When questioned about Senegal’s debt management and the upcoming IMF mission to Dakar, Ousmane Sonko delivered a frank assessment of his two years as prime minister while drawing clear red lines for the government of Al Aminou Lo. On the possibility of debt restructuring, the National Assembly president first rejected any dogmatic stance. “We are not in absolute positions. We will examine the situation with lucidity,” he stated. But he immediately recalled that as prime minister he had firmly opposed any hasty restructuring, arguing that “the conditions were not even met, since the country was not in default and was meeting its obligations.” He intends to uphold that line from the National Assembly. “If a decision were to be made that sacrifices our options for systemic and structural change for short-term ratios, we will not accept it,” he warned, promising to use “the powers of the National Assembly to say no.”
On his own record regarding debt, Sonko was straightforward. Faced with criticism that he continued to rely on international lenders despite his rhetoric on economic sovereignty, he defended the choice of transparency. “We chose to start from a good foundation and not hide figures, because that would have caught up with us sooner or later,” he explained, citing the precedent of the Greek debt crisis. “In all countries, debt is refinanced, it is renewed,” he added, asserting orthodox management of maturities.
Returning to the issue of odious debt proved the most revealing moment of the interview. Pressed to explain why he had not demanded outright cancellation of a debt he himself had called odious, Sonko acknowledged his institutional limits. “I did not have all the levers. The powers of the prime minister are extremely limited in this country,” he conceded, distinguishing his positions as party leader from his actual room for action as head of government. He also said he never disagreed with President Diomaye Faye on this matter, noting that during their latest discussion the president “confirmed that the line had not changed.”
But it was on the future that Sonko was most anticipated. Acknowledging that this debt is “partly odious,” he called on the current executive to show political courage. “It takes courage to raise that debate,” he said, expressing hope that the government “will take its responsibilities to discuss the cancellation of part of this debt.” The injunction also sounded like a test of consistency for a government of which he was, until recently, the linchpin.
