Guinea-Bissau Coup: Comparing and Contrasting Guinea and Cameroon

By Hans Ngala

Another coup in yet another West African country has taken place. On Wednesday, a military leader Dinis N’Tchama announced that “The High Military Command for the re-establishment of national and public order (has) decided to immediately depose the president of the republic, to suspend, until new orders, all of the institutions of the republic of Guinea-Bissau”.

The miltary also announced the arrest of president Umaro Sissoco Embaló, the suspension of the electoral process and the activities of media outlets, as well as closing all land, air and sea borders.

The coup in Guinea-Bissau comes just a few months after that of Madagascar, a former French colony. The difference with Guinea-Bissau’s case is that the country has had at least 19 coups or attempted coups with 5 of them being successful. The 2025 coup of Wednesday November 26 being the latest of these four.

Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country also had reports of a coup earlier this year, forcing President Bola Tinubu to fire some top military officials.

The coup in Guinea is the latest in a region which analysts have since 2020, dubbed “the Coup Belt” – a massive geographical area stretching from West, Central and East Africa where coups are common. Since 1990, the Coup Belt has seen 21 of the 27 coups that have taken place on the African continent.

As of November 2025, there are five West African countries under military rule. These are Burkina Faso

Guinea

Guinea-Bissau

Mali

Niger

Faso

The common denominator amongst the above countries is that they are all former colonies of France, except Bissau, exposing a growing disgruntlement with their elected leaders and often accusing the French of meddling in their politics. These countries often then turn to Russia for military and economic assistance, to the chagrin of the French.

What are the Comparisons Between Guinea-Bissau’s Military and Cameroon’s?

It is not hard to see the stark contrast between the Bissau military and the one in Cameroon. While the Guinea coup has so far been bloodless, post-electoral protests in Cameroon last October, turned violent when soldiers opened fire on protesters with live ammunition. A lady was killed in Garoua (or was it Maroua) while scores more were killed in Douala. The UN said about 48 people died.

The similarities are also present: In Cameroon, like in Bissau, both opposition candidates all claimed victory before the official proclamation of results. While Biya did not explicitly claim victory in the October 12 polls in Cameroon, his Guinea-Bissau counterpart did – beginning a tug-of-war that is a likely contributory factor that precipitated Wednesday’s military take-over.

While there is no report of any deaths or casualties in the Guinea-Bissau coup, this could point to a pattern of entrenched military take-overs in the country where military take-overs have becoming all too common.

Paul Biya on the other hand as the world’s longest-ruling non-royal leader has mastered the art of staying in power by manipulating the electoral system and keeping the military loyal to him. This ensures that the likelihood of a coup, is greatly weakened.

The persistence of coups across Africa—particularly in former French colonies—reveals a continent experiencing a deep geopolitical recalibration. At the heart of the pattern is a crisis of legitimacy. Many of the affected countries have political systems that outwardly appear democratic but function as closed, elite-driven structures that exclude citizens from genuine participation. Elections are often marred by irregularities, courts lack independence, and opposition voices face repression. As trust in civilian leaders dissipates, military leaders have stepped into the vacuum, presenting themselves as corrective forces. Whether they ultimately deliver stability or worsen governance varies from country to country, but the trend signals a profound erosion of faith in democratic institutions and points to a struggle with African post-colonial states’ struggle with what democracy means. It exposes the insufficiency of democracy and its limitations, an issue I previously wrote about here on CNA. African states need to define for themselves what democracy means because with the rising number of coups, it is clear that democracy as we currently understand it, has failed to work for the average post-independence African state.

From Mali to Niger, Burkina Faso to now Guinea-Bissau, a shared thread is the rejection of French influence. Decades of economic and military partnerships with Paris have increasingly been seen by populations as unequal and self-serving. Perceptions are that France props up unpopular leaders or benefits disproportionately from resource extraction which in turn fuels resentment. Coups therefore become domestic political restarts and geopolitical statements—moves to break from an old order that many citizens believe has failed them.

Russia also takes advantage of these fragile political moments, positioning itself as an alternative partner through military support, security advisors and mining deals. For juntas seeking legitimacy and leverage, Moscow offers what Paris cannot: an immediate, transactional partnership without conditions tied to governance, democracy or human rights. This has intensified a new Cold War-like competition on the continent, with African countries becoming arenas for global power rivalry.

Yet, the wave of coups also exposes deeper socioeconomic frustrations—poverty, youth unemployment, insecurity, extremist violence. Without addressing these structural issues, neither military governments nor their civilian predecessors can claim long-term legitimacy. What this moment ultimately reveals is a continent at a crossroads: citizens are rejecting broken democratic processes, but the alternative—military rule—risks entrenching instability if genuine reforms do not follow.

Africa’s future trajectory will depend on whether states can rebuild trust between leaders and citizens, reform institutions, and craft foreign alliances that prioritize national interests rather than external agendas.