It seems the coup government enjoys a lot of popular support, as opposed to the previously "elected" government.
I fully expect it to if they publicly frame it as a response to widespread grievances but they'll have to quickly move to address them lest they lose that support. Junta and "protest" generally don't mix.
branded as military coups by the West are sometimes socialist revolutions led by the military
True, but Sankara seized powers from other military rulers, not a civilian government. Chavez also won elections before rewriting the Constitution. The "military coups" in Venezuela were generally to ensure democratic institutions and processes were followed since the Venezuelan right wing engages in subverting Bolivaran Constituonal processes.
Not to mention the "democratic" president in custody belongs to a certain arab tribe, which doesn't even make up 0.1% of the population. This arab tribe was also used by france as foreign mercenaries to beat down any rebellions which happened. This tribe is also immensely rich and powerful. So in sort these guys claim to be democratically elected, but once again the entire democratic process favours this particular group and in return, these guys give wealth to france for them to keep being in power.
I could see similar conditions existing in Niger as in Venezuela and Burkina Faso. As I said, I don't know much about Niger politics. They do enjoy up to 80% support from their people (according to the Grayzone), which is an extremely high approval rate. I don't think the previous government was that democratic to begin with.
Next elections weren't supposed to be until 2025. I hope the military government moves that up.
Semi-related, the idea that a constitution can be suspended via unilateral action in the first place fascinates me. It seems like it relies on weak and dysfunctional courts in order to work.
I fully expect it to if they publicly frame it as a response to widespread grievances but they'll have to quickly move to address them lest they lose that support. Junta and "protest" generally don't mix.
True, but Sankara seized powers from other military rulers, not a civilian government. Chavez also won elections before rewriting the Constitution. The "military coups" in Venezuela were generally to ensure democratic institutions and processes were followed since the Venezuelan right wing engages in subverting Bolivaran Constituonal processes.
Not to mention the "democratic" president in custody belongs to a certain arab tribe, which doesn't even make up 0.1% of the population. This arab tribe was also used by france as foreign mercenaries to beat down any rebellions which happened. This tribe is also immensely rich and powerful. So in sort these guys claim to be democratically elected, but once again the entire democratic process favours this particular group and in return, these guys give wealth to france for them to keep being in power.
I could see similar conditions existing in Niger as in Venezuela and Burkina Faso. As I said, I don't know much about Niger politics. They do enjoy up to 80% support from their people (according to the Grayzone), which is an extremely high approval rate. I don't think the previous government was that democratic to begin with.
Next elections weren't supposed to be until 2025. I hope the military government moves that up.
Semi-related, the idea that a constitution can be suspended via unilateral action in the first place fascinates me. It seems like it relies on weak and dysfunctional courts in order to work.