Paper short abstract:

The French-led intervention in Mali was initially welcomed by many. Subsequent events led to suspicion about France’s role, concerning conflict actors or Malian resources. The changing attitude reflects the varying success of the intervention and conflicting views of how to deal with the conflict.

Paper long abstract:

Observations made in Northern Mali initially suggested enthusiasm for France and the French intervention in Mali in 2013. More recent visits to Mali revealed growing scepticism regarding France’s role in Mali. Speculations regarding the ‘real’ intentions of France could be heard among ordinary people and government agents. France was accused of siding with some actors in the conflict, the Tuareg rebels in particular. Speculations verging on conspiracy theories claimed that the French supported not just the rebels but also indirectly the Islamists and also failed to apprehend wanted rebel or Islamist leaders. The French supposedly had a hidden agenda and were pursuing their own objectives. More specific reasons were invoked, listing the attempts of the French to take control of the assumed vast mineral wealth of Northern Mali, oil and uranium in particular. The relationship between France and Mali is not determined from the outset, but shaped by unfolding developments. Oscillating over the years, it is neither one of one-sided French dominance nor necessarily harmonious. Rather, the tensions between the French and Malian governments, as the changing, and progressively negative, perceptions of the French presence in Mali, have emerged as different approaches to the conflict have been attempted with varying success. These include differences of opinion as to certain options, including the choice to negotiate with the Islamists. The mitigated success of the long-lasting French-led intervention is also what has prompted consideration of recourse to other external forces including the Russians.