In the wake of the attacks targeting the Charlie Hebdo offices and a kosher deli in Paris, another attack with a death toll of approximately 2,000 individuals almost went unnoticed. The mass killings were carried out over a number of days in the town of Baga, in Northern Nigeria. The full extent of the murderous rampage is still unknown.
These attacks elicited a more muted reaction. This fact is worrying on two counts. It unmasks the relativistic attitude adopted in the face of human tragedy and it highlights a certain indifference towards the tragedies unfolding in a number of regions which may be geographically and culturally remote from our reality.
It also reveals a certain naivety when it comes to some serious security problems.
The attacks that took place in Paris are the result of a mounting problem with home-grown terrorism nurtured in disaffected and disengaged segments of communities.
Those that happened in Nigeria are a result of an expansionary form of terrorism which has become more prevalent in different parts of the globe.
IS (formerly known as ISIS) is currently in control of territories in Iraq and Syria while al-Shabab and al-Qaeda are also trying to consolidate their power and establish a functioning governance system in Somalia and Yemen respectively.
Boko Haram is another armed group which is in control of about 51,800 kilometres square of Nigerian territory home to a population of 1.7 million. These groups are trying to expand their territory further using violent means.
Boko Haram translates as “Western education is forbidden”.
Churches have been attacked and burnt to the ground; Christian girls have been kidnapped from their schools and their families and mosques which are deemed to preach under undue western influence have also been attacked. A total of 300,000 people are displaced.
Much of the problem lies in Nigeria’s domestic situation. The predominantly Christian southern and central regions of Nigeria are home to the country’s natural resources; the predominantly Muslim north is plagued by widespread poverty and inadequate resources. This situation has served to instil a siege mentality within certain groups.
Moreover, the Nigerian government is riddled with inefficiency and corruption and has been unable to counter the rise of extremism. In 2012, in an apparent admission of failure, President Goodluck Jonathan stated that Boko Haram sympathisers had infiltrated the three branches of government: the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.
In addition, the President has admitted that extremists have also managed to penetrate the armed forces, the police and security agencies. Fifteen senior military officers have been found guilty of providing both information and ammunition to Boko Haram.
The apparatus of State is in a very weak position. The lack of trust among the population is palpable and, thus, the gathering of intelligence is rendered even more difficult.
When dealing with Boko Haram, many take an ‘out of sight, out of mind’ approach
The situation is likely to spill over in neighbouring countries.
There are an estimated 300 Boko Haram training camps in the region and the Cameroonian army has recently dismantled one such camp in its territory.
Cameroon is the main country which is at risk of infiltration. Boko Haram may find some fertile grounds for recruitment. There is suspicion of collusion between some sections of the Cameroonian government and Boko Haram. The group is also suspected to have a presence in the Central African Republic and Niger. Boko Haram is also attempting to foster closer links with other groups operating in the region.
Another great threat to international security comes from the methods used by Boko Haram to elicit funds.
A bulk of its funds is received through al-Qaeda and other Islamist groups. It supplements this income with its own illicit activities: plundering and looting, ransom money and extortion and incomes from the black market, drugs smuggling and arms trafficking.
In considering terrorist activities, we must also acknowledge the role of certain states. Their underhanded methods and numerous vested interests have largely shielded them from international scrutiny. This trend must be reversed, not least by independent institutions and the media.
Qatar has been involved in supporting various Islamist militant groups in northern Nigeria, southern Mauritania and central Mali. This support comes in the form of direct financing, weapons and ideological training. US officials now believe that Qatar has replaced Saudi Arabia as the largest source of private donations to terrorist and extremist groups. The role of Qatar and Saudi Arabia cannot be understated.
Nigeria cannot singlehandedly deal with the threat of extremism. The institutions of government are far too weak; they are riddled with corruption and are therefore inept before this threat. The most basic type of help should come in the form of institution building and the strengthening of intelligence gathering capacity.
The porous and unsecure Nigerian borders with Cameroon and the Central African Republic are exacerbating the problem while the vast inaccessible territories are equally challenging for intelligence officials and the military.
Cooperation among regional actors is thus equally vital.
Action cannot be delayed and indifference may prove to be dangerous. At present, Boko Haram lacks a central structure and a hierarchical configuration. Moreover, the exact number of militants and the arms they have at their disposal is still uncertain. The group is thus still fluid and, in many respects, still weak.
Failure to take any concrete action may strengthen the group. This would worsen the unfolding humanitarian tragedy and cause a complete security meltdown in the region and beyond.
When dealing with Boko Haram, many take an ‘out of sight, out of mind’ approach. When such an approach was adopted with regard to other similar groups, the result proved to be devastating.
andre.deb@gmail.com