Aftermath in Tougan: Burkina Faso’s farmers weigh debt, debate and the future of food sovereignty
The situation in Tougan leaves a bitter aftertaste. Beneath the official narrative of sovereignty, industrialisation and domestic output, agricultural producers say they continue to face alone a far less glorious reality: selling their harvests at a loss, repaying their loans and, in some cases, contemplating a border crossing simply to survive.
“Last year, maize yielded well. They capped the price, and the producers made no profit. This year, others will cross the border because of the credits,” recounts a testimony from Tougan. One particularly telling phrase sums up the predicament: “The producer weeps when the harvest is good, and weeps when the harvest is bad.”
This contradiction raises a fundamental question: what has become of the priority supposedly given to those who feed the nation?
The public debate: sovereignty rhetoric versus rural reality
Since coming to power, Ibrahim Traoré has regularly highlighted local production, economic sovereignty and Burkina Faso’s ability to manufacture certain equipment itself. Announcements about industrial units, notably those intended for the army’s needs, occupy a prominent place in this messaging.
Yet an economy cannot be reduced to its factories or military equipment.
While new industrial capacities are presented as symbols of sovereignty, farmers remain confronted with far more immediate problems: insufficient purchase prices, indebtedness, uncertain markets and low profitability of harvests.
Producing more only makes sense if those who produce can also live from their work.
The fallout: a model that punishes success
The problem in Tougan thus goes beyond the simple case of maize. It raises the question of agricultural investment. What entrepreneur will sustainably agree to invest in a sector where a good harvest can drive prices down to the point of ruining the producer, while a bad harvest exposes him directly to debt?
This is precisely where one of the great blind spots of the sovereignty narrative lies: a nation does not become economically independent merely because it manufactures its own weapons. It must also be able to secure the incomes of those who produce its food.
The paradox is brutal. Burkina Faso wants to produce its equipment locally, but some agricultural producers still seem to be searching for ways to sell their own output without losing their investment.
What comes next: the urgent question of agricultural investment
By constantly showcasing images of factories, machines and military equipment, the authorities risk leaving in the shadows another reality: that of fields, granaries, credits and rural families awaiting concrete solutions.
Sovereignty is not measured solely by what a state can manufacture for its army. It is also measured by its capacity to protect those who, every morning, put a seed in the ground to feed the nation.
In Tougan, the question is therefore not how many factories Burkina Faso can inaugurate. The question is simpler, and probably more urgent: how much longer can the producer work without earning a living?