The return of several French officers to N’Djamena since mid-April 2026, aimed at restarting military cooperation between France and Chad, has triggered widespread debate. This move comes less than two years after the historic decision to end the French military presence in the country, as analysed by a political and security expert.
Although Paris insists it does not plan to redeploy permanent forces on Chadian soil, the simple resumption of military cooperation and intelligence sharing raises serious questions about its impact on President Mahamat Idriss Déby Itno’s image and the credibility of the political narrative he has championed since coming to power.
A contradiction with sovereignty and pan-Africanist discourse
In the months following the withdrawal of French forces, President Déby presented that decision as a victory for national sovereignty and a reclamation of the state’s strategic independence. He linked it to a message of emancipation from foreign dependencies and the pursuit of balanced partnerships, aligning with the growing pan-African momentum in the region.
Now, restarting military cooperation with Paris, even in a limited form, could be seen as a step back from one of the regime’s most emblematic sovereign decisions. This is especially true since Chadian authorities repeatedly justified ending military agreements by citing a lack of concrete results and strong public pressure demanding the departure of French troops.
A risk to Chad’s regional standing
Over the past two years, Chad has built a reputation as an influential regional security power, capable of addressing threats through cooperation with neighbours and diversified international partnerships. President Déby has positioned himself as a regional mediator and a key player in stabilisation efforts in the Sahel and Central Africa.
However, returning under the French intelligence umbrella could undermine that image and suggest that N’Djamena ultimately failed to break free from its traditional partner, despite rhetoric about strategic autonomy.
The expert also notes that the decision to end the French military presence responded to popular demands expressed through multiple protests calling for France to leave Chad. Any rapprochement with Paris risks angering a significant portion of the public, which viewed the French withdrawal as a sovereign gain not to be reversed.
A France that politically fought Déby and hosted the opposition
The paradox is that France, now returning as a security partner, has been one of the main sources of pressure on the Déby regime over the past two years.
In July 2024, accusations targeting the Chadian president and several family members were reported by French judicial authorities in investigations into suspected embezzlement of public funds and spending on luxury hotels, high-end vehicles, and expensive clothing. Those cases were revived in March 2026, along with recurring speculation about possible freezing of assets and accounts linked to the presidential family.
Returning to cooperation with a state that used its judicial and media institutions to personally target the head of state’s image raises legitimate questions about the level of political trust that can exist between the two sides.
Meanwhile, France hosted the largest gathering of Chadian political and politico-military opposition in Nantes in October 2025. Nearly twenty organisations and movements participated, aiming to coordinate their political, diplomatic, and military efforts against the authorities in N’Djamena.
Paris also played a notable role in the Succès Masra affair, involving French lawyers in his defence, efforts to facilitate his transfer to France for medical care, and media coverage of the case within the French parliament and various European and international institutions.
Between security imperatives and political cost
No one denies that Chad faces growing security challenges in the Lake Chad region and along its eastern and northern borders. However, the question now is whether the potential security benefits of a rapprochement with Paris justify the political and symbolic cost of such a move.
President Déby has built much of his legitimacy on a discourse centred on sovereignty, independence, and rejection of foreign dependence. Any resumption of military cooperation with France could weaken that narrative’s credibility and give political opponents the chance to question the sincerity of the sovereignist project he has promoted for years.
The expert concludes with a fundamental question: how to justify a return to a political, media, and judicial partner that hosted the opposition, criticised the regime, and attempted to pressure it on several fronts, only to be presented to the public again as an indispensable partner for the future of national security?
