This article explores the Pan-Africanism of Thomas Sankara, the revolutionary leader of Burkina Faso, in the context of the country’s 1983–1987 revolution. Sankara sought to transform Burkina Faso through his policies and initiatives, using Pan-Africanism to promote social, political and economic justice, all the while empowering the masses and challenging neo-colonialism.

His revolutionary project can be understood as distinctly Pan-African, grounded in his pursuit of emancipation through pragmatic reforms that centred the localised needs of the people of Burkina Faso. 

On 4 August 1983, Sankara seized power in a military coup that ousted the government of Jean-Baptiste Ouédraogo. Though technically a coup, it is widely regarded as a popular revolution, driven by growing dissatisfaction with the existing administration and grounded in the will of the people. Sankara’s intent was to give power back to the people and transform society in the process. Sankara’s rise to power took place in the context of genuine popular mobilisation – in May 1983, he was arrested due to increased unease within the ruling elite and government, and charged with treason. His popularity among fellow soldiers and the general public contributed to his release, and his arrest drove students to stage protests against their government in solidarity with Sankara.Sankara’s bottom-up support created a greater necessity to listen to the needs and demands of the people, and Sankara’s focus on this only furthered his popular appeal. Sankara had a vision for his country, and committed himself to executing that vision without the trappings of corruption or sympathy for colonial forces, as was seen in other leaders of Burkina Faso. Indeed, this commitment highlights his Pan-African beliefs as he saw the road to self-sufficiency was only to be achieved by fostering the agency of ordinary Burkinabè people. 

His rise to power through a coup nonetheless would inform public opinion of his tenure. A coup that had revolutionary foundations and good intentions is still, in any case, a coup, and he arguably fell short of addressing the consequences of this. However, to claim that the coup undermined his commitment to mass mobilisation, self-sufficiency or democratic empowerment and emancipation overlooks the transformative nature of his leadership. Sankara encouraged political participation through mass meetings and national congresses, allowing ordinary Burkinabè to have a voice. He fostered political engagement and avidly challenged elite domination, centring Burkinabè people. Moreso, his capacity to lead by example through modest living – his assets amounting to a car, a fridge, some guitars and bikes; he had a mortgage and was known to have cheques bounce due to insufficient funds – reflects his efforts to embody the ideology of Pan-Africanism by living within normal standards, to match his rhetoric. 

Crucially, judging the legitimacy of Sankara’s route to power through Western standards reinforces Eurocentric assumptions. Newly independent African states were in many respects expected to take Western systems of democracies and implement them in their own countries. This was another way that colonial powers continued to exert control and subjugate the continent. Burkina Faso and Africa generally is still healing from the negative implications of colonial regimes that dismantled their existing structures to remove their autonomy and freedom. Revolutionary action is often a response to such subjugation, and therefore a coup to implement his Pan-African ideology to create substantial change was a compliment rather than a contradiction to his Pan-African ideals surrounding self-determination, autonomy and anti-imperialism Sankara’s revolution is distinct from other coups or revolts, as it was backed by popular support.

Burkina Faso’s history prior to the 1983 revolution was defined by its colonial legacies, neo-colonial influences, and corrupt governments that did not champion change for the masses. Sankara’s military history, understanding of leftist ideologies, and his exposure to the possibilities of change through mass mobilisation gave him the groundwork to challenge these realities. Understanding of these historical and political foundations is critical to analysing the politics and strategies of Sankara’s government in regards to translating his Pan-African ideals into concrete socio-political and economic change.

Sankara’s political thought advanced a radical framework for societal reform, aimed at achieving profound and lasting social transformation. Sankara desired to enact lasting change for society in Burkina Faso through the power of his revolution and following tenure. His vision for African self-sufficiency was tied to his commitment to reclaiming African identity and advancing emancipation, and it is in his social and economic policies that this is exceptionally clear.

An important analysis of Sankara’s Pan-Africanism lies in his reluctance to fully embrace a unified Africa that included the broad spectrum of political ideologies across the continent. His relationship with neighbouring governments – particularly the more conservative, pro-Western administrations in, for example, Mali, Côte d’Ivoire, and Togo – was marked by tension and hostility. In 1985, he publicly criticised these regimes as neocolonial and reliant on foreign powers, placing himself as an opposition to them, urging Africans to challenge powers within their own countries. This highlights Sankara’s divergence from early Pan-Africanists who advocated for unity with the goal of nation building, while Sankara believed more deeply in uniting the people. Criticism of other African leaders and their administrations may not seem to be in line with an earlier understood goal of African unity. However, this stance reaffirms his positioning. His resistance was to conservative, Western-reliant regimes, and in resisting them he centered and reaffirmed his Pan-Africanism as standing with the people of Africa, not their states. 

In his speech titled We Can Count on Cuba Sankara concisely explains what I believe outlines his fundamental commitment to self-sufficiency when he stated that: ‘democracy can’t be conceived of without total power resting in the hands of the people – economic, military, political, social, and cultural power’ (Sankara, 1988f:230). He consistently reiterated that the general population were needed for the project towards self-determination, despite often being met with huge resistance from the West. Sankara had the luxury of hindsight and was able to draw on twentieth-century Pan-Africanism and the legacy of leaders such as Nkrumah, using strong rhetoric and clear vision to reinvigorate the movement in Burkina Faso. Sankara’s focus on popular mobilisation, grassroots involvement, and self-reliance, demonstrates both the possibilities and limitations of applying a Pan-African ideal in a nation.