France is a global leader in nuclear energy, deriving 70% of its electricity from nuclear sources, the highest percentage worldwide. Central to this success is uranium, even though France is not known for having significant uranium deposits of its own. Instead, France's uranium is extensively mined in regions like Niger, which are rich in natural resources. Niger is internationally known as one of the world's poorest countries. Over 60% of Niger’s people are illiterate and 80% have no electricity. What is less commonly known is that Niger is one of the largest uranium producers globally, with export values reaching over $378 million in 2010 alone. While French corporate entities like AREVA (now rebranded to Orano) reap huge economic gains from mining arrangements with Niger, beneath the surface lies a complex geopolitical mess – marked by environmental destruction, a legacy of imperialism, neo-colonial economic dependency between nations, and the emergence of terrorist rebel groups, all leaving an indelible impact on the local Tuareg people. This is the hidden cost in exchange for sustaining France’s nuclear industry. The culpability of corporate and state enterprises is often dismissed, packaged into simplified media narratives – terrorism is bad, terrorism is a global threat. Yeah – no shit. This black-and-white frame of thinking is reductionist because it diverts attention away from the economic and environmental exploitation of the local Tuareg people. Instead, this is the very thinking that seeks to justify military intervention or economic sanction under the guise of counter-terrorism, thereby serving the interests of the military-industrial complex, perpetuating an incredibly corrosive cycle of exploitation and disenfranchisement. Such dynamics are not confined to France-Niger relations but reflect a recurring theme where former colonial powers continue to exert influence over resource-rich African nations, prioritising economic interests above ethical environmental and socio-economic considerations for local populations. We need a deeper collective understanding of how power, exploitation, globalisation, and the rise of terrorism inextricably interlink, particularly in the context of France’s Uranium Mining in Niger. Demonising terrorism does not seek to solve it. Looking beyond simplistic media narratives should prompt us to question whether corporate and state enterprises, through the harm they cause (particularly to resource-rich African nations), are equally as culpable as the rebel groups they combat. So, who are the real terrorists?
Whilst nuclear poses its benefits such as providing carbon free electricity, the industry leaves behind millions of tonnes of radioactive waste. What makes nuclear waste significant compared to other types of industrial waste, is not its quantity but its high level of radioactivity which can persist for thousands of years. Thereby the key challenge lies in safely storing and disposing of this waste. In Niger, as a result of AREVA’s uranium mining, radioactive waste was exposed to desert winds in the Sahara, spreading radioactive dust across a local town. The impact was severe: children became sick from uranium-tainted water, unable to urinate. Pregnant women faced higher rates of stillbirths, birth defects, and severe deformities. Animals consuming contaminated pastures died, posing significant challenges for local herders. Land was rendered unviable for pasture, further devastating local communities, agriculture, and industry. A local herder describes the aftermath of his camel who was left handicapped, unable to stand after drinking contaminated water: "She was pregnant; when she gave birth, the calf came out dead and bloated." Despite this, AREVA (now Orano) seeks to double uranium production in the area with the opening of the Imouraren mine, one of the largest uranium mines in Africa. Local mayors have voiced concerns, stating that these operations could deplete all the water in northern Niger’s aquifers, transforming the Tuareg homeland into a "poisoned, waterless wasteland." AREVA's Response AREVA, however, continues to argue that not proceeding with the Imouraren mine would have "a negative impact on the economic, social, and societal development of the region." They assert, "we monitor the impact of our activities on air, soil, the food chain, and water. The results show there is no risk to the local population or animals." A Mining Hospital In response to the inevitable occupational disease that would occur as a result of working in these mines, AREVA built a mining hospital exclusively for their workers. However, dozens of sick locals report being turned away by AREVA’s mining hospital, which refused to treat them despite severe health implications. Fatima, a local woman in her late thirties, rapidly became paralysed from the chest down as a result of radiatio. Her son died fighting Gaddafi’s war in Libya, in an attempt to earn money for her medical treatment. Fatima died soon after. Al Jazeera’s documentary, Orphans of the Sahara, shows AREVA’s hospital denying a father a death certificate for his son and even refusing to cite a cause of death. Despite the nurse stating that radiation was the cause of death, the hospital refused to document it. The nurse stated, “Now we also cannot give you a death certificate because you mentioned the word radiation. You know this issue of radiation is extremely sensitive. No one will give you any documents once you mention that word. Absolutely no one.” This situation is evidence of how institutional bureaucracy is often designed to protect transnational corporations and corporate elites. By refusing to document radiation and hiding these health issues, the hospital shields AREVA from potential legal and financial repercussions. This lack of transparency prevents affected families from seeking justice and ensures that the true extent of health issues related to radiation exposure remains hidden. This makes it impossible to hold multinational groups like AREVA accountable. For families to conclusively attribute these health problems to radiation exposure, thorough scientific investigations and medical examinations would be needed. Whilst NGOs have conducted their own inspections, there has been a lack of state authorised full, independent environmental studies to assess the impact of mining on Niger. A local community leader, Khummu Ilyas, asserts, "AREVA is able to hide its secrets from the world because the local people are poor and illiterate. They are weak and unemployed. They have no idea what is wrong with them or what to do. And no one will tell them the secret truth about their real illness.” Medical Gaslighting? AREVA responded with the statement, “We provide free medical care to workers, their families and local people. The impact of the mining activities on the local population is very closely monitored and checked. The added dose limit of 1 mSv a year set by Niger regulations is respected around AREVA’s mines, guaranteeing there is no impact on health.” Why is Nothing Being Done Politically? Universally, political inaction persists due to entrenched corruption within governments, where elite officials often benefit financially through private deals with corporate groups. This creates a disincentive for challenging exploitative practices. Previously, concerns were raised about a potential conflict of interest due to the influence of Niger’s former President Mahamadou Issoufou (tenure from 2011-2021), who had previously headed AREVA's largest mine in Niger. But geopolitical issues extend merely beyond a few bad actors. An Unequal Relationship between Nations - Embedded Hierarchies & Economic Dependency The lack of responsive action by Niger’s government cannot be understood without addressing a legacy of imperialism, neo-colonialism and financial dependency. France might need Niger’s natural resources, yet Niger depends on France politically for foreign aid, military support, and diplomatic backing. Their relationship is not and has never been equal. Despite its rich uranium reserves, Niger remains one of the poorest countries in the world. Despite gaining independence from France after 1960, a legacy of imperialism continues as the nation still recovers from decades of exploitation, military control, and political instability. Ongoing conflicts and insurgencies in the region have further destabilised the country, making it challenging to overcome its deep-rooted issues inherited from the colonial era. As a result, Niger is heavily reliant on foreign aid, investment, and trade from western nations. This support spans critical sectors, like education, health, and infrastructure. This dependency on foreign aid means that Niger often must align its policies with the interests of donor countries, including France. French companies and investors also play a pivotal role in Niger’s economy beyond natural resources, however ultimately uranium remains a major export for Niger, and the revenue from these operations is crucial to maintain the country's economy. Yet this trade relationship remains unequal. According to the International Monetary Fund, AREVA’s global revenues of nearly $13 billion made the French firm almost twice as large as Niger’s entire economy in 2013. Furthermore, Niger owes substantial debt to France and continues to receive loans and financial assistance from both France and international financial institutions. Neocolonialism manifests in various ways, such as debt dependency, where weaker nations accumulate debt to powerful nations or international lenders for development projects and stabilisation. Unequal trade relationships also manifest with weaker nations exporting materials at low prices. Additionally, powerful nations may exert control over weaker nations' economic policies through conditions attached to loans or aid packages, influencing domestic policies and resource allocation. Loans often come with stringent conditions that require the implementation of austerity measures, privatization of public services, and market deregulation, which can lead to economic instability and social unrest in the borrowing countries. High-interest rates exacerbate the debt burden, making it difficult for these countries to achieve economic self-sufficiency. Additionally, tied aid forces recipient countries to spend aid money on goods and services from the donor country, limiting their economic growth and reinforcing dependency. This financial dependency mirrors colonial-era economic relationships, and often involves the exploitation of natural resources in weaker nations by more powerful nations or multinational corporations. This almost always leads to environmental degradation, loss of local control over resources, and limited economic benefits for local populations as seen in the case of Niger. Niger’s financial dependency on France reflects a continuation of economic relationships reminiscent of colonialism, where economic power remains skewed in favour of former coloniser/dominant nations. Niger’s dependency on France is also exacerbated by security concerns and its need for diplomatic backing. Niger, situated in a volatile region, faces persistent threats from terrorist groups such as Boko Haram and ISIS-affiliated factions. France has been pivotal in providing political stability, military assistance, equipment, troops, and training to Niger forces to stabilise the region and combat terrorism. France often also advocates for Niger in international forums such as the United Nations and the European Union. This diplomatic backing is vital for Niger, especially in securing international aid and support for development projects.
Necropolitics - A Lack of Care The reality is that these entrenched systems, which perpetuate trade imbalance and exploitation, do not change because they benefit powerful institutions. Perhaps if the miners were Western, this issue would receive more traction. However, globalisation has allowed AREVA to recruit 98% of its miners primarily from northern Niger. Employing locals rather than hiring French workers is cheaper, reduces legal liabilities, and makes it easier to sidestep human rights and health regulations. Globalisation allows companies to exploit cheap labour in developing countries, cut costs and avoid stringent regulations. By hiring local workers, AREVA avoids the higher costs and potential lawsuits that would come with employing French nationals, who would demand better safety measures and higher wages. This begs the question of whether such issues enter a necropolitical territory—whose lives are valued and whose are not. Seemingly, the lives of miners in Niger are not valued, as they suffer the consequences of radiation and die in an atmosphere of total indifference. Any form of recognition or accountability from the company that hired them seems out of the question, particularly given the absence of documentation on occupational disease among AREVA’s employees. This lack of transparency is striking, especially given CRIIRAD’s findings, indicating that 35 million tons of radioactive waste have accumulated in the open air since Niger's mines began operating. Either, AREVA is truly exemplary in its occupational health and safety practices, or diseases are being concealed and overlooked in various studies. Furthermore, only active miners are entitled to proper health care provided by the State of Niger, and there is no medical follow-up for former miners, who don’t receive health coverage from either AREVA or the state. This is despite the fact that radiation-related diseases usually break out years later. This can be seen in the case of former worker Mamane Sani, who disclosed that despite working 25 years for the company, he did not receive coverage for a single health expense. Since 1992, his left side has been paralyzed due to a disease that manifested itself “too late” to be acknowledged. At work, Mamane was in direct contact with "yellowcake," a uranium concentrate that is then enriched to produce nuclear fuel. Midwife Hamsatou Adamou, whose husband was one of the first workers at the mines lamented, “all his colleagues are dead of cancer, or of kidney and liver problems… Among those who are still here, many are sick or paralyzed, but we can’t say these problems are directly linked to radiation without any studies!” Several miners also pointed out the absence of any protection or education: “I handled uranium directly. At the beginning, we didn’t even know what it was. There were no masks either. All that came later.” The situation described by these miners paint a deeply troubling picture of exploitation and neglect. AREVA's predatory behaviour raises serious ethical concerns about corporate and state enterprises taking advantage of a poor, illiterate population desperate for employment. This predatory behaviour not only perpetuates a cycle of poverty and illness among the local population but also reflects a broader pattern of exploitation in resource-rich but economically vulnerable regions. The lack of accountability and the disregard for the lives of miners underscore the urgent need for transparency, regulatory oversight, and international scrutiny to ensure justice and protection for affected communities.
The Rise of Terror Yet, while French corporations like AREVA profit heavily, in Niger there is no evidence of the billions made each year from nuclear energy and electricity. Over 60% of Niger’s people are illiterate and 80% have no electricity. Chronic hunger and malnutrition afflict the nation, leaving many people indigent. When mining town locals attempted to transition to modern life and seek employment in the mines, they were met with rejection by AREVA, which preferred to import workers from other regions of Niger. One local lamented, “I am so angry I can’t sleep at night. People in this world are living in comfort, experiencing freedom, while we have none of those things and our world is dying.” In 2007, this discontent culminated in a violent uprising. A group of Tuareg rebels, attacked the mining facilities of AREVA, and kidnapped several French uranium workers. This forced France to halt its operations in Niger. The rebels had clear demands: they called for 20-30% of the uranium profits to benefit the local population, the creation of mining jobs for locals, an end to the environmental pollution caused by mining activities, and a fairer price for Niger's uranium. The struggle for autonomy and economic justice would persist until Libyan leader Gaddafi's intervention halted the rebellion. Many former rebels jobless, and with little prospects locally in their homeland, were recruited as mercenaries to fight for the war in Libya. Al-Qaeda As a result, the situation stalled until Al-Qaeda and its affiliates in neighbouring regions offered to champion Niger, kidnapping western hostages for ransom and sending this message: “Africa has never known such depths of slavery, weakness, and humiliation as when the European and American crusaders began to occupy the land of your ancestors, to steal your property and wealth. So, when they say to you now that they want to help you develop your countries and emerge from your cycle of poverty and backwardness, that is nothing but trickery. If these criminals were sincere in what they said, then they would stop stealing your resources and looting your wealth, and stop controlling the decisions of your governments and stop directing their policies to preserve their own interests.” Media Narratives What the media fails to address when reporting on the proliferation of terrorism is why Al-Qaeda’s rhetoric appeals to a vulnerable population of disenfranchised, jobless, and desperate individuals. Feelings of marginalization and disillusionment create a fertile breeding ground for radicalization and recruitment by extremist groups. Al-Qaeda's message likely resonates with locals who feel failed by the state. Its rhetoric addresses the continuation of colonial exploitation in Niger and how Western ideas of modernity and progression, or promises of development, are driven by self-interest, imperialism and ongoing resource theft from African nations. For marginalised locals, this ideology provides a compelling explanation for their plight and a call to action. Unfortunately, when the local state government fails to protect its people, terrorist revolts often occur in response. Yet, the common narrative perpetuated by the mainstream media—"terrorism is bad" and "Western and secular values are under attack"—is reductionist and fails to address the root socio-economic conditions that make such rhetoric appealing. Extremist groups like Al-Qaeda exploit these sentiments, portraying themselves as liberators crusading against imperialist oppression. It is crucial to observe how such ideologies take root in environments of profound injustice and economic disparity if we want to understand war. The Military-Industrial Complex The media's framing perpetuates our narrow understanding of war, influencing both public opinion and policy. Mainstream narratives support hidden state agendas by serving the interests of the military-industrial complex. War is an economy. The global "war on terror" narrative justifies increased defence spending and arms sales. Simplified portrayals of terrorism can reinforce the belief that military intervention is necessary, sidelining diplomatic, developmental, or humanitarian approaches. Consistently portraying terrorism without context or nuance can foster public fear and support for aggressive counter-terrorism measures that may not address underlying grievances, as demonstrated by the invasion of Iraq in 2003. This creates a corrosive cycle that benefits a small group of elites who profit from ongoing conflict and instability, disincentivizing the pursuit of genuine solutions or addressing the underlying grievances that fuel extremism. A feedback loop is formed in which increased funding for war perpetuates cycles of violence and instability.
The Idea of "State" The exploitation of Niger’s natural resources exemplifies a failure of the state. Many of us look to the state or government as a benevolent force, however this perspective is becoming increasingly challenged by various academics. It could be argued that the state now functions as a corporation, working closely with the private sector to generate wealth for capitalists. Whilst this view may seem radical, the reality is that governments increasingly operate with efficiency metrics, profit motives, and strategic alliances similar to private businesses. There is a trend towards the privatization of public services and an undeniable influence of corporate interests on governmental policies. These policies prioritize economic growth and corporate profits over social welfare, highlighting the close tie between political power and private economic interests. This could be seen as a result of neoliberalism, which emphasizes the privatization of public goods, deregulation, and the prioritization of market mechanisms. As social decline worsens, it becomes easier to see through the notion of the government as a neutral arbiter and promoter of public welfare. A Final Note The relationship dynamic between France and Niger in the context of uranium mining reveals a complex interplay of power, exploitation, and hidden geopolitical interests. This case underscores the dark side of globalised capitalism where resource-rich but economically marginalised regions are subjected to severe environmental degradation and human suffering in exchange for the benefits enjoyed by more affluent nations. France's nuclear energy dependency has been largely sustained by exploiting Niger's uranium resources, yet this has come at a high cost for the local Tuareg population. The environmental and health consequences inflicted by uranium mining—ranging from radioactive contamination to severe health issues—highlight a stark disregard for humanitarian and environmental rights. The situation in Niger illustrates how geopolitical factors converge to sustain systems that prioritize profit. Financially motivated resource extraction is bolstered and enabled by globalisation, state inaction, and a legacy of imperialism. This nexus of exploitation not only leads to environmental devastation and health crises among vulnerable populations but also fuels disillusionment, radicalization, and the inevitable rise of terrorist rebel groups. Instead of addressing the root causes of what led populations vulnerable to terrorist revolt, mainstream narratives around terror continue to be perpetuated, obscuring the truth to serve in the interests of the military-industrial complex. Whilst these narratives benefit a group of elites who profit from war, these narratives fail to address corporate and state culpability, which should make us question – who are the real terrorists here? Mainstream narratives also distract from the fact that a lot of ‘poor’ African nations are incredibly resource-rich, diverting attention away from Western geopolitical interests in mineral wealth. By shifting the discourse around Africa to issues like terrorism, desertification, and food insecurity, true motives and financial interests at play are obscured. The exploitation of mineral wealth in resource-rich nations, including uranium, gold, phosphate, and coal, by international investors will only continue to expand. This dynamic is not exclusive to France-Niger relations but reflects a recurring theme globally, where former colonial powers continue to exert influence over resource-rich African nations, prioritising economic interests above ethical, environmental, and socio-economic considerations for local populations. So, what is the root cause of all of this? The relentless pursuit of profit at the expense of all ethical considerations. The predatory behaviour of corporations like AREVA. Greed. Yet, what is the alternative? I am not saying globalisation is bad per se, and we cannot discount the many benefits that globalisation has had for the working class in consumer nations. However, the lack of accountability by corporate conglomerates and the disregard for the lives and rights of local people in such situations underscore the urgent need for reform, transparency, regulatory oversight, accountability mechanisms, fair trade, ethical investment and international scrutiny to ensure justice and protection for affected communities. Addressing terrorism isn’t about demonising terrorists, but should be about addressing the root causes of radicalisation. Tackling the underlying socio-economic issues that contribute to disillusionment and radicalisation includes improving living standards, creating job opportunities, and addressing the multinational groups or corporations that perpetuate exploitation and marginalisation in the first place. Raising global ethical standards, reforming media practices, and promoting environmental sustainability would be part of the utopian vision we have for a more ethical capitalist approach. However, given financial systems today it seems highly unlikely that we will see any change as maximised monetary growth is dependent on the very systems that perpetuate environmental and humanitarian exploitation. Our current global economy is not sustainable, and with no incentives for transitioning toward sustainable global practices, our utopian vision recedes further and further away.
