Coup by orchestration?

Military coups, in countries where stuff happens, ordinarily are vicious power grabs by armed usurpers to displace sitting governments. These, of course, don’t belong with civilised people. They are a function of political underdevelopment and peculiar to backwater regions of the world. Even in Africa, categorised in the Third World, there is a region notorious for volatility and designated the coup belt. Office holders against whom coups are staged get typically shortchanged and could be in mortal danger, depending on the ruthlessness of those staging the coup against them.

There, however, seems to be some novelty to coup making in Guinea-Bissau – a notoriously unstable country in West Africa that has experienced four coups since independence from Portugal in 1974, besides multiple attempted coups. Sandwiched between Guinea and Senegal, it is one of the world’s poorest and most fragile countries with a population of approximately 1.9million. Its poll results are often contested, and the general election of Sunday, 23rd November, 2025 that resulted in a military takeover was not an exception.

This latest power grab is speculated to be orchestrated by President Umaro Sissoco Embaló – the very man from whom power was seized. A group of military officers announced the takeover of power in the country on Wednesday, 26th November, following an acrimonious presidential vote. Bissau-Guineans had gone to the poll the previous Sunday in an election that pitted Embaló against Fernando Dias da Costa as his main challenger. Collation of votes by the electoral commission of Guinea-Bissau had gone very far and provisional results due to be formally announced on Thursday, 27th November, but was headed off by the coupists.

Although Embaló, who is seeking re-election, and Dias, his main opponent, both claimed victory before the official declaration of results, observer missions reported that they gave their word to ultimately accept the will of the people. But as Bissau-Guineans and observers awaited the official outcome, soldiers butted in to announce having taken “total control” of the country in pre-emption of awaited results. Calling themselves the “High Military Command for the Restoration of Order,” the officers decreed immediate suspension of the electoral process “until further notice.” They also ordered the closure of Bissau’s land, air and sea borders and imposed a curfew, leaving hundreds of foreign poll observers stranded as they could not exit following the coup. Among those affected was former President Goodluck Jonathan of Nigeria, who had led the West African Elders Forum (WEF) observer mission.

Watchers of events in Guinea-Bissau queried the coincidence whereby faces of the coup were close associates of ousted Embaló. The erstwhile chief of army staff, who was named the country’s interim leader, is known to have been close in recent years to the man he now replaces. He told the press the military acted to “block operations that aimed to threaten our democracy.” Officers with him included former head of the presidential military office, who told journalists the army was assuming control “until further notice” after uncovering a plan involving drug lords by which they allegedly were introducing weapons into the country to alter the constitutional order. The coupists also named a former personal chief of staff to ousted Embaló as chief of staff of the armed forces.

Shortly after the military announced the takeover, Embaló himself was on phone with international media outlets, saying he had been arrested in his office at the presidential palace. But there were subsequent reports he had arrived “safe and sound” in Senegal on a military plane chartered by that country’s government. For his part, opposition candidate Dias said he escaped from his campaign headquarters on the day soldiers struck when armed men came to arrest him. Speaking from hiding, he accused Embaló of having orchestrated the coup, saying he believed he won the presidential poll and that the ousted president “organised” the power grab to prevent him from taking office. “I am the president (elect) of Guinea-Bissau,” Dias told foreign media by telephone, claiming he would have garnered around 52 percent of the vote had the results been announced. “There wasn’t a coup. It was organised by Mr. Embaló,” he affirmed.

“Someone needs to tell Embaló: you never win with military coups”

Sections of Bissau-Guineans and other analysts as well questioned the real motive behind the military takeover. They argued it could ultimately benefit Embaló. Some analysts, for instance, said there were unverified preliminary results circulating before the coup that showed opposition candidate Dias as winner of the election. “This is a coup aimed at preventing the opposition candidate, Fernando Dias, from taking power,” one researcher told a frontline news agency, adding: “This is an ideal scenario for Mr. Embaló who could, following negotiations, be released and potentially reposition himself for the next elections.”

Nigeria’s Jonathan was blunt that the purported coup was mere make-belief. He had managed to exit Guinea-Bissau shortly after the soldiers struck with some other prominent personalities on a rescue flight arranged by Cote d’Ivoirian authorities ahead of a similar arrangement that was being made by the Nigerian government. He also visited Aso Rock Villa in Abuja to brief President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on his first-hand experience of the upheavals in Bissau. Addressing journalists on the heels of his return, Jonathan expressed doubt that a coup truly happened, saying rather there were indications Embaló did not want to leave power.

“What happened in Guinea-Bissau was not a coup; maybe, for want of a better word, I would say it was a ceremonial coup. It is the president – President Umaro Embaló – who announced the coup. Before the military came up to address the world that they were in charge of everywhere, Embaló had already announced the coup, which is strange,” Jonathan said. He added: “Not only announcing the coup, but Embaló, while the coup took place, was using his phone and addressing media organisations across the world that he had been arrested. Who is fooling who? Basically, what happened in Guinea-Bissau is quite disturbing to me who believes in democracy. In fact, I feel more pained than the day I called (the late Muhammadu) Buhari to congratulate him when I lost the election.”

Jonathan-led WEF observer mission was in Guinea-Bissau along with delegations of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union (AU). He acknowledged that his team was a much smaller group and did not have sufficient personnel deployed for extensive poll observation, unlike the others that posted agents across the entire country. According to him, Bissau’s electoral body was almost through with the process “and we were all waiting for the results to be announced (when) Embaló announced that there was a coup, that soldiers had taken over and they had arrested him.” He argued, though: “But from all indications, nobody arrested him. My conviction is that, and my charge to ECOWAS and AU is that they must announce the results. They have the results because AU and ECOWAS officials were in all the regions when the results were collated. They cannot change those results. They should tally the results and announce the winner. They cannot force the military out. But they should announce, let the world know who won that election. They owe the world that responsibility.”

The familiar tendency in Africa has been leaders destabilising or caging opposition, and manipulating the poll in their respective country so to emerge landslide winners. Such elections typically lack transparency and a level playing field for multiplicity of contenders. That was the case in Tanzania’s general election in October, this year, won by Samia Suluhu Hassan. More pervasively, there are leaders who have reworked the laws of their respective country to stretch their stay in power beyond inherited constitutional term limits. Equatorial Guinea’s Teodoro Obiang, Cameroun’s Paul Biya and Cote d’Ivoire’s Alassane Ouattara feature prominently, among others, in this category. Worst case has been the tendency whereby election is clearly lost but the sitting ruler refuses to cede power, sometimes resulting in civil war like the case of Laurent Gbagbo and Ouattara in the 2010 Ivoirian election. 

Orchestrating a coup against oneself just so to avoid facing up to poll defeat, which the ousted Bissau president is accused of, adds a new trend to ways of self-perpetuation in power. But someone needs to tell Embaló: you never win with military coups. Going by experiences of all countries in the sub-region where soldiers have seized power, these usurpers are never in haste to restore democratic rule. Embaló will come to realise this sooner than later.