Senegal’s political rift: president faye and prime minister sonko’s diverging paths

On Friday, May 22, Ousmane Sonko was dismissed from his role as Prime Minister, a move that could trigger a significant political crisis in Senegal. For several months, Sonko had described their dynamic as a “soft cohabitation,” a paradoxical term given that he and President Bassirou Diomaye Faye emerged from the same political sphere and shared a profound closeness as recently as 2024.

An ostensibly unbreakable bond

The relationship between these two political figures, often referred to as “brothers” and close companions in both their struggle and daily lives, began with great promise. For a long time, they were seen as an inseparable duo whose paths seemed destined to converge. They first met as students and later reunited at the National School of Administration (ENA). Subsequently, they pursued identical careers as tax and property inspectors. In 2014, reflecting their ideological and political alignment, they co-founded PASTEF, the African Patriots of Senegal for Work, Ethics, and Fraternity party. By 2022, Bassirou Diomaye Faye had become its Secretary General, while Sonko set his sights on the presidency.

The radiant, knowing smiles exchanged on March 24, 2024, are still vivid in memory. They had achieved it! Their victory was resounding, tasting of triumph and vindication. Their ascent to power had been arduous, improbable, and even obstructed, particularly as former President Macky Sall clung tenaciously to his position. Both men had endured imprisonment in the cells of Cap Manuel, their fates seemingly sealed. Yet, within days, the tide turned. Public outcry swelled, international journalists focused their lenses on Dakar, and Sall, abandoned by allies, was forced to make concessions.

Upon their release from prison, the two leaders launched a lightning-fast campaign under the powerful slogan: “Diomaye mooy Sonko, Sonko mooy Diomaye” [Diomaye is Sonko, Sonko is Diomaye]. With Ousmane Sonko’s own presidential candidacy invalidated, he chose his most loyal collaborator for the nation’s highest office.

The victory was decisive and undeniable. Nothing, it seemed, could ever separate the two men. However, for many observers, the true victor of the presidential election was Sonko, while Faye remained largely unknown to the broader public at the time.

Indeed, Ousmane Sonko had already made a significant impact on the political scene in 2019, surprisingly emerging as the third-place finisher in that year’s presidential race. Despite facing legal challenges and the high-profile Sweet Beauty affair, he maintained immense popularity, particularly among the youth, who viewed him as a role model and an idol. Over the years, he cultivated a unique political and emotional connection with a segment of the Senegalese population, fueled by a narrative of systemic rupture, steadfast resistance, and a promise of genuine change.

In this context, Diomaye Faye’s presidential prospects initially appeared challenging. Without the overwhelming popular endorsement championed by Sonko, it is highly probable that he would never have attained the presidency. Nevertheless, he embraced the responsibilities of the office.

Political tandems in Senegal: a recurring pattern of divergence?

As highlighted in various analyses of African politics, Senegalese political partnerships, despite often beginning with strong, seemingly unshakeable loyalties, have historically struggled to withstand the rigors of power.

A prime example is the alliance between Léopold Sédar Senghor and Mamadou Dia. These companions, who had worked together since the late 1940s to build an independent Senegal, saw their relationship fracture after the Mali Federation dissolved in August 1960. Senghor became President of the Republic, and Dia assumed the role of President of the Council. While initially presented as complementary, their differences gradually emerged over the organization of power, economic direction, and relations with France. The institutional crisis of December 1962 culminated in Dia’s arrest on charges of attempted coup, leading to his imprisonment for over a decade.

Similarly, the political pairing of Abdou Diouf and Moustapha Niasse, a partnership initially favored by Senghor, quickly lost its cohesion within a matter of months.

However, it was arguably during Abdoulaye Wade’s presidency that conflicts of loyalty and subsequent imprisonments resurfaced with particular intensity. Wade and Idrissa Seck had jointly championed the call for change (sopi). Seck, long considered Wade’s political heir, witnessed their relationship deteriorate, leading to his political marginalization and eventual incarceration in 2005 in connection with the Thiès construction projects affair. He was acquitted months later, prompting thousands to flood the streets of Dakar, chanting “Idi” as if expressing a sense of betrayal by his mentor.

The separation between Faye and Sonko, at first glance, appears to align with these historical precedents. Yet, their initial configuration was notably distinct: the individual holding electoral legitimacy was not necessarily the one who commanded the greatest political capital.

The emerging fault lines

Undoubtedly, some of the deeper rifts between the two men remain unrevealed. As documented in memoirs by figures like Abdou Diouf, the influence of inner circles, often underestimated by observers, can be profoundly significant.

Beyond the initial imbalance, Faye and Sonko, frequently prompted by media to reaffirm their friendship, ultimately succumbed to animosity.

Over the past two years, grievances and resentments steadily accumulated.

Disagreements surfaced first regarding methodology. Several commentators noted tensions over the implementation of campaign promises: the pace of reforms, the handling of figures from the previous regime, and judicial reform. In essence, the scale of change expected by the militant base remained a constant point of contention. Sonko, for his part, publicly voiced his impatience on several key issues.

Debates surrounding national debt, the relationship with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) – from which Sonko reportedly wished to distance Senegal – the allocation of political funds, and broader economic strategy gradually crystallized differing visions for the exercise of power. Underlying these disagreements was a more profound divergence: should the government pursue immediate, radical rupture, or should it navigate and compromise with institutional and international constraints?

The first public display of this rivalry arguably occurred during Ousmane Sonko’s “Tera Meeting” on November 8, 2025, held at the Léopold Sédar Senghor stadium. The term “tera,” borrowed from units of measurement, aimed to emphasize the unprecedented and exceptional scale of the mobilization. Buses from across the country and popular marches converged on the capital, drawing keen attention from the press and political observers.

The fervor and remarkable capacity for mobilization demonstrated that day served as a potent reminder that the political capital of their movement largely remained concentrated around Ousmane Sonko.

Officially presented as an occasion to review the first eighteen months in power, to clarify political direction, and to re-energize the PASTEF project, the rally was, in reality, nothing less than a powerful demonstration of political force.

The message was clearly received at the highest levels, and a response was swift. Faye chose to reinforce the “Diomaye Président” coalition by entrusting a central role to Aminata (Mimi) Touré. This decision was then, and likely correctly, interpreted as a political signal of the President’s growing autonomy.

A former Prime Minister under Macky Sall and later an opposition figure, Mimi Touré was a controversial personality within certain segments of PASTEF – some militants criticized her past association with the previous regime and her perceived late embrace of the rupture project.

Nonetheless, Faye’s intention was clear: to demonstrate that he was not subservient to his Prime Minister.

For several months, Faye appeared constrained from fully embodying the presidency, seemingly cohabiting with a Prime Minister who himself harbored presidential ambitions. This created an untenable equation.

Sonko and his supporters, for a considerable period, had underscored their political superiority, reminding others of the debt owed to them: notably, in Pascal Boniface’s book Les maîtres du monde, it was Sonko who was featured, not Faye.

What lies ahead?

Sonko’s dismissal from his prime ministerial duties was announced. On May 22, he posted on Facebook, expressing a sense of relief at being able to sleep at his home in Keur Gorgui.

However, this relief proved to be short-lived.

The President of the National Assembly, El Malick Ndiaye, subsequently resigned from his position, and Sonko, leading the majority party with 130 out of 165 deputies, swiftly succeeded him on May 26.

This move effectively repositions him as a prominent opposition figure, a role in which he previously excelled and which significantly contributed to his widespread popularity.

Such a configuration, however, ushers in an unprecedented scenario: a president potentially deprived of his primary political support, facing a Parliament now controlled by his former ally. This dynamic raises serious concerns about unprecedented tensions between the executive and legislative branches.

Will Diomaye Faye succeed in solidifying his legitimacy without Sonko’s backing? That remains highly uncertain. Will Sonko attempt to initiate impeachment proceedings against him? The question is open for debate.

Yet, this fratricidal political duel risks overshadowing the nation’s pressing challenges: healthcare, the economy, and critically, a youth grappling with unemployment.

Two years following the political transition, numerous promised reforms remain either incomplete or delayed, fueling growing expectations among the populace. Beyond the personal rivalry between the two leaders, it is ultimately the social aspirations of the youth, the voters, and a population confronting issues of employment, purchasing power, and public service crises, who stand to bear the brunt of this political upheaval.

Did the country truly need this internal conflict? The question warrants serious consideration.