the spotlight.

Conversely, the hegemonic figure, driven by a desire to secure future electoral victories, transforms a loyal ally into an adversary due to mistrust. This dynamic fosters a reciprocal paranoia, foreshadowing a period of social and political turbulence within the nation.