In 2026, Madagascar’s capital, Antananarivo, remains the stage for a political transition marked by the unexpected departure of President Rajoelina, swept away by a crisis that profoundly transformed the island’s political and urban landscape. For nearly a decade, his government was both an engine of development and a source of controversy, leaving behind a tumultuous legacy. Sometimes praised for its modernization ambitions, sometimes criticized for its perceived autocratic choices, Rajoelina’s career embodies the complexity of governance in Madagascar, fractured between aspirations for growth and the difficulties of establishing lasting change. The president’s departure, repeatedly mentioned in the international media, now raises questions about the sustainability of the projects initiated, their impact on the population, and the role that Malagasy society must play in shaping its future. Over the years, his projects have sparked profound debate, illustrating both the ambition of someone who wanted to transform Antananarivo and a sometimes contested vision rooted in a complex political history and significant economic stakes.
The legacy of a bold yet controversial governance within the Malagasy context
Rajoelina’s term in office coincides with a period when Madagascar is seeking to rebuild its image by investing in large-scale urban and economic development projects. Among these initiatives, flagship infrastructure projects stand out: a highway network, an ambitious cable car system, and several shopping centers. However, this large-scale policy has often been hampered by criticism related to mismanagement, opaque financing, and environmental impact. The ambition to transform Antananarivo into a modern metropolis has sometimes seemed to come at the expense of cultural heritage, traditional neighborhoods, and vulnerable populations who have suffered damage or been subjected to brutal relocations.
These controversies highlight a major challenge: how to reconcile economic development, respect for local identity, and social inclusion? Tensions are high, especially in the context of economic crisis and political instability. While some praise Rajoelina’s forward-thinking vision, others denounce a management style that exacerbates social inequalities. The question remains: will we be able to learn lessons to build a new, consensual, and sustainable form of governance? A genuine urban transformation or an ambiguous reconstruction?
The capital’s transformation projects were also perceived as a display of authoritarian governance that favored a concentration of power in the hands of the elite. Criticism focused not only on the nature of the projects themselves, but also on their legitimacy and social cost. A segment of the population remained wary of the investments, fearing increased marginalization of working-class neighborhoods. The rehabilitation of certain districts was accompanied by lavish inaugurations, but also by accusations of buying social peace through broken promises or costly public relations campaigns that were more about not being truly inclusive.
The Political Stakes Behind Rajoelina’s Major Projects in Antananarivo
The controversial projects of the ousted president are not limited to their technical or economic aspects. They are also part of a political strategy aimed at bolstering Rajoelina’s legitimacy in the face of the opposition. Urban development became a tool for manipulating public perceptions, a means of rallying a segment of the population around a project of modernization. However, these initiatives have often been perceived as a series of gestures disconnected from the realities of the Malagasy people, especially in a context where the majority continue to live in precarious conditions. The disillusionment following these policies, amplified by accusations of corruption and abuse of power, undermines political stability and paves the way for a difficult transition, fueling resentment and exacerbating institutional divisions.
The role of the opposition in challenging presidential projects
For several years, the Malagasy opposition has expressed its disagreement with all the projects undertaken under Rajoelina’s rule. For his critics, these projects symbolize capricious governance or the safeguarding of personal interests at the expense of the public good. This protest has manifested itself in demonstrations and even boycotts, highlighting a deep-seated discontent. Young people, in particular, have played a key role in denouncing these excesses, with some figures organizing to offer an alternative voice to the centralization of power. The confrontation between these actors has underscored the need to re-examine the nature of governance in Madagascar, in order to prevent history from repeating its mistakes and to achieve lasting political stability.
The consequences for sustainable development and the environment in Antananarivo
Beyond the political stakes, Rajoelina’s controversial projects have also raised questions about their compatibility with sustainable development. The construction of new infrastructure has sometimes led to environmental degradation, affecting protected natural areas or weakening local ecosystems. The pressure exerted on the capital’s historical heritage and waste management have not always been controlled, fueling a negative perception and mistrust regarding the true long-term impacts of these projects.
| For a more balanced future, Madagascar must also integrate its urban strategies into an ecological framework, while mobilizing transparent governance. International awareness of environmental issues could accelerate this transition, but this largely depends on political will. The challenge lies in transforming economic growth into an engine that respects natural resources and vulnerable populations. | Comparative Table: Rajoelina’s Controversial Projects in Antananarivo | Project 🚧 | Objectives 🎯 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Controversies ⚠️ | Environmental Impact 🌍 | Current State 🔄 | Royal Highway | Connect the periphery to the city center |
| Exorbitant cost, degradation of working-class neighborhoods | Destruction of natural areas | Promotes congestion | Antananarivo Cable Car | Reduce traffic in the city center |
| High cost, safety issues | Impact on local biodiversity | In operation, but under surveillance | Modern Shopping Center | Stimulate the local economy |
Relegation of small, traditional businesses
Increased consumption, waste
Functional, criticized by the opposition
It is crucial that these new initiatives be built on genuine consensus and greater respect for citizens’ concerns. The challenge will also be to integrate the environmental dimension, avoiding the mistakes of the past. Collective awareness must broaden: it is no longer simply a matter of building a modern capital, but of shaping a model of equitable and sustainable development for all of Madagascar, thus uniting all stakeholders around a common project.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pu8qkyTx9Q
What are the main legacies of Rajoelina’s term in Antananarivo?
Large-scale urban and economic development projects, accompanied by controversies related to their management, their social and environmental impact, and a strong centralization of power.
How does Malagasy society wish to guide the political transition?
Découvrez notre guide complet — destinations, budget, visa, faune et conseils pratiques pour préparer votre voyage.
📖 Vous aimerez aussi
Transition à Madagascar : la société civile et la Génération Z face aux doutes sur le « Programme de la Refondation »
3 March 2026
Fermeture de l’aéroport de Dubaï : chaos et désarroi chez les voyageurs bloqués
2 March 2026
