On Tuesday, November 8, the US issued a statement confirming its pledge to support fight the rise of terrorism in Nigeria by providing training for the security forces in the US. This action follows the November 5 attacks on multiple targets in the country of Nigeria which resulted in over 100 casualties, including police and civilians. The relationship between the US and Nigeria has been friendly in the security arena ever since Nigeria’s efforts to carry out peacekeeping operations in other African countries. The US has stated that the security forces are to be training in “warfare tactics” which is many speculate will be to address the issue of the fundamentalist Islamic sect called the Boko Haram. The Boko Haram have risen to the number one security threat in Nigeria, surpassing the traditional regional conflicts, and have come to dominate the oil rich Niger delta which has caused the most concern for the government until the audacious and deadly raid attack in 2009 leading the killing of 700 Nigerians. The Government of Nigeria has responded to these series of attack with swift and harsh reprisals which some have suggested has not been as effective as previously due the concerns which have led to the extremist movement to take root in the society. These concerns have evolved over “Anger at years of poor local governance, corruption and endemic poverty” which has found a voice at the mosques (Smith, 2011). The argument now is if the use of the entire fore of the military will be the best course of action, or if it will result in more terrorist attacks as the Boko Haram counter react to the government’s actions against them.
This article is significant because it illustrates two major point in highlighting US pledge of continuing with the “War on Terror” while at the same time discussing the previous rhetoric of the Nigerian government for addressing similar instances of conflict while accessing its successfulness. The US support against this terrorist organization is yet another piece of evidence towards the continuation of the US declared “War on Terror” while maintaining its distance from actual physical involvement as an effort to keep away from another costly and lengthy military involvement such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. The second, and more important point, is that the article point out the pattern of government reaction towards attacks of the state while at the same time illustrating the limited affect on the enemy while creating massive losses amongst the civilian populations either by state or terrorist retribution. This method of all out total military suppression of the enemy is questioned several times throughout the article and the underlining question it presumes is how will military training from the US change the eventual outcome or will it change the tactical strategy implemented by the Nigerian government currently. Ultimately US assistance is a welcome and necessary for the greater effectiveness of the Nigerian security forces to combat the insurgency yet it will not provide the solution to the underlining scar which continues to fester and motivate the Fundamentalist movement, which is the failure of the state to address structural errors in the government and its political system overall.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/08/nigerian-taliban-us-boko-haram
1 comment:
Its good that the U.S. provides support to those other countries in need. The other countries don't have any other outlets for such horrific things that happen in their country. The fact that the U.S. steps up to help with such a problem of terrorism is great because no one should have to live in fear on a day to day basis.
Post a Comment