Western countries should not be interfering in African internal affairs  Western nations should clearly not be interfering in African affairs. Not only is this conflict outside of NATO’s remit but it is internal to an individual African state rather than a war between states. By intervening France and other nations are taking part in a civil war in which they are aiding a government that was placed in office by a military coup in March 2012 so does not have a democratic mandate. [1]  This intervention is an example of France once more playing the role of gendarme and considering that it has some kind of divine right to intervene in Africa. [2] This war is of course in large part France’s fault in the first place; it is trying to hold together a nation that should be split in two as a result of artificial colonial borders that fan conflict by dividing communities. [3] In this case France is intervening to deny a legitimate people’s, the Tuareg, their right to self-determination. The Tuaregs are divided between Algeria, Kibya, Mali, and Niger but without a majority in any. [4] The Turegs when they took control of Azawad made a declaration of independence. [5] While this has not been recognised this simply shows how existing states are worried about accepting the logic of self-determination when they themselves have groups that may want independence.  [1] Felix, Bate, ‘Mali junta sees civilian government “in days”’, Reuters, 8 April 2012,   [2] Diop, Boubacar Boris, ‘La Vie en %$!’, Foreign Policy, July/August 2010,   [3] Zachary, G. Pascal, ‘African Needs a New Map’, Foreign Policy, 28 April 2010,   [4] 10% in Mali ‘Mali’ The World Factbook, CIA,  9.3% in Niger ‘Niger’, The World Factbook, CIA,   [5] Fessy, Thomas, ‘Mali Tuareg rebels declare independence in the north’, BBC News, 6 April 2012,