In the United States, Australia, and Europe there can be no cause more idealistic, more popular, and more progressive than the abolition of female genital mutilation (FGM). Many countries have banned it; NGOs educate people about it. The United Nations has proclaimed February 6 as International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation.

According to the World Health Organization, FGM has been declining over the past 30 years. In the 1990s, one in two girls between 15 and 19 had undergone FGM in countries where it was traditional; today, the figure is just one in three. Hopefully, says WHO, it will soon be consigned to the rubbish bin of history.

But there is a snag.

International solidarity has broken down in The Gambia. The parliament of this Muslim-majority west African country recently voted overwhelmingly to reverse its 2015 ban on FGM. Many of the local MPs say that FGM is needed to “uphold religious loyalty and safeguard cultural norms and values”. The bill still needs to be reviewed by a parliamentary committee before a final vote.

In short, The Gambia, a nation of 2.5 million in West Africa, could become the first country to defy the international consensus on FGM.

Don’t get me wrong. I agree that FGM is an appalling violation of human rights. The WHO’s fact sheet describing FGM is gut-wrenching. It is demeaning, sexist, unhealthy, and painful.

However, from a political point of view, the debate over banning FGM presents a political conundrum for the Western nations who fund and publicise the campaign against FGM in Africa and the Middle East.

UNICEF and UNFPA say that “The introduction of the ban on FGM in The Gambia in 2015 represent[ed] a significant milestone in the country's efforts to safeguard the rights and well-being of its female population, and was seen as a model of progressive legislation worldwide.” True enough.

But it was imposed on the citizens of The Gambia by loathsome dictator, Yahya Jammeh. Mr Jammeh, who ruled from 1996 to 2017, is currently in exile in Equatorial Guinea. Human Rights Watch says that he was responsible for “widespread abuses, including forced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and arbitrary detention.” The description of the abuses is blood-curdling. The number of women who have accused him of rape suggests that he was not a champion of women’s rights.

But for some reason, he banned FGM, perhaps to curry favour with Western benefactors. The leading anti-FGM activist in The Gambia, Jaha Dukureh, whose campaign is supported by The Guardian, was overjoyed at the time. “He put women and girls first, this could negatively affect him, but this shows he cares more about women than losing people’s votes,” said Dukureh.

It didn’t seem to occur to her or to anyone in the West that the ban was an unpopular and undemocratic move. No one asked what Gambian voters thought of their dictator’s conversion to the international consensus.