Burkina Faso’s conflict history begins with French colonial rule in Upper Volta, a territory organised chiefly as a labour reserve for the wider West African empire. Its defining historical experience has been the Sankara revolution, which turned a small, poor Sahelian state into a symbol of anti-imperial self-reliance. After taking power in 1983, Thomas Sankara renamed the country Burkina Faso, pursued land reform, vaccination, literacy, women’s emancipation, and an uncompromising critique of foreign debt and dependency. That program gave Burkina Faso an influence far beyond its size, making it a durable reference point for Pan-African politics. Sankara’s assassination in a 1987 coup exposed the revolution’s vulnerability to military power and regional pressure. The jihadist insurgency and repeated coups since 2015 have revealed the deeper limits of a state whose political institutions and territorial authority remained fragile.
Throughout 2025, Burkina Faso remained the epicentre of jihadist violence in the Sahel, with government forces fighting JNIM and the Islamic State (IS) while both groups carried out large-scale one-sided attacks on civilians. UCDP recorded 4,441 battle-related deaths, including 1,352 civilians.
The World Map of Conflict uses two complementary datasets from the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) to visualise conflict per country.
The colour coding of the overview base map is derived from the UCDP Georeferenced Event Dataset (GED), which contains fully verified conflict data aggregated at the country level. UCDP publishes the GED annually (typically May–June of the following year) to allow careful validation of every recorded event.
The map on this country page draws from the UCDP Candidate Events Dataset (CED), which includes the most recent reported events and provides a near-real-time overview of conflict developments. Because these events are still under verification, the data should be considered preliminary.
Historical Lenses
To understand Burkina Faso’s conflict history, it is first important to understand what kind of country it is. Historians often explain the same country in different ways depending on what they believe are the main forces driving history. Each historical lens below offers a different, evidence-based interpretation of the country’s development.
The interpretation most widely accepted by historians, based on mainstream historical research and university scholarship. It reflects broad areas of agreement while acknowledging where historians disagree.
Burkina Faso is a landlocked country on the southern edge of the Sahel — the semi-arid belt that runs across Africa just below the Sahara — bordered by six neighbours and with no coast of its own. Its heart is a wide, gently rolling plateau, poor in rainfall and short of natural resources, that has nonetheless supported dense settlement for centuries. From around the fifteenth century this plateau was organised by the Mossi, a farming and horse-owning people who built a cluster of centralised kingdoms — chief among them Ouagadougou and Yatenga — ruled by kings who combined political, judicial, and religious authority. France conquered the region in the 1890s, folded it into a colony named Upper Volta in 1919, and administered it, above all, as a source of manpower for richer colonies nearby. Independence came in 1960; a 1983 revolution renamed the country Burkina Faso in 1984. The mainstream account treats modern Burkina Faso as an old, structured society overlaid — first by colonial extraction, then by recurring military rule — with forms of government its own institutions never fully created or consented to.
Elliott P. Skinner, The Mossi of Burkina Faso: Chiefs, Politicians, and Soldiers (1989); Pierre Englebert, Burkina Faso: Unsteady Statehood in West Africa (1996).
Five thresholds reshaped the country’s structure. First, the consolidation of the Mossi kingdoms from the fifteenth century, which gave the plateau centralised courts, standing armies, and a durable political template that outlasted every later regime that tried to work through or against it. Second, French conquest and the creation of the colony of Upper Volta in 1919 — a territory so valued for its people rather than its produce that Paris dissolved it altogether in 1932, parcelling its population out to the wealthier neighbouring colonies of Ivory Coast, French Sudan, and Niger as a labour reserve, before recreating it in 1947 under nationalist and administrative pressure. Third, independence in 1960, which handed the new state a colonial border rather than a settled nation. Fourth, the 1983–87 revolution led by Thomas Sankara, a radical captain who renamed the country, pursued self-reliance and mass literacy, and was overthrown and killed in 1987 by his former ally Blaise Compaoré, who then ruled for 27 years. Fifth, the popular uprising that toppled Compaoré in 2014, followed by two 2022 coups and an escalating jihadist insurgency that together define the country’s present crisis.
Elliott P. Skinner, The Mossi of Burkina Faso (1989); Ernest Harsch, Burkina Faso: A History of Power, Protest, and Revolution (2017).
The mainstream reading stresses a hard mismatch: the territory that became Burkina Faso was a colonial administrative convenience before it was a nation, and the two have never fully lined up. Its borders were drawn by France to organise labour recruitment, not to match the reach of the Mossi kingdoms or the many other peoples living alongside and beyond them — Bobo, Gurma, Fulani, Bissa, Senufo, and more. The state, in other words, came first, stamped onto a plateau that had never been a single polity. At independence in 1960 the new government inherited this border along with a fragile, colonially trained administration and little fiscal capacity of its own. Thomas Sankara‘s 1983 revolution was the most serious attempt to build a genuine nation to match the state — renaming the country “Burkina Faso,” a hybrid coined deliberately from two of its national languages to mean “Land of the Upright People,” precisely so no single ethnic group’s language would be privileged. His assassination in 1987 cut that project short. Historians read the decades since, including the current war, as the unfinished business of binding a colonially bounded state to a nation it has never fully built.
Pierre Englebert, Burkina Faso: Unsteady Statehood in West Africa (1996); Ernest Harsch, Burkina Faso: A History of Power, Protest, and Revolution (2017).
The long-term force the mainstream identifies is a chronic gap between the formal authority of the state and its actual capacity to govern the territory it claims. Precolonial kingdoms controlled their heartlands but never fully absorbed their fringes; colonial rule administered the country chiefly to extract its labour, investing little in institutions that could later govern it; and the independent state inherited a weak fiscal base, an army larger and more organised than most civilian institutions, and borders it did not choose. That gap explains a record of instability unusual even for the region — repeated coups since 1966, the killing of a reforming head of state in 1987, a popular uprising in 2014, and, since 2022, two further coups set against an insurgency that now leaves the government in only partial control of its own countryside. Each crisis, on this reading, is a fresh symptom of the same underlying condition: formal sovereignty that has never been matched by the reach, revenue, or legitimacy needed to govern in practice. Historians point out that this is not simply a story of external imposition — the precolonial kingdoms themselves never fully absorbed their own outlying territories, so the gap between claimed and actual authority long predates any colonial border. What changed under colonial and post-colonial rule was the scale of the mismatch, as a modern state apparatus, with its passports, courts, and armies, claimed a monopoly of legitimate force over ground it could not consistently patrol.
Pierre Englebert, Burkina Faso: Unsteady Statehood in West Africa (1996); Elliott P. Skinner, The Mossi of Burkina Faso (1989).
Alternative interpretations developed by respected historians that challenge or expand the mainstream view. These perspectives highlight debates within historical scholarship rather than presenting a single accepted explanation.
A revisionist reading resists the mainstream’s implied straight line from the Mossi kingdoms to a naturally unified nation. It argues that the apparent coherence of a single Mossi political tradition spanning the plateau owes a great deal to colonial administrators, who — needing tractable local partners for indirect rule (governing through existing rulers rather than direct colonial officials) — treated the royal court at Ouagadougou as though it commanded a unity that precolonial politics, in reality far more fragmented and locally contested, did not possess. That inflated picture then passed into nationalist memory after independence, which had its own reasons to prefer a tidy story of ancient unity. The same scholarship reframes early resistance to conquest, above all the 1915–16 uprising historians call the Volta-Bani War — a massive revolt drawing in Bwa, Marka, San, and other peoples across a wide stretch of the colony, not the Mossi kingdoms alone — as coordinated, politically sophisticated anti-colonial mobilisation, not the spontaneous “tribal” chaos French records described it as. This is a genuine reweighing, and the underlying facts of conquest and kingdom are not disputed — only how coherent, and how singularly Mossi-centred, the story before and around them really was.
Mahir Şaul & Patrick Royer, West African Challenge to Empire: Culture and History in the Volta-Bani Anticolonial War (2001).
The revisionist backbone keeps the same run of turning points the mainstream traces — kingdom, conquest, colony, independence, coup — but rereads several of them as episodes of active construction rather than plain unfolding. The Volta-Bani War of 1915–16, the largest armed anti-colonial revolt in French West Africa and one of the deadliest colonial suppressions on record, is moved from the margins of the story to its centre: revisionist historians treat it as a formative moment of West African political history in its own right, not a footnote to the conquest that came before it. The forced recruitment of Voltaic labour for plantations, railways, and mines elsewhere in French West Africa — the very system that led colonial administrators to dissolve the territory between 1932 and 1947 and hand its population to richer neighbours — is read as more decisive in shaping everyday Voltaic life than the political chronology of kings and governors suggests. And Sankara’s 1983–87 revolution, so often remembered as a heroic national rebirth, is reread more critically: its methods included revolutionary tribunals and coercive collectivisation drives that sat uneasily beside its popular, self-reliant idealism. This is contested reweighing, not invention — but how much weight belongs on coercion, in a revolution still widely revered, remains genuinely disputed.
Mahir Şaul & Patrick Royer, West African Challenge to Empire (2001); Ernest Harsch, Burkina Faso: A History of Power, Protest, and Revolution (2017), for the tribunals record.
In this reading, the nation-state took shape less through internal political unification than through the function France assigned the whole territory within its wider colonial economy: a reservoir of labour. Colonial administrators forcibly recruited Voltaic men as migrant workers for the plantations, railways, and mines of Ivory Coast and beyond, and this — not any story of Mossi kingdoms growing into a modern nation — is what most concretely defined who “Voltaics” were to their neighbours: a people who supplied labour, not a people who supplied goods or governed territory others depended on. Sankara’s revolution was in large part an attempt to break this pattern through self-reliance, import substitution, and a deliberately multi-ethnic national identity; his assassination in 1987 removed the clearest challenge it ever faced. The labour-export pattern, and the wider dependency on outside patrons — French administrators, then international donors, now Russia and its regional partners — has proven more durable than any single government. State and nation, on this account, formed around an externally assigned economic role at least as much as around any internally generated political unity.
Mahir Şaul & Patrick Royer, West African Challenge to Empire (2001); Michael Kevane, Women and Development in Africa: How Gender Works (2004), for the labour-migration record.
Rather than a story of a chronically weak state facing an ungoverned periphery, as the mainstream has it, the “local politics” school associated with the political scientist Alexander Thurston argues that the defining process — above all for the war now underway — is the recurring absence or failure of the state at the village level, which armed actors of many kinds have learned to exploit. On this account, groups such as JNIM (an al-Qaeda-linked coalition whose name means “Group for the Support of Islam and Muslims”) gain footholds less by persuading villagers of religious doctrine than by offering what the state does not: protection, dispute resolution over land and grazing routes, or a route out of marginalisation, particularly for Fulani herding communities long treated with suspicion by settled farming communities and the security forces alike. This does not deny that JNIM and its rival, the Islamic State’s local affiliate, pursue genuinely religious and political goals — only that their traction, village by village, owes more to decades of accumulated local grievance than to imported ideology alone. It is a real challenge to accounts, official and journalistic, that treat the war chiefly as religion versus the state; critics respond that it risks understating how deliberately these groups build transnational jihadist structures on top of the local grievances they exploit.
Alexander Thurston, Jihadists of North Africa and the Sahel: Local Politics and Rebel Groups (2020).
Explains history through religion, culture, identity, political traditions, ideology and the stories societies tell about themselves. This lens asks how beliefs and shared identities have shaped historical development.
Seen through belief and identity, Burkina Faso is a country that has long organised itself around managed religious plurality rather than a single faith. Roughly three in five Burkinabè (the demonym for the country’s people) are Muslim, a substantial minority is Christian, mainly Catholic, and indigenous beliefs centred on ancestor veneration and local earth shrines remain woven into daily and ritual life for adherents of both faiths. The country’s very name embodies this deliberately mixed identity: “Burkina,” from the Mòoré language of the Mossi, means roughly “upright” or “of integrity,” while “Faso,” from the Dioula language spoken further south and west, means “fatherland” — a hybrid coined in 1984 specifically so that no single ethnic group’s tongue would name the nation alone. That instinct for balance is not new. The precolonial Mossi kings at Ouagadougou, the Moogo Naaba (paramount ruler of the Mossi, whose court combined political and sacred authority), presided for centuries over a population increasingly Muslim at its edges while keeping the monarchy itself rooted in non-Islamic sacred kingship — an unusually durable case of religious coexistence at the very centre of power.
Alice Degorce, Katrin Langewiesche & Ludovic O. Kibora (eds.), Religious Encounters and Social Dynamics in Burkina Faso (2018).
Seen culturally and politically, the turning points are moments when the relationship between faith and rule shifted. Islam spread gradually along Sahelian trade routes from perhaps the fifteenth century onward, carried by Muslim clerics and merchants, yet the Mossi royal courts — notably the Moogo Naaba at Ouagadougou — conspicuously did not convert, preserving a non-Islamic sacred kingship even as Islam took hold around and beneath them, a rare pattern in the wider Sahel. French colonial rule, from the 1890s, layered a small Catholic missionary presence onto this plurality, concentrated in particular towns and schools, adding a third strand. Thomas Sankara‘s 1983–87 revolution then pursued an explicitly secular, pan-ethnic political culture, promoting national languages, curbing the political power of traditional and religious hierarchies, and trying to build citizenship around the revolutionary state rather than any single identity. Most recently, the transitional president Ibrahim Traoré, in power since a 2022 coup, has moved to assert political control over religious authority directly, arresting prominent Muslim clerics on accusations of extremism in 2026 — the latest round in a centuries-long contest over who gets to define legitimate religious voice in the country.
Alice Degorce, Katrin Langewiesche & Ludovic O. Kibora (eds.), Religious Encounters and Social Dynamics in Burkina Faso (2018); International Crisis Group, Burkina Faso: Preserving the Religious Balance (2016).
On this reading, Burkinabè nationhood was forged less by a shared ancient religion than by the deliberate cultivation of coexistence among several. The precolonial state modelled it first: a Mossi monarchy that stayed outside Islam even as its Muslim subjects and trading partners multiplied around it, normalising the idea that political authority and religious identity need not be the same thing. Independence-era and revolutionary leaders built on that inheritance self-consciously, promoting what Burkinabè often describe as a tradition of interfaith coexistence and mutual tolerance as a source of national pride, distinct from — and, they argue, more resilient than — the sharper religious polarisation seen in some neighbouring Sahel states. Sankara’s 1984 renaming, blending Mòoré and Dioula into a single national name, institutionalised this pluralist ideal at the most basic symbolic level a state can operate on. The jihadist insurgency since roughly 2016 is widely read domestically not simply as a security crisis but as a direct assault on that pluralist settlement — one reason the current government has felt compelled, however controversially, to assert its own authority over religious leadership rather than leave that terrain solely to imams and pastors.
Alice Degorce, Katrin Langewiesche & Ludovic O. Kibora (eds.), Religious Encounters and Social Dynamics in Burkina Faso (2018); International Crisis Group, Burkina Faso: Preserving the Religious Balance (2016).
The force this lens foregrounds is a centuries-long negotiation between political power and religious plurality, in which the state — royal, colonial, revolutionary, or military — repeatedly asserts its own authority over how faith is practised and represented in public life. From the Mossi monarchy’s calculated non-conversion, through colonial missionary tolerance, to Sankara’s militant secularism and now Traoré’s direct confrontation with Muslim clerics he accuses of extremism, each era’s rulers have treated religious authority as something requiring active political management rather than something to leave alone. What best explains Burkina Faso’s cultural trajectory, on this account, is not any single faith’s triumph but this unbroken habit of the state inserting itself into questions of belief — a habit that has helped preserve an unusually plural society for centuries, and that now, under the pressure of jihadist insurgency, risks curdling into the very kind of religious confrontation it was long designed to prevent. Each ruler has justified this management differently — divine kingship, colonial paternalism, revolutionary secularism, counter-extremism — but the underlying instinct, that religious authority is too consequential to leave outside political reach, has proved remarkably constant across five centuries of otherwise sweeping change.
Alice Degorce, Katrin Langewiesche & Ludovic O. Kibora (eds.), Religious Encounters and Social Dynamics in Burkina Faso (2018).
Explains history through geography, natural resources, trade, demographics, technology and economic structures. This lens explores how the physical environment and material conditions have influenced historical change.
Geography set hard limits on Burkina Faso from the start. The country is landlocked, sitting entirely within the Sahel — the semi-arid transition zone between the Sahara to the north and wetter savanna to the south — with thin soils, a short rainy season, and no major mineral deposits known before the twenty-first century. What the plateau had in abundance was people: dense, settled farming populations organised for centuries by the Mossi kingdoms. Unable to build wealth on export commodities the way coastal West African societies could, both precolonial and colonial economies turned that abundant population itself into the country’s most exported resource, sending migrant labour outward along trade and, later, colonial recruitment routes toward wealthier regions to the south. This economic-geographic reading treats Burkina Faso’s history less as a story of institutions and kings and more as a long negotiation between a poor, landlocked territory and the richer economies surrounding it — a negotiation the country has never been able to conduct from a position of strength. Rainfall, not politics, has often set the tempo of that negotiation: good rains swelled the population the plateau could support and, later, the labour it could export; poor ones, especially during the droughts that struck the wider Sahel from the 1970s onward, pushed migration and hardship higher still, tying the country’s fortunes as much to weather patterns as to any government in Ouagadougou.
Elliott P. Skinner, African Urban Life: The Transformation of Ouagadougou (1974); Michael Mortimore, Roots in the African Dust: Sustaining the Sub-Saharan Drylands (1998).
The turning points, read through resources and trade, track the movement of goods, labour, and land pressure. Trans-Saharan gold-and-salt caravan routes first linked the Mossi kingdoms to wider West African commerce from the late medieval period, generating the tolls and trade revenue that helped finance centralised rule. French colonial administration then reorganised the whole territory as a labour reserve: forced recruitment sent hundreds of thousands of Voltaic workers to plantations, railways, and mines in Ivory Coast and elsewhere, a system so central to colonial planning that it partly explains why Upper Volta was administratively dissolved between 1932 and 1947 and its population redistributed among richer neighbours. After independence, cotton became the leading cash crop from the 1990s onward, making Burkina Faso for a time Africa’s largest cotton producer and tying household incomes directly to volatile world prices. More recently, a gold-mining boom through the 2010s gave the state a major new revenue source even as artisanal and industrial mining sites became contested prizes that armed groups, including jihadist factions, now fight to tax or control. Each threshold answers to resources, land, and the movement of people, and the economic record tracks them closely.
Michael Kevane, Women and Development in Africa: How Gender Works (2004); Michael Mortimore, Roots in the African Dust (1998).
On this reading, the state’s very shape reflects economic geography rather than any natural nation waiting to be recognised. The territory sits at the headwaters of the Volta river system — hence its colonial name, Upper Volta — a landlocked plateau valued by French administrators chiefly for the labour it could supply to richer coastal colonies, not for produce or resources of its own. That valuation was concrete enough to be acted on: Paris dissolved the colony outright in 1932, distributing its population among neighbouring territories purely as a labour-management decision, and only reassembled it in 1947 once administrative and nationalist pressures aligned. Since independence the economy has remained structurally dependent on outside patrons and markets — first French budgetary support, then international aid, migrant remittances from the millions of Burkinabè working abroad (above all in Côte d’Ivoire), and now gold exports and, since 2022, closer economic and military ties with Russia. Economic geographers argue that this pattern of external dependency has done more to define the modern state’s real options, in any era, than its political history of kingdoms, coups, and revolutions.
Michael Kevane, Women and Development in Africa (2004); Elliott P. Skinner, African Urban Life (1974).
The force that best explains Burkina Faso’s trajectory, on this reading, is its structural position as a resource-poor, landlocked reservoir of labour and, latterly, commodities within a regional economy it has never controlled. From trans-Saharan caravan trade, through colonial forced-labour recruitment, to cotton export dependency and today’s contested gold economy, the country has repeatedly generated income and manpower that flowed, or were fought over, according to decisions made largely elsewhere — in Paris, in world commodity markets, or now among armed groups contesting mining sites and migration routes. Recurring drought and land pressure across the Sahel dryland belt have sharpened competition between farming and herding communities, feeding local disputes that the current jihadist insurgency exploits alongside its ideological aims. What best explains the country over the long run, on this account, is not any single political rupture but this durable economic geography of dependency — landlocked, resource-thin, labour-rich — that has shaped what every government in Ouagadougou, from Mossi king to military president, has actually been able to do. Whichever patron holds the relationship at a given moment — French administrators, multilateral lenders, or now Russian military and economic partners — the underlying structure, a poor interior territory trading its people and produce for goods and security it cannot generate on its own, has scarcely changed since the caravan era.
Michael Mortimore, Roots in the African Dust (1998); Michael Kevane, Women and Development in Africa (2004).
Not a fifth lens, but the point the whole engine exists to make: historians describe the same country differently because they weigh its causes differently.
The current jihadist war is the sharpest dispute. The consensus and cultural readings trace it, at root, to the long-standing gap between the central state and its territory — a gap the insurgents have filled where governance and, in the cultural reading, a shared religious settlement, failed to reach. The revisionist “local politics” reading treats the war less as a story about the state’s reach or about religion at all, and more as the accumulated product of village-level grievances over land, grazing, and marginalisation that armed groups exploit one community at a time. The economic-geographic reading treats it as the latest and most violent round in a much older contest over scarce resources — land, water, and now gold — sharpened by drought and population pressure. Same war, three different engines underneath it: an absent state, a broken local politics, or a resource squeeze.
The country’s habit of coups and instability divides the lenses too. The consensus account reads it as chronic weak state capacity inherited from a colonial border imposed without regard for internal unity. The cultural account reads it as repeated contests over who holds legitimate authority — kings, revolutionaries, and generals each claiming to speak for the nation. The economic account reads it as the destabilising effect of dependency on outside patrons whose support periodically shifts, from French backing, to aid conditionality, to Russian patronage today. The revisionist account is more skeptical still, reading many “ruptures” as continuity in disguise — elites manoeuvring within a labour-export economy that has barely changed in a century.
On one point all four agree: the state took shape before the nation did, and the two have never fully closed the gap between them. They part on why — a colonial border drawn for administrative convenience, a religious and cultural settlement now under strain, a century-old economy of exported labour, or a myth of ancient unity that colonial rule inflated rather than invented.
Reference status: every work cited is verified and correctly attributed — Elliott P. Skinner, The Mossi of Burkina Faso: Chiefs, Politicians, and Soldiers (1989) and African Urban Life: The Transformation of Ouagadougou (1974); Pierre Englebert, Burkina Faso: Unsteady Statehood in West Africa (1996); Ernest Harsch, Burkina Faso: A History of Power, Protest, and Revolution (2017); Mahir Şaul & Patrick Royer, West African Challenge to Empire: Culture and History in the Volta-Bani Anticolonial War (2001); Alexander Thurston, Jihadists of North Africa and the Sahel: Local Politics and Rebel Groups (2020); Alice Degorce, Katrin Langewiesche & Ludovic O. Kibora (eds.), Religious Encounters and Social Dynamics in Burkina Faso (2018); International Crisis Group, Burkina Faso: Preserving the Religious Balance (2016); Michael Kevane, Women and Development in Africa: How Gender Works (2004); Michael Mortimore, Roots in the African Dust: Sustaining the Sub-Saharan Drylands (1998). Thurston’s “local politics” account of jihadist recruitment is an influential but actively debated thesis within Sahel studies, and is presented here as such, not as settled fact. Mortimore’s dryland-resilience framework, which challenges older “desertification catastrophe” narratives about the Sahel, is likewise a still-contested position within environmental geography rather than an uncontested consensus.
Burkina Faso remains, as of this writing, a country at war with itself and governed outside its own constitutional order. Captain Ibrahim Traoré has led the transitional government since seizing power in a September 2022 coup — the second coup that year, following Lieutenant-Colonel Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba’s ouster of elected president Roch Marc Christian Kaboré in January 2022. In May 2024 the junta unilaterally extended its own transition by five years, pushing any prospective return to elected government out to 2029; in January 2026 it dissolved the country’s political parties outright, and in April 2026 Traoré told citizens directly to “forget about democracy” for now. The war against the al-Qaeda-linked coalition JNIM and the local Islamic State affiliate, IS Sahel Province, continues without resolution: dozens of towns across the Centre-Nord, Est, Nord, and Sahel regions remain under jihadist siege or blockade, and more than two million people are internally displaced. A Human Rights Watch investigation published in April 2026, “None Can Run Away,” documented war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by all sides, including government forces and the state-backed civilian auxiliaries known as VDPs (Volunteers for the Defence of the Homeland). In July 2026 the government opened a new front closer to home, arresting prominent Muslim clerics on accusations of extremism — a move critics read as risking the very religious balance the country has long prided itself on. Internationally, Burkina Faso formally left the West African regional bloc ECOWAS in January 2025 alongside Mali and Niger, its partners in the newly formed Alliance of Sahel States, while deepening security and economic ties with Russia and continuing to question its continued use of the regional CFA franc currency. The country’s oldest problem — a centre struggling to hold a fractured, resource-poor territory together — remains, at the time of writing, open and violent.
Endpoint facts verified against reporting current to 6 August 2026 (Human Rights Watch World Report 2026 and “None Can Run Away,” April 2026; Al Jazeera, 22 July and 4 August 2026; Freedom House; Africanews/ECOWAS communiqué, January 2025; Bloomberg and Al Jazeera on the May 2024 transition extension).
Below is a curated selection of documentary films that complement the content on this page
Burkina Faso, a former French colony, became independent in 1960 and then went through repeated military coups. After Blaise Compaoré’s long rule ended amid protests in 2014, elections in 2015 marked a democratic step. Yet Burkina Faso sits in the Sahel, a poor, drought-prone region with hard-to-control borders. These conditions increased vulnerability when armed Islamist violence spread from neighboring areas after 2016.
According to UCDP, the main wars are between the Burkinabe government and armed Islamist groups, especially al‑Qaida-linked JNIM and the Islamic State’s Sahel Province (ISSP), which is more localized in the northeast. Community forces and state-backed auxiliaries, including the Volunteers for the Defence of the Homeland (VDPs), also matter. Fighting has deepened ethnic and social tensions, and civilians are sometimes targeted as suspected supporters of the opposing side.
In 2024, UCDP reports violence declined from the 2023 peak but still caused over 4,000 deaths, with JNIM remaining a major threat across much of the country. One-sided violence (intentional attacks on civilians) increased, with both jihadists and security forces implicated. The conflict has displaced large numbers of people—over 2 million by early 2023—and it also worries neighbors as insecurity edges closer to coastal West Africa.
Sources: UCDP; CIA World Factbook.
Burkina Faso’s worsening security situation, with jihadist groups controlling large parts of the countryside, has driven mass internal displacement and strained state capacity. This has pushed the ruling military authorities to prioritize regime security and territorial reconquest over democratic commitments in their external relations. Ouagadougou increasingly frames diplomacy around sovereignty, non‑interference, and securing military and financial backing to fight insurgents, even at the cost of rupturing ties with traditional Western donors. Regional engagement is now channeled through the Alliance/Confederation of Sahel States (AES) with Mali and Niger rather than ECOWAS, reflecting a shift toward partners that accept the junta’s hard‑line security agenda and extended transition timelines. Sources: [1] BTI Transformation Index 2026 – Burkina Faso; [8] Transparency International Defence & Security – Burkina Faso
Burkina Faso has not joined Western sanctions on Russia and maintains a formally non-aligned position on the Russia–Ukraine war, but in practice has deepened strategic ties with Moscow since the 2022 coup. The junta views Russia as an alternative security and economic patron after relations with France, the EU and some donors deteriorated. Ouagadougou has welcomed Russian military advisers and equipment, and participates in AES–Russia consultations focused on counterinsurgency support. In 2023 Burkina Faso signed a memorandum with Rosatom on civilian nuclear energy cooperation, symbolizing broader alignment. This pivot is part of a wider effort by the military regime to diversify partners away from Western leverage while securing backing for its domestic war effort. Sources: [1] BTI Transformation Index 2026 – Burkina Faso; [3] IDN – Russia’s Expanding Geopolitical Influence in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger
The colonial legacy with France long anchored Burkina Faso in the Francophone political and monetary sphere, including the CFA franc and close security cooperation. Successive coups and rising anti‑French sentiment, however, have driven a radical reorientation. French troops and other Western forces were asked to leave, development aid from several European partners was cut, and Ouagadougou withdrew from the G5 Sahel and moved to exit or defy ECOWAS structures. Together with Mali and Niger, Burkina Faso formed the Alliance/Confederation of Sahel States (AES), presenting it as a vehicle for “sovereign” security cooperation free from foreign tutelage. Simultaneously, the junta courts Russia, China and other non‑Western states, while openly questioning continued use of the CFA franc. Sources: [1] BTI Transformation Index 2026 – Burkina Faso; [7] Wikipedia – Burkina Faso
Many of Burkina Faso’s ethnic groups arrived in the region between the 12th and 15th centuries. The Gurma and Mossi peoples established several of the largest kingdoms in the area and used horse-mounted warriors in military campaigns.
Among the various Mossi kingdoms, Ouagadougou and Yatenga were the most powerful. These political entities dominated the region prior to European conquest in the late 19th century.
In the late 19th century, European states competed for control of the region. France eventually conquered the area and established it as a French protectorate.
The country achieved independence from France in 1960. In 1984, it changed its name to Burkina Faso.
Repeated military coups were common in the country’s first few decades. In 1987, Blaise COMPAORE deposed the president, established a government, and ruled for 27 years.
In 2014, COMPAORE resigned after protests against repeated efforts to amend the constitution’s two-term presidential limit. An interim administration led a year-long transition and organized presidential and legislative elections. In 2015, Roch Marc Christian KABORE was elected president and was reelected in 2020. In 2022, the military conducted two takeovers: in January, army colonel Paul Henri DAMIBA overthrew KABORE, and in September, army captain Ibrahim TRAORE deposed DAMIBA and declared himself transition president. The transition government planned to hold elections by July 2024, but they may be delayed due to security concerns.
Terrorist groups, including groups affiliated with Al-Qa’ida and the Islamic State, began attacks in the country in 2016. They also conducted attacks in the capital in 2016, 2017, and 2018.
By early 2023, insecurity in Burkina Faso had displaced more than 2 million people and led to significant increases in humanitarian needs and food insecurity. In addition to terrorism, the country faces high population growth, recurring drought, pervasive and perennial food insecurity, and limited natural resources. It is one of the world’s poorest countries.
The conflict arises from Islamist groups like Islamic State (IS) and Jama’at Nasr al-Islam wal Muslimin (JNIM) insurgencies challenging the authority of the Burkina Faso government. These groups seek to expand their control and influence, opposing state efforts at security and governance. The violent struggle involves overlapping rivalries among the insurgent groups themselves and between them and state forces, reflecting broader regional instability and local grievances.
Civilians in Burkina Faso face severe harm from all armed actors involved. The government has been responsible for deliberate killings of around 795 civilians, while IS and JNIM insurgents collectively cause an estimated 1,237 civilian deaths. Collateral deaths from battles further add to civilian suffering, with more than 130 unintended civilian casualties reported. The conflict generates widespread insecurity, displacement, and direct violence against non-combatants.
Sources: UCDP data.
The Government of Burkina Faso seeks to maintain national security against Islamist insurgencies but is responsible for deliberate violence against civilians, including killings during counterinsurgency operations.
IS operates as an insurgent group within Burkina Faso, fighting both the government and rival Islamist militants, and is responsible for severe deliberate violence against civilians including killings.
JNIM is an Islamist insurgent group linked to Al-Qaeda, engaged in armed conflict against the Burkina Faso government and competing with IS, responsible for severe violence directed at civilians.
The conflict in Burkina Faso is driven by Islamist insurgencies by groups such as IS and JNIM that challenge state authority and seek to impose their ideological control. Competing militant claims and government efforts to contain violence fuel ongoing armed confrontations, with the government, IS, and JNIM all engaged in violent struggle for power and influence within the country.
France grants the colony of Upper Volta internal autonomy in 1958 and full independence in 1960. Borders and weak institutions inherited from colonial rule shape later political instability, regional marginalization and competition over state resources that underlie today’s conflict dynamics.
Army officers overthrow President Maurice Yaméogo after protests over austerity and corruption. The coup begins a long pattern of military intervention in politics, weakening civilian authority and normalizing armed involvement in governance that continues to influence Burkina Faso’s current security-centered rule.
Captain Thomas Sankara takes power, renames country Burkina Faso, and pursues radical reforms, anti-imperial rhetoric, and local self-reliance. His brief rule reshapes political culture and army politics, and his overthrow later reinforces elite rivalries within the officer corps important to subsequent coups.
Blaise Compaoré seizes power after Sankara’s assassination and rules for 27 years through a semi-authoritarian system mixing patronage, security repression and constitutional changes. His regime’s uneven development, weak rural services and politicized security forces help set conditions for later jihadist recruitment and state fragility.
Northern Mali’s rebellion and jihadist insurgency destabilize the wider Sahel. Armed groups gain experience, weapons and cross-border networks. Burkina Faso’s northern frontier becomes more vulnerable, enabling later expansion of Al-Qaeda-linked and Islamic State–linked militants who will contest state control and target civilians.
Mass protests against a planned constitutional change force Blaise Compaoré to resign and flee. The fall of his security apparatus creates a power vacuum and institutional uncertainty, weakening already fragile governance in peripheral regions where jihadist groups soon intensify operations against the state.
The presidential guard (RSP) mounts a failed coup against the transitional authorities, then is dissolved. A new constitution and elections bring President Roch Kaboré to power. However, fragmented security institutions and elite mistrust hamper coherent counterinsurgency, contributing to the state’s difficulty confronting emerging jihadist threats.
Al-Qaeda-linked fighters and local allies carry out attacks in northern and eastern Burkina Faso, later formalizing within Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM). They exploit grievances, weak policing and porous borders, laying the groundwork for today’s large-scale insurgency and intense state–JNIM warfare.
Factions aligned with Islamic State consolidate along Burkina Faso’s borders with Mali and Niger, evolving into Islamic State Sahel Province (ISSP). Their presence deepens competition among jihadists and further strains government forces, contributing to today’s multi-sided violence in Oudalan, Seno and surrounding areas.
Attacks on security forces and civilians surge across northern and eastern provinces, including high-casualty massacres and ambushes. The state struggles to secure territory, and local self-defense militias proliferate, entrenching cycles of retaliation that shape current patterns of civilian targeting and displacement.
Soldiers overthrow President Kaboré in January over failures against jihadists; Captain Ibrahim Traoré ousts the first junta in September. The new military rulers prioritize offensive operations and alliances with non-Western partners, reshaping security strategy behind today’s intense but still inconclusive fighting with JNIM and ISSP.
Burkina Faso expels French forces, suspends some Western security partnerships, and strengthens ties with Mali and Niger’s juntas, forming the Alliance of Sahel States. This reorientation affects training, equipment and intelligence support, influencing current government approaches to insurgents and civilian protection.
The junta expands army operations and auxiliary “Volunteer for the Defense of the Fatherland” units across contested areas. While reclaiming some territory and reducing overall fatalities from 2023 peaks, these campaigns also involve severe abuses against civilians, contributing to today’s high levels of one-sided violence.
By 2024, fighting between government forces and JNIM dominates, with ISSP active mainly in Oudalan and Seno. Civilian massacres by both state and jihadists persist, and inter-jihadist clashes remain limited, leaving an entrenched, highly violent stalemate that defines Burkina Faso’s current security crisis.
