• Traoré expanded state control over Burkina Faso’s mining sector through resource nationalism, strengthening government ownership of strategic resources.
• Popular support for economic sovereignty and limited resistance from key veto players have sustained Traoré’s political legitimacy despite international criticism.
• Although the policy has been implemented, uncertainty over its long-term impact on governance and security keeps Traoré HOT rather than BLAZING.

Why is Ibrahim Traoré HOT?

Answer: Traoré has translated promises of economic sovereignty into policy through resource nationalism, but long-term governance impacts remain uncertain.  

Since taking power on September 30, 2022, Ibrahim Traoré has placed resource nationalisation at the centre of his political agenda. The policy centres on expanding state ownership and control over Burkina Faso’s strategic mineral resources. Burkina Faso’s mining sector had long been dominated by foreign companies, with only one of fifteen mines operated locally in 2022. As gold became Burkina Faso’s leading export, debates over who truly benefits from the country’s mineral wealth intensified. Against a backdrop of worsening insecurity, many Burkinabè were frustrated with the political management of Roch Marc Christian Kaboré’s regime.

Traoré argued that the state should play a greater role in managing strategic resources. His resource nationalism agenda aimed to increase state participation in the mining sector, retain a larger share of mining revenues, and reduce reliance on foreign actors in the extraction of Burkina Faso’s natural resources.

Although sovereignty projects often remain largely symbolic, Traoré has followed through on key elements of his agenda. His government nationalised the Boungou and Wahgnion mines on August 27, 2024, expanded the role of the state-owned company Société de Participation Minière du Burkina (SOPAMIB), increased Burkina Faso’s stake in strategic projects such as the Kiaka mine, and announced plans to continue nationalising industrial mines and to increase refinery capacities. These measures have significantly expanded the state’s participation in the mining sector. Six of the country’s 15 industrial gold mines are now majority-owned by Burkinabè companies, with three under direct state control, demonstrating that Traoré has effectively implemented the promised policies.

However, implementation alone does not automatically equate to success. The reforms have expanded state control over resources, but whether they can deliver the lasting governance and security improvements Traoré promises remains uncertain. This gap between implementation and outcomes is what keeps him HOT rather than BLAZING.

What is changing Traoré’s heat level?

Answer: Traoré remains HOT because opposition to his resource nationalism agenda has been weaker than the domestic support it has generated. 

Rather than provoking a wave of opposition, Traoré’s resource nationalism agenda has largely benefited from the inability of veto players to alter the course of the policy. Within Burkina Faso, the military leadership has actively driven the push for greater state control over natural resources. The military-backed government implemented the agenda through a new mining code and the creation of SOPAMIB, both of which expanded state control over the mining sector. Nationalist groups have embraced these measures as long-overdue assertions of the country’s economic sovereignty. 

Foreign mining companies such as Fortuna Mining and West African Resources represent the strongest external veto players because of their substantial investments in Burkina Faso’s mining sector. These companies, alongside investors, have voiced concerns over permit withdrawals, nationalisations, and the expanding role of the state in the sector, warning of heightened uncertainty and risks to the investment climate and production capacity. Nevertheless, these objections have had limited practical effect. 

French influence in Burkina Faso has dwindled, and the government has demonstrated its willingness to cultivate alternative partnerships with Russia. The withdrawal of French troops and the deterioration of diplomatic relations reduced France’s ability to exert political pressure, while Russia’s provision of military assistance and diplomatic support gave the government an alternative source of external backing. As a result, reforms have continued to advance with limited constraint.    

Domestically, this policy has generated support by tapping into widespread frustrations over who benefits from Burkina Faso’s natural wealth. For many Burkinabè, greater state control over gold production represents more than economic reforms; it symbolises a reclaiming of their national resources and a rejection of arrangements that have historically benefitted foreign interests over local communities. While direct polling on support remains limited, broader public attitudes suggest that these messages resonate.

According to Afrobarometer data, acceptance of military rule in Burkina Faso has risen significantly, from 24% to 66% since 2012. Acceptance of military rule has risen alongside growing demands for sovereignty and decisive leadership. By presenting resource nationalism as a means of reclaiming Burkina Faso’s wealth from foreign actors, Traoré has aligned his reforms with these sentiments, helping sustain his political temperature.

What is driving Traoré?

Answer: Traoré is driven by a belief that economic sovereignty can restore both Burkina Faso’s independence and the state’s legitimacy. 

Traoré presents his economic independence policy as both ideological and strategic. He seeks greater economic independence, but the success of these reforms has also reinforced his legitimacy. Pursuing these objectives has also strengthened his image as a defender of national interests and encouraging  comparisons with former president Thomas Sankara, Burkina Faso’s revolutionary president from 1983 to 1987, whose legacy of self-determination, anti-colonialism, and economic independence continues to resonate in the country today.

While it is difficult to disentangle intention from political outcome, the legitimacy generated by these reforms appears to have complemented, rather than replaced, Traoré’s stated goals. The political support derived from resource nationalism therefore serves not only as an outcome of the policy but also as an incentive for its continuation.

At the same time, whether resource control can achieve the broader governance transformations he promises remains uncertain. At the governance level, Traoré’s policy increases state revenue, expanding the government’s capacity to address Burkina Faso’s security crisis. Military budgets in Burkina Faso have more than doubled since 2021, now accounting for between 14 per cent and 17 per cent of official government expenditure according to the World Bank. This increase reflects the regime’s prioritisation of combating jihadist insurgencies and reasserting state authority. Although the government has used these additional revenues to expand military spending and reduce its reliance on traditional Western partners, it remains unclear whether this has produced lasting improvements in governance, institutional effectiveness, or security.

Burkina Faso has simultaneously deepened its military and economic ties with Russia, including granting mining concessions and strengthening security cooperation. The relationship can be viewed both as a pragmatic tool for advancing resource nationalism and as a potential constraint on the full autonomy Traoré claims to pursue. This shift raises questions about whether the sovereignty promised through resource nationalism has truly been achieved, or whether dependence has simply been redirected from one set of external actors to another.

What does this mean for you?

Answer: Traoré’s rise illustrates how visible acts of sovereignty can become powerful sources of legitimacy, even when their long-term outcomes remain uncertain.

Traoré’s resource nationalism also points to a broader shift among Sahelian military governments, which increasingly derive legitimacy from promises of sovereignty, self-determination, and reduced dependence on external actors. In Burkina Faso, reclaiming control over strategic resources has become a visible demonstration of state action in a context where citizens have grown frustrated with insecurity, unmet promises, and external influence. Yet visible reforms also generate expectations. If greater state control over mineral wealth fails to deliver measurable improvements in security, government revenues, institutional capacity, and living standards, the legitimacy these policies have generated may prove difficult to sustain.

Beyond Burkina Faso, Traoré’s approach mirrors wider trends across the Sahel, where sovereignty and self-determination increasingly resonate with populations disillusioned with traditional political models. In neighbouring Niger, the military government has similarly pursued resource nationalism and sought to reduce French influence while presenting these measures as part of a broader sovereignty agenda. For young and international audiences, his trajectory raises an important point: leaders can build political support through symbolism of reclaiming national agency, and be judged by their ability to translate that symbolism into lasting outcomes.