Boko Haram

On 5 September 2015, Muhammadu Buhari will mark the first 100 days of his presidency. As expectations are high, particularly regarding his strategy and actions against Boko Haram, these first 100 days are a useful indicator of what is to come. As Michael Watkins puts it in the Harvard Business Review, ‘what new leaders do in their early days has a disproportionate impact on all that follows’. While this is not his first time at Nigeria’s helm, this former major general faces far different challenges than during his first tenure as military head of state from 1983 to 1985.

Nigerians supposedly elected Buhari to reinstate the country’s honour or ‘manifest destiny’, which has suffered under steady state decay caused by spiralling corruption, a deteriorating economy and persistent insecurity from the Boko Haram crisis in the north of the country. The latter may have played a critical role in Buhari’s election. Thanks to the Islamist sect’s campaign of violence, which reached its peak last year accounting for more than 400 attacks and over 9 000 deaths, support for the previous administration dwindled rapidly.

For many Nigerians, the intensity of Boko Haram attacks demonstrated the inability of the previous administration under Goodluck Jonathan to deal with the crisis. The perceived ineptitude of his government was best illustrated when Boko Haram carried out the mass kidnapping of nearly 300 school girls at Chibok, Borno State, in April 2014, attracting global condemnation. The global social media campaign of #BringBackOurGirls, which mobilised some of the most powerful voices on earth, was perceived almost as an opposition group. 

Boko Haram has continued to evolve both structurally and tactically. In March this year, it became the first group in sub-Saharan Africa to pledge allegiance to the Islamic State (IS), signalling a shift in authority from its notorious leader, Abubakar Shekau, to the supreme command of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of IS. This strategic association is meant to enable Boko Haram, which now goes by a new name, the Islamic State Province in West Africa, to benefit from the expansive resources of IS, potentially guaranteeing its long-term sustainability. It’s a union that does not augur well for the fight against Boko Haram because, in theory, it means that defeating the group also requires dismantling the Islamic State. 

Since Buhari’s inauguration on 29 May, Boko Haram has intensified its attacks in Nigeria in a bid to intimidate the new president and force his hand. According to data compiled by the ISS on reported major terrorist incidents in Africa, Boko Haram has carried out more than 200 attacks as at 31 August, claiming over 5 000 lives in the four Lake Chad Basin countries – Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad and Niger.

Despite the expansion of the group’s attacks to the three other countries, Nigeria continues to be the principal target. Of the 200 attacks this year, 141 (70%) have occurred in Nigeria, which accounts for 4 233 deaths (85%) of total deaths recorded so far. The deadliest attack was in January when Boko Haram militants invaded Baga, a town in Borno State, where they massacred 2 000 people. Meanwhile, 31 attacks have been recorded in Cameroon with 296 deaths, 16 in Chad with 189 deaths, and 12 in Niger with 160 deaths.

From January to May, before Buhari took office, Boko Haram carried out 115 attacks in all the four countries – a monthly average of 23 attacks. Under Buhari, 86 attacks occurred in three months – a monthly average of 27 attacks. Approximately 3 466 deaths were recorded between January and May, averaging 693 deaths per month. In Nigeria alone, 60 attacks accounting for 1 145 deaths have occurred under Buhari, reaching their peak in July, which accounted for 30 or about half of all attacks in Nigeria between June and August, with 647 or 57% of total Boko Haram-related deaths in the same period in Nigeria.

A major shift in Boko Haram’s tactics during the past 100 days is the increased use of suicide attacks, especially involving young teenage girls. Only 19 suicide attacks took place in the five months before Buhari took power, but at least 33 have occurred in the past three months, accounting for 55% of all attacks carried out during that period. Boko Haram has used suicide attacks not only to reach difficult targets but also to inflict mass casualties. The new administration has rightly made the issue a top priority. Buhari has responded with military, diplomatic, social and economic measures. In a diplomatic offensive, the Boko Haram crisis featured prominently in the president’s first foreign state visits to Niger, Chad, United States, Cameroon, Benin and the G7, where he sought to consolidate support and harness resources to combat the Islamist sect.

To win heart and minds, the president has also made plans to attract pro-poor development initiatives in the north and diversify the Nigerian economy – to eliminate the reliance on the oil industry and put new focus on agriculture with a view to create youth employment. He is also promoting efforts to de-link Boko Haram and its activities from Islam, by claiming that the Islamist sect is a fraud and that neither the group nor its activities has anything to do with religion. To streamline and sharpen the focus on the military, one of Buhari’s first policy decisions was to transfer the Joint Military Command headquarters from Abuja to Maiduguri so that it could be closer to the action. He has also appointed new military chiefs and commanders and ordered them to draw up plans for defeating Boko Haram within three months.

The decision may help generate increased momentum and resources necessary to eliminate Boko Haram. But it raises serious questions about the feasibility of – within just three months – destroying a six-year insurgency which has tentacles spread way beyond Nigeria and whose command structures may be found in Iraq and Syria. Buhari’s strategic approach has been to isolate the group in the Sambisa forest and use neighbouring countries and the regional Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF) to block escape routes and safe havens and ultimately obliterate Boko Haram. This is by no means as easy as it sounds.

Firstly, the size and terrain of the Sambisa forest is a huge challenge. Secondly, Buhari would need more than three months to rekindle the diminishing morale in the military, which was at its lowest right before he took office. Add to this, the military’s inadequate and inappropriate arms cache and a lack of expertise in fighting in such a diverse and complex terrain against an adversary whose fighters live in caves and makeshift tunnels. Thirdly, Buhari’s plan does not depend entirely on what the Nigerian military can do, but also on the skills and commitment of the forces of neighbouring countries. Fourthly, it is not clear if the approved 8 700 troops of the MNJTF is the right capacity given that previous discussions had considered between 7 500 and 10 500. The MNJTF is also designed as a traditional peacekeeping force, which, from experiences in Somalia and Mali, has not proven to be a successful counter-terrorism tool. Finally, although Buhari has pledged US$100 million, long-term funding for the MNJTF remains a vexing issue, causing several deployment delays.

Despite these challenges, there is every reason for Buhari to celebrate his 100 days at the helm of Aso Rock. The military has rescued the majority of the women and girls that Amnesty International estimated had been kidnapped or abducted by Boko Haram. Additional towns and villages have been retaken, including the recent liberation of Gamboru Ngala, a strategic town bordering Cameroon. This is good news, but these recent successes create a false impression that Boko Haram has been incapacitated and is on the verge of defeat. In the past, when Boko Haram appeared frail and defeated, it has always bounced back reenergised and more deadly. Buhari should avoid the same mistakes of the previous administration that issued numerous timelines to defeat Boko Haram but never met any of them. Such unfulfilled promises cost the previous administration dearly.

The litmus test for Buhari’s administration remains the liberation of the 219 Chibok schoolgirls believed to be in Boko Haram’s captivity. In this regard, the president however, seems to be implementing the same strategy as his predecessor, relying heavily on the military. A new approach, which focuses on a criminal justice response, implementing the 2011 Terrorism Prevention Act and establishing special courts or tribunals mandated to investigate and prosecute acts of terror, might help Buhari in his quest to ultimately defeat Boko Haram.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

05.Sep.2015

Hits: 1643

Write comment (0 Comments)

On 5 September 2015, Muhammadu Buhari will mark the first 100 days of his presidency. As expectations are high, particularly regarding his strategy and actions against Boko Haram, these first 100 days are a useful indicator of what is to come. As Michael Watkins puts it in the Harvard Business Review, ‘what new leaders do in their early days has a disproportionate impact on all that follows’. While this is not his first time at Nigeria’s helm, this former major general faces far different challenges than during his first tenure as military head of state from 1983 to 1985.

Nigerians supposedly elected Buhari to reinstate the country’s honour or ‘manifest destiny’, which has suffered under steady state decay caused by spiralling corruption, a deteriorating economy and persistent insecurity from the Boko Haram crisis in the north of the country. The latter may have played a critical role in Buhari’s election. Thanks to the Islamist sect’s campaign of violence, which reached its peak last year accounting for more than 400 attacks and over 9 000 deaths, support for the previous administration dwindled rapidly.

For many Nigerians, the intensity of Boko Haram attacks demonstrated the inability of the previous administration under Goodluck Jonathan to deal with the crisis. The perceived ineptitude of his government was best illustrated when Boko Haram carried out the mass kidnapping of nearly 300 school girls at Chibok, Borno State, in April 2014, attracting global condemnation. The global social media campaign of #BringBackOurGirls, which mobilised some of the most powerful voices on earth, was perceived almost as an opposition group. 

Boko Haram has continued to evolve both structurally and tactically. In March this year, it became the first group in sub-Saharan Africa to pledge allegiance to the Islamic State (IS), signalling a shift in authority from its notorious leader, Abubakar Shekau, to the supreme command of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of IS. This strategic association is meant to enable Boko Haram, which now goes by a new name, the Islamic State Province in West Africa, to benefit from the expansive resources of IS, potentially guaranteeing its long-term sustainability. It’s a union that does not augur well for the fight against Boko Haram because, in theory, it means that defeating the group also requires dismantling the Islamic State. 

Since Buhari’s inauguration on 29 May, Boko Haram has intensified its attacks in Nigeria in a bid to intimidate the new president and force his hand. According to data compiled by the ISS on reported major terrorist incidents in Africa, Boko Haram has carried out more than 200 attacks as at 31 August, claiming over 5 000 lives in the four Lake Chad Basin countries – Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad and Niger.

Despite the expansion of the group’s attacks to the three other countries, Nigeria continues to be the principal target. Of the 200 attacks this year, 141 (70%) have occurred in Nigeria, which accounts for 4 233 deaths (85%) of total deaths recorded so far. The deadliest attack was in January when Boko Haram militants invaded Baga, a town in Borno State, where they massacred 2 000 people. Meanwhile, 31 attacks have been recorded in Cameroon with 296 deaths, 16 in Chad with 189 deaths, and 12 in Niger with 160 deaths.

From January to May, before Buhari took office, Boko Haram carried out 115 attacks in all the four countries – a monthly average of 23 attacks. Under Buhari, 86 attacks occurred in three months – a monthly average of 27 attacks. Approximately 3 466 deaths were recorded between January and May, averaging 693 deaths per month. In Nigeria alone, 60 attacks accounting for 1 145 deaths have occurred under Buhari, reaching their peak in July, which accounted for 30 or about half of all attacks in Nigeria between June and August, with 647 or 57% of total Boko Haram-related deaths in the same period in Nigeria.

A major shift in Boko Haram’s tactics during the past 100 days is the increased use of suicide attacks, especially involving young teenage girls. Only 19 suicide attacks took place in the five months before Buhari took power, but at least 33 have occurred in the past three months, accounting for 55% of all attacks carried out during that period. Boko Haram has used suicide attacks not only to reach difficult targets but also to inflict mass casualties. The new administration has rightly made the issue a top priority. Buhari has responded with military, diplomatic, social and economic measures. In a diplomatic offensive, the Boko Haram crisis featured prominently in the president’s first foreign state visits to Niger, Chad, United States, Cameroon, Benin and the G7, where he sought to consolidate support and harness resources to combat the Islamist sect.

To win heart and minds, the president has also made plans to attract pro-poor development initiatives in the north and diversify the Nigerian economy – to eliminate the reliance on the oil industry and put new focus on agriculture with a view to create youth employment. He is also promoting efforts to de-link Boko Haram and its activities from Islam, by claiming that the Islamist sect is a fraud and that neither the group nor its activities has anything to do with religion. To streamline and sharpen the focus on the military, one of Buhari’s first policy decisions was to transfer the Joint Military Command headquarters from Abuja to Maiduguri so that it could be closer to the action. He has also appointed new military chiefs and commanders and ordered them to draw up plans for defeating Boko Haram within three months.

The decision may help generate increased momentum and resources necessary to eliminate Boko Haram. But it raises serious questions about the feasibility of – within just three months – destroying a six-year insurgency which has tentacles spread way beyond Nigeria and whose command structures may be found in Iraq and Syria. Buhari’s strategic approach has been to isolate the group in the Sambisa forest and use neighbouring countries and the regional Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF) to block escape routes and safe havens and ultimately obliterate Boko Haram. This is by no means as easy as it sounds.

Firstly, the size and terrain of the Sambisa forest is a huge challenge. Secondly, Buhari would need more than three months to rekindle the diminishing morale in the military, which was at its lowest right before he took office. Add to this, the military’s inadequate and inappropriate arms cache and a lack of expertise in fighting in such a diverse and complex terrain against an adversary whose fighters live in caves and makeshift tunnels. Thirdly, Buhari’s plan does not depend entirely on what the Nigerian military can do, but also on the skills and commitment of the forces of neighbouring countries. Fourthly, it is not clear if the approved 8 700 troops of the MNJTF is the right capacity given that previous discussions had considered between 7 500 and 10 500. The MNJTF is also designed as a traditional peacekeeping force, which, from experiences in Somalia and Mali, has not proven to be a successful counter-terrorism tool. Finally, although Buhari has pledged US$100 million, long-term funding for the MNJTF remains a vexing issue, causing several deployment delays.

Despite these challenges, there is every reason for Buhari to celebrate his 100 days at the helm of Aso Rock. The military has rescued the majority of the women and girls that Amnesty International estimated had been kidnapped or abducted by Boko Haram. Additional towns and villages have been retaken, including the recent liberation of Gamboru Ngala, a strategic town bordering Cameroon. This is good news, but these recent successes create a false impression that Boko Haram has been incapacitated and is on the verge of defeat. In the past, when Boko Haram appeared frail and defeated, it has always bounced back reenergised and more deadly. Buhari should avoid the same mistakes of the previous administration that issued numerous timelines to defeat Boko Haram but never met any of them. Such unfulfilled promises cost the previous administration dearly.

The litmus test for Buhari’s administration remains the liberation of the 219 Chibok schoolgirls believed to be in Boko Haram’s captivity. In this regard, the president however, seems to be implementing the same strategy as his predecessor, relying heavily on the military. A new approach, which focuses on a criminal justice response, implementing the 2011 Terrorism Prevention Act and establishing special courts or tribunals mandated to investigate and prosecute acts of terror, might help Buhari in his quest to ultimately defeat Boko Haram.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

05.Sep.2015

Hits: 1131

Write comment (0 Comments)

On 5 September 2015, Muhammadu Buhari will mark the first 100 days of his presidency. As expectations are high, particularly regarding his strategy and actions against Boko Haram, these first 100 days are a useful indicator of what is to come. As Michael Watkins puts it in the Harvard Business Review, ‘what new leaders do in their early days has a disproportionate impact on all that follows’. While this is not his first time at Nigeria’s helm, this former major general faces far different challenges than during his first tenure as military head of state from 1983 to 1985.

Nigerians supposedly elected Buhari to reinstate the country’s honour or ‘manifest destiny’, which has suffered under steady state decay caused by spiralling corruption, a deteriorating economy and persistent insecurity from the Boko Haram crisis in the north of the country. The latter may have played a critical role in Buhari’s election. Thanks to the Islamist sect’s campaign of violence, which reached its peak last year accounting for more than 400 attacks and over 9 000 deaths, support for the previous administration dwindled rapidly.

For many Nigerians, the intensity of Boko Haram attacks demonstrated the inability of the previous administration under Goodluck Jonathan to deal with the crisis. The perceived ineptitude of his government was best illustrated when Boko Haram carried out the mass kidnapping of nearly 300 school girls at Chibok, Borno State, in April 2014, attracting global condemnation. The global social media campaign of #BringBackOurGirls, which mobilised some of the most powerful voices on earth, was perceived almost as an opposition group. 

Boko Haram has continued to evolve both structurally and tactically. In March this year, it became the first group in sub-Saharan Africa to pledge allegiance to the Islamic State (IS), signalling a shift in authority from its notorious leader, Abubakar Shekau, to the supreme command of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of IS. This strategic association is meant to enable Boko Haram, which now goes by a new name, the Islamic State Province in West Africa, to benefit from the expansive resources of IS, potentially guaranteeing its long-term sustainability. It’s a union that does not augur well for the fight against Boko Haram because, in theory, it means that defeating the group also requires dismantling the Islamic State. 

Since Buhari’s inauguration on 29 May, Boko Haram has intensified its attacks in Nigeria in a bid to intimidate the new president and force his hand. According to data compiled by the ISS on reported major terrorist incidents in Africa, Boko Haram has carried out more than 200 attacks as at 31 August, claiming over 5 000 lives in the four Lake Chad Basin countries – Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad and Niger.

Despite the expansion of the group’s attacks to the three other countries, Nigeria continues to be the principal target. Of the 200 attacks this year, 141 (70%) have occurred in Nigeria, which accounts for 4 233 deaths (85%) of total deaths recorded so far. The deadliest attack was in January when Boko Haram militants invaded Baga, a town in Borno State, where they massacred 2 000 people. Meanwhile, 31 attacks have been recorded in Cameroon with 296 deaths, 16 in Chad with 189 deaths, and 12 in Niger with 160 deaths.

From January to May, before Buhari took office, Boko Haram carried out 115 attacks in all the four countries – a monthly average of 23 attacks. Under Buhari, 86 attacks occurred in three months – a monthly average of 27 attacks. Approximately 3 466 deaths were recorded between January and May, averaging 693 deaths per month. In Nigeria alone, 60 attacks accounting for 1 145 deaths have occurred under Buhari, reaching their peak in July, which accounted for 30 or about half of all attacks in Nigeria between June and August, with 647 or 57% of total Boko Haram-related deaths in the same period in Nigeria.

A major shift in Boko Haram’s tactics during the past 100 days is the increased use of suicide attacks, especially involving young teenage girls. Only 19 suicide attacks took place in the five months before Buhari took power, but at least 33 have occurred in the past three months, accounting for 55% of all attacks carried out during that period. Boko Haram has used suicide attacks not only to reach difficult targets but also to inflict mass casualties. The new administration has rightly made the issue a top priority. Buhari has responded with military, diplomatic, social and economic measures. In a diplomatic offensive, the Boko Haram crisis featured prominently in the president’s first foreign state visits to Niger, Chad, United States, Cameroon, Benin and the G7, where he sought to consolidate support and harness resources to combat the Islamist sect.

To win heart and minds, the president has also made plans to attract pro-poor development initiatives in the north and diversify the Nigerian economy – to eliminate the reliance on the oil industry and put new focus on agriculture with a view to create youth employment. He is also promoting efforts to de-link Boko Haram and its activities from Islam, by claiming that the Islamist sect is a fraud and that neither the group nor its activities has anything to do with religion. To streamline and sharpen the focus on the military, one of Buhari’s first policy decisions was to transfer the Joint Military Command headquarters from Abuja to Maiduguri so that it could be closer to the action. He has also appointed new military chiefs and commanders and ordered them to draw up plans for defeating Boko Haram within three months.

The decision may help generate increased momentum and resources necessary to eliminate Boko Haram. But it raises serious questions about the feasibility of – within just three months – destroying a six-year insurgency which has tentacles spread way beyond Nigeria and whose command structures may be found in Iraq and Syria. Buhari’s strategic approach has been to isolate the group in the Sambisa forest and use neighbouring countries and the regional Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF) to block escape routes and safe havens and ultimately obliterate Boko Haram. This is by no means as easy as it sounds.

Firstly, the size and terrain of the Sambisa forest is a huge challenge. Secondly, Buhari would need more than three months to rekindle the diminishing morale in the military, which was at its lowest right before he took office. Add to this, the military’s inadequate and inappropriate arms cache and a lack of expertise in fighting in such a diverse and complex terrain against an adversary whose fighters live in caves and makeshift tunnels. Thirdly, Buhari’s plan does not depend entirely on what the Nigerian military can do, but also on the skills and commitment of the forces of neighbouring countries. Fourthly, it is not clear if the approved 8 700 troops of the MNJTF is the right capacity given that previous discussions had considered between 7 500 and 10 500. The MNJTF is also designed as a traditional peacekeeping force, which, from experiences in Somalia and Mali, has not proven to be a successful counter-terrorism tool. Finally, although Buhari has pledged US$100 million, long-term funding for the MNJTF remains a vexing issue, causing several deployment delays.

Despite these challenges, there is every reason for Buhari to celebrate his 100 days at the helm of Aso Rock. The military has rescued the majority of the women and girls that Amnesty International estimated had been kidnapped or abducted by Boko Haram. Additional towns and villages have been retaken, including the recent liberation of Gamboru Ngala, a strategic town bordering Cameroon. This is good news, but these recent successes create a false impression that Boko Haram has been incapacitated and is on the verge of defeat. In the past, when Boko Haram appeared frail and defeated, it has always bounced back reenergised and more deadly. Buhari should avoid the same mistakes of the previous administration that issued numerous timelines to defeat Boko Haram but never met any of them. Such unfulfilled promises cost the previous administration dearly.

The litmus test for Buhari’s administration remains the liberation of the 219 Chibok schoolgirls believed to be in Boko Haram’s captivity. In this regard, the president however, seems to be implementing the same strategy as his predecessor, relying heavily on the military. A new approach, which focuses on a criminal justice response, implementing the 2011 Terrorism Prevention Act and establishing special courts or tribunals mandated to investigate and prosecute acts of terror, might help Buhari in his quest to ultimately defeat Boko Haram.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

05.Sep.2015

Hits: 1321

Write comment (0 Comments)

On 5 September 2015, Muhammadu Buhari will mark the first 100 days of his presidency. As expectations are high, particularly regarding his strategy and actions against Boko Haram, these first 100 days are a useful indicator of what is to come. As Michael Watkins puts it in the Harvard Business Review, ‘what new leaders do in their early days has a disproportionate impact on all that follows’. While this is not his first time at Nigeria’s helm, this former major general faces far different challenges than during his first tenure as military head of state from 1983 to 1985.

Nigerians supposedly elected Buhari to reinstate the country’s honour or ‘manifest destiny’, which has suffered under steady state decay caused by spiralling corruption, a deteriorating economy and persistent insecurity from the Boko Haram crisis in the north of the country. The latter may have played a critical role in Buhari’s election. Thanks to the Islamist sect’s campaign of violence, which reached its peak last year accounting for more than 400 attacks and over 9 000 deaths, support for the previous administration dwindled rapidly.

For many Nigerians, the intensity of Boko Haram attacks demonstrated the inability of the previous administration under Goodluck Jonathan to deal with the crisis. The perceived ineptitude of his government was best illustrated when Boko Haram carried out the mass kidnapping of nearly 300 school girls at Chibok, Borno State, in April 2014, attracting global condemnation. The global social media campaign of #BringBackOurGirls, which mobilised some of the most powerful voices on earth, was perceived almost as an opposition group. 

Boko Haram has continued to evolve both structurally and tactically. In March this year, it became the first group in sub-Saharan Africa to pledge allegiance to the Islamic State (IS), signalling a shift in authority from its notorious leader, Abubakar Shekau, to the supreme command of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of IS. This strategic association is meant to enable Boko Haram, which now goes by a new name, the Islamic State Province in West Africa, to benefit from the expansive resources of IS, potentially guaranteeing its long-term sustainability. It’s a union that does not augur well for the fight against Boko Haram because, in theory, it means that defeating the group also requires dismantling the Islamic State. 

Since Buhari’s inauguration on 29 May, Boko Haram has intensified its attacks in Nigeria in a bid to intimidate the new president and force his hand. According to data compiled by the ISS on reported major terrorist incidents in Africa, Boko Haram has carried out more than 200 attacks as at 31 August, claiming over 5 000 lives in the four Lake Chad Basin countries – Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad and Niger.

Despite the expansion of the group’s attacks to the three other countries, Nigeria continues to be the principal target. Of the 200 attacks this year, 141 (70%) have occurred in Nigeria, which accounts for 4 233 deaths (85%) of total deaths recorded so far. The deadliest attack was in January when Boko Haram militants invaded Baga, a town in Borno State, where they massacred 2 000 people. Meanwhile, 31 attacks have been recorded in Cameroon with 296 deaths, 16 in Chad with 189 deaths, and 12 in Niger with 160 deaths.

From January to May, before Buhari took office, Boko Haram carried out 115 attacks in all the four countries – a monthly average of 23 attacks. Under Buhari, 86 attacks occurred in three months – a monthly average of 27 attacks. Approximately 3 466 deaths were recorded between January and May, averaging 693 deaths per month. In Nigeria alone, 60 attacks accounting for 1 145 deaths have occurred under Buhari, reaching their peak in July, which accounted for 30 or about half of all attacks in Nigeria between June and August, with 647 or 57% of total Boko Haram-related deaths in the same period in Nigeria.

A major shift in Boko Haram’s tactics during the past 100 days is the increased use of suicide attacks, especially involving young teenage girls. Only 19 suicide attacks took place in the five months before Buhari took power, but at least 33 have occurred in the past three months, accounting for 55% of all attacks carried out during that period. Boko Haram has used suicide attacks not only to reach difficult targets but also to inflict mass casualties. The new administration has rightly made the issue a top priority. Buhari has responded with military, diplomatic, social and economic measures. In a diplomatic offensive, the Boko Haram crisis featured prominently in the president’s first foreign state visits to Niger, Chad, United States, Cameroon, Benin and the G7, where he sought to consolidate support and harness resources to combat the Islamist sect.

To win heart and minds, the president has also made plans to attract pro-poor development initiatives in the north and diversify the Nigerian economy – to eliminate the reliance on the oil industry and put new focus on agriculture with a view to create youth employment. He is also promoting efforts to de-link Boko Haram and its activities from Islam, by claiming that the Islamist sect is a fraud and that neither the group nor its activities has anything to do with religion. To streamline and sharpen the focus on the military, one of Buhari’s first policy decisions was to transfer the Joint Military Command headquarters from Abuja to Maiduguri so that it could be closer to the action. He has also appointed new military chiefs and commanders and ordered them to draw up plans for defeating Boko Haram within three months.

The decision may help generate increased momentum and resources necessary to eliminate Boko Haram. But it raises serious questions about the feasibility of – within just three months – destroying a six-year insurgency which has tentacles spread way beyond Nigeria and whose command structures may be found in Iraq and Syria. Buhari’s strategic approach has been to isolate the group in the Sambisa forest and use neighbouring countries and the regional Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF) to block escape routes and safe havens and ultimately obliterate Boko Haram. This is by no means as easy as it sounds.

Firstly, the size and terrain of the Sambisa forest is a huge challenge. Secondly, Buhari would need more than three months to rekindle the diminishing morale in the military, which was at its lowest right before he took office. Add to this, the military’s inadequate and inappropriate arms cache and a lack of expertise in fighting in such a diverse and complex terrain against an adversary whose fighters live in caves and makeshift tunnels. Thirdly, Buhari’s plan does not depend entirely on what the Nigerian military can do, but also on the skills and commitment of the forces of neighbouring countries. Fourthly, it is not clear if the approved 8 700 troops of the MNJTF is the right capacity given that previous discussions had considered between 7 500 and 10 500. The MNJTF is also designed as a traditional peacekeeping force, which, from experiences in Somalia and Mali, has not proven to be a successful counter-terrorism tool. Finally, although Buhari has pledged US$100 million, long-term funding for the MNJTF remains a vexing issue, causing several deployment delays.

Despite these challenges, there is every reason for Buhari to celebrate his 100 days at the helm of Aso Rock. The military has rescued the majority of the women and girls that Amnesty International estimated had been kidnapped or abducted by Boko Haram. Additional towns and villages have been retaken, including the recent liberation of Gamboru Ngala, a strategic town bordering Cameroon. This is good news, but these recent successes create a false impression that Boko Haram has been incapacitated and is on the verge of defeat. In the past, when Boko Haram appeared frail and defeated, it has always bounced back reenergised and more deadly. Buhari should avoid the same mistakes of the previous administration that issued numerous timelines to defeat Boko Haram but never met any of them. Such unfulfilled promises cost the previous administration dearly.

The litmus test for Buhari’s administration remains the liberation of the 219 Chibok schoolgirls believed to be in Boko Haram’s captivity. In this regard, the president however, seems to be implementing the same strategy as his predecessor, relying heavily on the military. A new approach, which focuses on a criminal justice response, implementing the 2011 Terrorism Prevention Act and establishing special courts or tribunals mandated to investigate and prosecute acts of terror, might help Buhari in his quest to ultimately defeat Boko Haram.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

05.Sep.2015

Hits: 1534

Write comment (0 Comments)

Early in August 2015, the President of Chad, Idriss Deby, announced the death of Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau and a possible change in the militant group’s leadership. A purported picture of Shekau’s corpse was circulated in the media, but the Nigerian military neither denied nor confirmed the story. That was not the first announcement of its kind. Army officers in Cameroon and Nigeria had made similar claims about Shekau in the past. But a few days after Deby’s pronouncements, in an audio recording, Shekau thanked Allah for still being alive and promised to continue his orgy of violence. It looks as if, like Saddam Hussein, Shekau has seven lives.

The Nigerian government and its regional allies would welcome the incapacitation of Shekau who was relatively unknown until he assumed the leadership of the Islamist group in July 2009. His rise to power produced one of the most brutal and deadly forms of terror ever witnessed in Africa. Before Shekau took over, the sect was largely involved in ‘hit and run’ tactics like throwing petrol bombs into police stations and attacking police checkpoints.Under Shekau, Boko Haram transformed into a formidable terror group with a well organised propaganda machinery, networks across the region, and consolidated financial resources and weaponry. In six years, Shekau turned a group of ragtag ‘shoeless’ civilians into a radical entity capable of seizing territories, operating rocket-propelled grenades, taking hostages and hitting back at the armies of Nigeria and other states in the region. Ineffective government responses to Boko Haram, fuelled by corruption and a lack of attention from neighbouring countries contributed to the group’s reign of terror under Shekau. 

Reports of his death have been received with scepticism for several reasons. Firstly, in his announcement, Deby failed to specify who had killed Shekau or how the leadership changes came about. Secondly, the long absence of what had become Shekau’s regular video appearances – which fuelled speculations that he was dead – may be linked to the group’s pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State (IS) in March. In doing so, Shekau sought to yield leadership and control of Boko Haram to the global terrorist network. Thirdly, the Nigerian government and its military leadership want to avoid repeating past embarrassments by rushing to pronounce on his death. Lastly, it is not certain that Shekau’s death or a change in Boko Haram’s leadership will mean an end to the violence.

Empirical evidence demonstrates that removing leaders can weaken non-state armed groups, but it can also lead to the proliferation of independent units that are even more dangerous than the main body. Shekau’s death could also trigger feelings of revenge that unite Boko Haram members as happened with al-Qaeda after the demise of Osama Bin Laden. Boko Haram remains extremely violent and active, but since February the tide has started to turn. The sect has been defeated in some areas; territories have been regained and the group has been dispersed and is now largely confined to the Sambisa Forest in northeast Nigeria. It has also resorted to attacking soft targets rather than confronting the military. Although Boko Haram remains a serious threat after recent attacks in Cameroon, Chad and Nigeria, the scale of its activities does not resemble that experienced in 2013 and 2014 when swathes of territories across northeast Nigeria were seized and controlled. Even the so-called allegiance with IS does not appear to be working in its favour. The combined bombardments by armed forces from Cameroon, Chad, Niger and Nigeria flushed out the sect, and it may well be that Shekau pledged support to IS as a survival strategy in response to the intense military pressure on Boko Haram.

The success of Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari’s campaign against Boko Haram will be a key indicator of his performance during his first 100 days in office. Eradicating the group was one of his election promises, and Buhari has undertaken a number of reforms to improve Nigeria’s counter-terrorism strategy. He relocated the army command centre to Maiduguri (the birth place of Boko Haram and the epicentre of the crisis), brought about key changes in the military hierarchy, and instructed security forces to destroy Boko Haram within 90 days. This is an ambitious timeframe but displays Nigerian authorities’ resolve to end the reign of terror. Regional efforts to set up a Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF) of 8 700 troops from Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon, Niger and Benin present an opportunity for an effective offensive against Boko Haram. Headquartered in N’Djamena in Chad and under Nigeria’s command, the MNJTF will complete the operation launched in February and enable a regional response to terrorism.

This is welcome, but other measures are also needed. Rumours about Shekau’s death could deal a blow to the morale of the militant group and give armed forces fighting Boko Haram a confidence boost, but it may not diminish Boko Haram’s effectiveness as a terror group. Achieving that requires a coherent and comprehensive approach by all stakeholders and security agencies, along with better laws and intelligence, well-equipped and trained armed forces, and unwavering political commitment. Border control needs to be more effective, and the flow of funds and weapons to Boko Haram must be stopped. A multi-pronged approach is needed and Nigeria must display leadership in this regard.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

03.Sep.2015

Hits: 1973

Write comment (0 Comments)

Early in August 2015, the President of Chad, Idriss Deby, announced the death of Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau and a possible change in the militant group’s leadership. A purported picture of Shekau’s corpse was circulated in the media, but the Nigerian military neither denied nor confirmed the story. That was not the first announcement of its kind. Army officers in Cameroon and Nigeria had made similar claims about Shekau in the past. But a few days after Deby’s pronouncements, in an audio recording, Shekau thanked Allah for still being alive and promised to continue his orgy of violence. It looks as if, like Saddam Hussein, Shekau has seven lives.

The Nigerian government and its regional allies would welcome the incapacitation of Shekau who was relatively unknown until he assumed the leadership of the Islamist group in July 2009. His rise to power produced one of the most brutal and deadly forms of terror ever witnessed in Africa. Before Shekau took over, the sect was largely involved in ‘hit and run’ tactics like throwing petrol bombs into police stations and attacking police checkpoints.Under Shekau, Boko Haram transformed into a formidable terror group with a well organised propaganda machinery, networks across the region, and consolidated financial resources and weaponry. In six years, Shekau turned a group of ragtag ‘shoeless’ civilians into a radical entity capable of seizing territories, operating rocket-propelled grenades, taking hostages and hitting back at the armies of Nigeria and other states in the region. Ineffective government responses to Boko Haram, fuelled by corruption and a lack of attention from neighbouring countries contributed to the group’s reign of terror under Shekau. 

Reports of his death have been received with scepticism for several reasons. Firstly, in his announcement, Deby failed to specify who had killed Shekau or how the leadership changes came about. Secondly, the long absence of what had become Shekau’s regular video appearances – which fuelled speculations that he was dead – may be linked to the group’s pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State (IS) in March. In doing so, Shekau sought to yield leadership and control of Boko Haram to the global terrorist network. Thirdly, the Nigerian government and its military leadership want to avoid repeating past embarrassments by rushing to pronounce on his death. Lastly, it is not certain that Shekau’s death or a change in Boko Haram’s leadership will mean an end to the violence.

Empirical evidence demonstrates that removing leaders can weaken non-state armed groups, but it can also lead to the proliferation of independent units that are even more dangerous than the main body. Shekau’s death could also trigger feelings of revenge that unite Boko Haram members as happened with al-Qaeda after the demise of Osama Bin Laden. Boko Haram remains extremely violent and active, but since February the tide has started to turn. The sect has been defeated in some areas; territories have been regained and the group has been dispersed and is now largely confined to the Sambisa Forest in northeast Nigeria. It has also resorted to attacking soft targets rather than confronting the military. Although Boko Haram remains a serious threat after recent attacks in Cameroon, Chad and Nigeria, the scale of its activities does not resemble that experienced in 2013 and 2014 when swathes of territories across northeast Nigeria were seized and controlled. Even the so-called allegiance with IS does not appear to be working in its favour. The combined bombardments by armed forces from Cameroon, Chad, Niger and Nigeria flushed out the sect, and it may well be that Shekau pledged support to IS as a survival strategy in response to the intense military pressure on Boko Haram.

The success of Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari’s campaign against Boko Haram will be a key indicator of his performance during his first 100 days in office. Eradicating the group was one of his election promises, and Buhari has undertaken a number of reforms to improve Nigeria’s counter-terrorism strategy. He relocated the army command centre to Maiduguri (the birth place of Boko Haram and the epicentre of the crisis), brought about key changes in the military hierarchy, and instructed security forces to destroy Boko Haram within 90 days. This is an ambitious timeframe but displays Nigerian authorities’ resolve to end the reign of terror. Regional efforts to set up a Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF) of 8 700 troops from Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon, Niger and Benin present an opportunity for an effective offensive against Boko Haram. Headquartered in N’Djamena in Chad and under Nigeria’s command, the MNJTF will complete the operation launched in February and enable a regional response to terrorism.

This is welcome, but other measures are also needed. Rumours about Shekau’s death could deal a blow to the morale of the militant group and give armed forces fighting Boko Haram a confidence boost, but it may not diminish Boko Haram’s effectiveness as a terror group. Achieving that requires a coherent and comprehensive approach by all stakeholders and security agencies, along with better laws and intelligence, well-equipped and trained armed forces, and unwavering political commitment. Border control needs to be more effective, and the flow of funds and weapons to Boko Haram must be stopped. A multi-pronged approach is needed and Nigeria must display leadership in this regard.

Details

Ngwa Bertrand

03.Sep.2015

Hits: 1790

Write comment (0 Comments)