Madagascar’s youth are rising up—but the government’s response is raising eyebrows. In a bold move amid escalating protests led by the country’s young population, President Andry Rajoelina has appointed a military general, Ruphin Fortunat Zafisambo, as the new prime minister. This decision is seen by many as a clear attempt to regain control and restore order, but it also signals a worrying shift towards militarization during a period of mounting social unrest.
Just days after President Rajoelina voiced concerns about a potential coup, installing Gen. Zafisambo, who was previously in charge of the military cabinet within the prime minister’s office, marks a decisive step toward involving the army directly in governance. The president justified the appointment by emphasizing the need for "a leader capable of restoring order and earning the people's trust," underlining the severity of the current crisis.
But here’s where it gets controversial: the youth protest group called Gen Z Mada outright rejected the new prime minister and gave Rajoelina a strict 48-hour ultimatum to step down. They have vowed to persist in their fight for change as long as the president remains in power. These protests first erupted on September 25, sparked by widespread frustration over repeated water and power outages. Yet, what began as grievances over essential services rapidly expanded to encompass deeper issues such as endemic corruption, soaring unemployment rates, and an escalating cost-of-living crisis.
In a recent attempt to soothe the unrest, President Rajoelina dismissed the civilian Prime Minister Christian Ntsay and his entire cabinet. However, this move did little to calm tensions or satisfy the protesters.
At a press announcement from the presidential palace, Rajoelina described Gen Zafisambo as "someone clean" and fully prepared to rescue Madagascar from its current turmoil. Despite this optimism, the opposition, including former President Marc Ravalomanana, remains unimpressed. Ravalomanana criticized Rajoelina for being unwilling to listen and dismissed the new prime minister’s appointment as ineffective, noting that Gen Zafisambo had held a significant government military role before and was unlikely to resolve the crisis.
Human rights and international observers have raised alarms about the violence surrounding the protests. Last week, the United Nations reported that at least 22 people had died and more than 100 were injured. The government, however, rejected these figures, calling them "rumors and misinformation."
Violent clashes between security forces and protesters have unfolded in Antananarivo, the capital, as well as in the southern city of Toliara and northern Diego Suarez. Recent demonstrations saw hundreds of mainly university students marching from the suburbs into city centers, leading to confrontations with authorities who deployed barricades and force. Injuries including one young man hospitalized after being hurt during these clashes were documented by news agencies.
Madagascar’s political history is not unfamiliar with upheaval. Since gaining independence in 1960, the island nation has endured several waves of mass protests, including the 2009 uprising that toppled Ravalomanana and brought Rajoelina to power, who then returned after winning the 2018 election. The current protests represent the most serious challenge to his leadership since his re-election in 2023.
And yet, the country's hardships run deeper than politics alone. Despite its rich natural resources, Madagascar remains one of the poorest nations globally, with three out of every four people living in poverty according to World Bank data. Access to electricity is scarce, with only about one-third of its approximately 30 million inhabitants connected, as per International Monetary Fund reports.
Is turning to a military figure the right solution for Madagascar’s crisis, or could it further deepen divisions and instability? Could better listening and engagement with the protesters’ demands offer a more peaceful path forward? These are questions stirring intense debate—what’s your take? Do you believe military involvement can stabilize the country, or is it a step toward greater authoritarianism? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments below.
