Diomaye-Sonko, la dérive propriétaire du combat patriotique (Par Sidy Djimby NDAO)
There is an unspoken element in the latent, or now open, crisis between Bassirou Diomaye Faye and Ousmane Sonko, an element that is nonetheless glaringly obvious to anyone observing the Senegalese political landscape with even a modicum of lucidity. This unspoken element is the near-hegemonic drift of a faction within PASTEF activism, which speaks, argues, and acts as if the history of patriotic struggle, the fight against injustice, popular mobilization, and political change were the private property of a single man: Ousmane Sonko.
This militant reductionism has become one of the main fuels of the current polarization. It feeds misunderstandings, radicalizes positions, stifles nuance, and mutilates collective memory. Listening to some PASTEF supporters, one might almost believe that Senegal's recent political trajectory is solely due to the solitary courage of a leader, as if the thousands of anonymous individuals who marched, resisted, paid lawyers, endured social pressures, lost jobs, or simply took the risk of raising their hands to challenge the system played no role whatsoever in the advent of the change of March 24, 2024.
This personalist interpretation of the struggle is not only historically incorrect. It is politically dangerous.
First, because it denies the plurality of an unprecedented social mobilization. The transformation project championed by PASTEF was not born in an office, nor in a single mind. It was built through widespread sacrifices, awakened consciences, student networks, dissident civil servants, entire families traumatized by repression, harassed journalists, imprisoned or exiled activists, and citizens who sometimes voted for the first time in their lives. To reduce it to an individual epic is to erase this collective dimension, without which PASTEF would never have been a political phenomenon.
Furthermore, this exclusive appropriation distorts the relationship to power. For if victory becomes the work of a single individual, then any disagreement with that individual immediately becomes treason—even when the disagreement concerns institutional orientations, political strategies, or visions of governance that are perfectly legitimate within a republican framework. The risk is immense: making personal loyalty a political criterion, to the detriment of ideas, programs, and principles. Such logic can only lead to disaster.
This phenomenon is all the more worrying given that Bassirou Diomaye Faye was not a latecomer to the patriotic struggle. He was one of its architects, one of its most determined, and one of the first to pay the price of direct confrontation with the system. His release preceded his election, and his rise to the highest office was possible because a collective, not an isolated individual, had stood firm, even in the darkest moments.
Reducing PASTEF's dynamic to a mere "legacy" that only certain activists are deemed legitimate to interpret is profoundly regressive. It amounts to shutting the door on internal debate, which is nevertheless essential in any party that aspires to endure, renew itself, and govern. Paradoxically, it also amounts to reproducing the very practices that PASTEF once denounced in its adversaries: the symbolic hijacking of a collective struggle by a partisan faction.
Even more serious: this essentialist stance prevents a mature perspective on the current crisis. Instead of analyzing genuine disagreements—regarding government operations, international strategy, the party's role in the state, the president's autonomy from the party, or the pace of reforms—some activists prefer to dismiss any nuance by equating it with an attack on Ousmane Sonko. This attitude is not only unproductive, but it also degrades public debate by reducing it to a tribal reflex, precisely when Senegal needed a fresh democratic impetus.
The credit for the patriotic struggle belongs to no one. It cannot be passed on, appropriated, or sanctified to the point of being beyond criticism. It belongs to the nation's history. It belongs to the dead, the wounded, and the imprisoned. It belongs to the citizens who made courageous choices. It belongs to the early activists as well as the last-minute voters. It belongs to the activists as well as the abstainers who, witnessing the determination of the youth, finally decided to vote. It belongs to the families who protected their children, to the teachers who awakened consciences, and to the journalists who stood firm under pressure.
No one has the right to privatize this heritage.
Political maturity demands that we state clearly that Sonko, without his people, would never have reached the milestones that propelled him to the rank of national leader. And that Diomaye, without the popular support built up through years of mobilization, could never have embodied the change the country was waiting for. Both contributed, each in their own way, to writing an essential chapter in Senegalese political history. Their disagreement does not diminish their role, nor that of the millions of Senegalese who participated in this endeavor.
The question today is therefore not who "owns" the struggle. It is whether PASTEF will be able to preserve the spirit that has driven it: that of a citizen movement, pluralistic, humble in victory, open in debate, respectful of institutions, and aware that Senegal cannot be governed sustainably by a cult of personality, whoever the beneficiary may be.
Because the real risk for PASTEF is not the disagreement between two men. The real risk is the symbolic hijacking of a collective struggle by a militant faction that believes it is defending Sonko while actually undermining the very project that Sonko himself champions: a reconciled, peaceful Senegal, where debate prevails over fanaticism and where ideas take precedence over blind loyalty.
It is time to remember a simple truth: no change of power survives if it becomes a religion. No leader is infallible. No party can thrive if it does not recognize the democratic power of dissent. And no country can move forward if its citizens allow themselves to be trapped in loyalties that stifle critical thinking.
The struggle was collective. Power, too, must be collective. Senegal deserves better than squabbles over the appropriation of memory. This country deserves clear-sighted governance, a party open to debate, and a patriotic movement that never forgets its origins: simply, the people.
Sidy Djimby NDAO
Journalist
Commentaires (42)
Poulaagu weleme tan ! Gonene nédo gotto !
🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐑🐏🐏🐏🐄🐄🐄🐄🐄🐮🦌🦌🦌
Le peuple le suit parcequ'il conprends les problemes du pays depuis notre independence.
IL ya un projet en place et IL faut decouler ce projet.
Diomaye doit comprendre avec tout le respect qu'on lui doit que son leader politique est Sonko,sa defense est Pastef et sa ligne de mire:la Marche du projet.
Mais il faut un leadership Sonko Mandela Gandhi etc etc incarnés ce leadership
Bon soir
Vive la république
Vive le Sénégal
Pour le respect des institutions de la république
Le peuple sénégalais ne permettra à aucun individu d ou qu il vienne qui il soit de piétiner les fondamentaux de la république car il y va de la survie et de l’existence de notre nation
Vous n'avez encore rien compris ?
Il faut reconnaître à Sokon. Il ne faut pas pa
S être niliste
Vive le Sénégal
Moi personnellement, j’ai voté contre Macky Sall en 2024 et fais voter beaucoup de sénégalais contre lui, sans être membre d’un seul parti politique. Et pourtant, le déclic que j’ai eu ne vient pas de Pastef. C’était en mars 2018 quand j’ai lu la lettre de démission du Juge Deme. Sa démission a fait que j’ai commencé à prêter attention à la justice. Sans oublier sa formule légendaire « je démissionne d’une magistrature qui a démissionné ».
Je ne l’ai jamais rencontré, je ne milite pas dans son parti mais c’est quelqu’un que j’apprécie énormément. Et je sais que sa démission a bien secoué le régime de Macky Sall parce que c’est à ce moment que beaucoup de sénégalais comme moi ont commencé à commencé à prêter attention aux faits et gestes de la justice.
Au delà des façades de la réalité sortie des urnes et des actes officiels de l'organisation de l'état de droit et des procédures officiels, dans l'imaginaire de l'entendement du peuple sénégalais l'occupant actuel du palais de Roume le fait d'accepter de jouer d'être proposé comme un candidat de stratégie pour réincarné un autre candidat empêché, une fois élu n'est plus qu'un président de substitution, un "sosie de l'autre" un "office Keeper", un tributaire de l'autre dont la crédibilité repose sur le fait qu'il se conforme à cela. Je ne sais pas s'il en est conscient mais c'est pourquoi toutes initiatives privées qui lui est personnelles pour s'opposer politiquement à l'autre de sa nouvelle statue avec l'avantage d'être président apparaîtront comme une trahison de sa part en voulant retourner les armes qui lui ont été données contre celui dont il les a reçu. C'est une réalité sociologique qui s'oppose à la réalité officielle
Diomaye n'inspire personne, n'influence personne et ne guide personne, une autre manière de dire qu'il n'est tout simplement pas un leader. C'est un chanceux, un veinard qui, enivré par les délices du pouvoirs fomente l'assassinat politique de celui qui lui a offert ce même pouvoir sur un plateau d'or.
God doesn’t like ugly !!!!!
Félicitations pour cette contribution très pertinente. Le Sénégal a besoin de l’engagement de tous ses enfants pour surmonter la crise économique actuelle et dépasser les confrontations stériles qu’un individu a cherché à imposer en plaçant sa personne au centre du débat.
Qu’Allah swt nous guide pour sortir de cette situation. Amine
Participer à la Discussion
Règles de la communauté :
💡 Astuce : Utilisez des emojis depuis votre téléphone ou le module emoji ci-dessous. Cliquez sur GIF pour ajouter un GIF animé. Collez un lien X/Twitter ou TikTok pour l'afficher automatiquement.