The unspoken crisis beneath Burkina Faso’s sovereignty agenda
In Tougan, the story is stark. Behind the official narrative of sovereignty, industrialisation, and national production, agricultural producers say they continue to face a far less glamorous reality: selling their harvests at a loss, repaying loans, and sometimes considering crossing the border to survive.
“Last year, maize did well. They capped the price, and producers saw no profit. This year, others will cross the border because of the loans,” reports a witness from Tougan. One phrase captures the absurdity: “The producer weeps when the harvest is good, and weeps when the harvest is bad.”
The unasked question: who feeds the nation?
This contradiction raises a fundamental question: where has the priority for those who feed the country gone?
Since coming to power, Ibrahim Traoré has consistently promoted local production, economic sovereignty, and Burkina Faso’s ability to manufacture certain equipment itself. Announcements about industrial units, particularly those for the army’s needs, feature prominently in this communication.
But an economy is not limited to its factories or military equipment.
The blind spot in the sovereignty narrative
While new industrial capabilities are presented as symbols of sovereignty, farmers remain confronted with far more immediate problems: insufficient purchase prices, indebtedness, uncertain markets, and low profitability.
Producing more only makes sense if the producer can also live from their work.
The problem in Tougan thus goes beyond maize. It raises the question of agricultural investment. What entrepreneur would durably invest in a sector where a good harvest can drive prices down to the point of ruining the producer, while a bad harvest exposes them directly to debt?
This is precisely where one of the major blind spots of the sovereignty narrative lies: a nation does not become economically independent solely by manufacturing its own weapons. It must also be able to secure the incomes of those who produce its food.
The brutal paradox of production and survival
The paradox is brutal. Burkina Faso wants to locally produce its equipment, yet some farmers still seem to be searching for ways to sell their own production without losing their investment.
By emphasizing images of factories, machines, and military equipment, the authorities risk leaving in the shadows another reality: that of fields, granaries, loans, and rural families waiting for concrete solutions.
Sovereignty is not measured only by what a state can manufacture for its army. It is also measured by its capacity to protect those who, every morning, plant a seed to feed the nation.
In Tougan, the question is thus not how many factories Burkina Faso can inaugurate. The question is simpler, and probably more urgent: how much longer can the producer work without earning a living?
