Connect with us

Terrorism

Boko Haram and Its Current Situation in Nigeria

Published

on

Authors: Farzad Ramezani Bonesh and Chidiebere Favour Nwobodo

Although boko haram and ISIS have been confusingly used interchangeably due to their seemingly common characteristic, which majorly stems on terrorism, this research gives a clear distinction between the duos. Different tactics are being used by these groups ranging from locally made weapons to acquiring sophisticated weapons to carry out their attacks. Understanding the strategic trend of these terrorist groups will aid in the understanding of their operations.

Boko Haram And ISIS: An Overview

Boko haram in Nigeria has not only become synonymous with terrorism but has also become a nightmare in the history of the national security. When one talks about boko haram, one refers to an era of kidnappings, killings, bombings and displacement, which have left many in the dungeon of misery. The Arabic name for boko haram is Jama’atu Ahlissunnah lidda’awati wal Jihad, which means ‘People Committed to the Propagation of the Prophet’s Teachings and Jihad’ (Onuoha, 2011).  The sole aim of the group is the overthrow of the Nigerian state and the implementation of Sharia across the entire country.

On the other hand, ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), according to a BBC report, was originally formed in April 2013 and emerged out of Al Qaeda in Iraq (BBC, 2014 I in Olayinka, 2020). Abu Bakr Baghdadi was the Caliph of this group.

Differences And Similarities Between Boko Haram And Isis In The Year 2019 And 2020

One major difference between these two groups is the fact that these groups are from different parts of the world. Whereas boko haram originated from Nigeria, ISIS emerged out of al-Qaeda in Iraq. Another major difference is in their funding. According to Eme,O.I and Ugwu, C.C(2016), Boko haram in Nigeria generates their funds through bank robbery, and other illegimate transactions. In the cases of ISIS, their most common ways is through the black-market antiquity sale. They also partake in the illegal sale of treasures and artifacts, oil smuggling and trafficking. ISIS has been known to be state-sponsored by some countries.

Based on their similarities in the recent year, this research analytically looks at their mode of operation and attacks. In general, the weapon types common with these terrorist groups are explosives and firearms, while the attack types common to them are armed assault, assassination, and bombing. For example, Guardian newspaper (2019) recorded that “More than 60 mourners leaving a funeral at Maiduguri in north-east Nigeria were killed by the militant group of boko in haram in 2019”. This Day newspaper (2020) recorded on March 31st, “a theatre of death for Nigerian soldiers” as 47 soldiers were killed and 15 others badly injured by boko haram. Similarly, The Guardian (2019) in the rise and fall of the ISIS “caliphate” posits that “Destruction had been a calling card of ISIS’s presence ever since Baghdadi”.

Most Important Changes To Boko Haram In The Past Years

This has to do with the evolution of this group over the years starting from the bringing in of Abubakar Shekau into power as the successor of Mohammed Yusuf (founder), after he died in the Nigerian police detention. This group has survived thanks to its ability to reinvent itself, change tactics and adopt different strategies. Over the years, this group had adopted varying different terror strategies, which include upgrading from locally made weapons to sophisticated weapons, upgrading from bank robbery to kidnapping as their means of funding and so many others.

Current Situation Of Boko Haram In Nigeria

The emergence of Boko Haram; particularly, the adopted mode of prosecuting their objective have posed serious threat to Nigeria and its citizen without excluding foreigners. It must also be noted that Boko Haram’s activities has also led to closure and abandonment of people’s business activities within the affected area.

Currently, the emergence of Boko Haram in Nigeria has negatively affected the relationship between Nigeria and other nations of the world because of bombing couple with kidnapping and hostage taking with or without demand for ransom; particularly of alien.

Conclusively, the current situation of boko haram in Nigeria still poses security threat and economic threat in Nigeria. This research also opines that terrorism has been and is still the watchword of these two groups; therefore, one cannot be mentioned without the other. The changes made so far to boko haram is still a nightmare to both Nigeria citizens and non-citizens. To so many foreign countries, Nigeria is being described as one of the most dangerous places in the world filled with corruption.

Vision

As various economic, social, political, religious factors and environmental challenges were involved in the formation of the Boko Haram extremist group, various factors also have role in its future and the continuation of its power in Africa.

In recent years, Boko Haram has been present in nearly twenty Northern provinces of Nigeria, the Republic of Niger, Chad, Cameroon and Sudan, and has been able to expand its relations with Salafi jihadist groups domestically, regionally and internationally. In addition to working with extremist groups in West Africa, the group is linked to ISIS and its affiliates and allies around the world.

Boko Haram is still financially part of the world’s richest terrorist organization, and could be no less violent and dangerous than ISIS with its main focus is on terrorist attacks on close enemies (Christians and Shiites in Nigeria).

In fact, although the Nigerian government and neighboring countries have been battling the Boko Haram terrorist group in recent years, they have so far failed to completely defeat the group. In the meantime, since the various roots of the formation of Boko Haram have not yet been eradicated in West Africa, we should not wait for the failure of Boko Haram in the short term. In fact, it seems unlikely that governments will be able to take an effective step toward a complete boycott of Boko Haram, and that these areas will continue to be the strongholds of these extremist and fundamentalist groups

Continue Reading
Comments

Terrorism

War Victim Becomes Hope For Pakistan’s Tribal Districts

Published

on

pakistan-terrorism

A 10-Year-old boy Irfan Ullah Jan would walk down the streets of Sadda, Kurram district heading to his school with one simple fantasy: one day he would become something. He aspired to return something back to his loved ones. Sadly, Jan’s fantasy didn’t remain simple as it seemed to be after a deadly bomb blast. But today, he is giving back a lot more to the once war-torn Tribal districts.  

An IED blast ripping through the Awami Bazar, Sadda in Kurram District killed three people on spot, leaving several injured back in July 2011. Among them was Jan, whose legs had to be amputated to rescue his life. It took almost 10 years for him to formulate an organization in the once war-torn Tribal districts of Pakistan called as “FATA Disable Welfare Organization”. Till date, he has enrolled thousands of poor disabled students in private schools.

Furthermore, he rendered social services for disables by forming an organization “Kurram Union of Special Persons”. This union facilitated disabled children to get their early education without any cost. The union after years of hard work has been matured into FDWO – FATA Disable Welfare Organization. The now chairman of FDWO, Irfan Ullah Jan has successfully assisted hundreds of war victims in getting free access to education. FDWO has rehabilitated more than one thousand disabled persons by providing them with artificial limbs. Philanthropist Mr Jan has reintegrated the disabled persons by arranging community activities like Sports galas. Speaking to us on the support he has been receiving, Irfan Ullah Jan says “FDWO receives charity money from public at large. Pakistan Army has been pivotal in facilitating me to inaugurate rehabilitation center for Special Persons along with an imperative support in educating disabled children of the area. I received “President’s Pride of Performance Award” this year for the services FDWO has been providing in the region.”

He expresses thatthe tribal region has seen worst militancy in the past which includes deaths, economic losses and instability. Apart from these challenges, rehabilitating war victims was the biggest challenge for the government of Pakistan and this was the aim behind the foundation of his organization to rehabilitate and bring normalcy in the region.”

The long wave of militancy which effected people economically and socially especially in the tribal districts has now transformed into a wave of rehabilitation. Youth like Irfan Ullah Jan are returning a lot more to the once war-torn Tribal districts.

Continue Reading

Terrorism

With Al Qaeda down but not out, killing Zawahiri is symbolic

Published

on

President Joe Biden was not wrong when he declared that “justice has been served” with the killing of Al Qaeda leader Ayman Zawahiri in a US drone strike.

The problem is that’s only half of the truth; the other half is that Mr. Zawahiri was more a has-been than a power to be reckoned with on the jihadist totem pole. In death, he may have scored his most significant achievement since becoming head of Al Qaeda as the symbol of the failure of decades of war in Afghanistan.

Mr. Zawahiri’s presence in Kabul in a house owned by Sirajuddin Haqqani, Afghanistan’s de  facto deputy head of state, will be touted as evidence that Afghanistan has reverted to being a base for terrorist groups. Mr. Haqqani’s son and son-in-law are believed to have also died in the drone strike.

In addition, the killing will likely become a partisan issue in domestic US politics, with Republicans pointing to Mr. Biden’s bungled withdrawal a year ago of US troops from Afghanistan.

In anticipation of the criticism, Mr. Biden said the killing demonstrated the United States’ post-withdrawal ability to protect Americans without “thousands of boots on the ground.”

Even so, the withdrawal resulted from a war that the United States and its allies could not win and a fundamentally flawed US-Taliban agreement negotiated by the administration of former President Donald J. Trump that helped the Taliban regain power.

Since succeeding Osama bin Laden after the United States killed him in 2011, Mr. Zawahiri, the man who helped shape Al Qaeda from day one, could not garner the stature of the group’s former leader. Nor was he able to impose his will on Al Qaeda franchises in Yemen, Somalia, and elsewhere in Africa.

Researcher Nelly Lahoud argues in a recently published book based on computer files confiscated in the US raid that killed Mr. Bin Laden that Al Qaeda had lost much of its operational capability in the immediate years after the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan.

The Islamic State, the foremost jihadist organization locked into a bitter fight with the Taliban, increasingly overshadowed Al Qaeda, showcasing Mr. Zawahiri’s inability to fill Mr. Bin Laden’s shoes.

In fact, the Islamic State today poses a greater threat to the United States than Al Qaeda. Equally importantly, the Islamic State also constitutes a more significant threat to Central Asian states like Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, as well as Russia and China.

If Mr. Zawahiri’s presence in Kabul raises questions about the Taliban’s willingness and determination to prevent militant groups from operating from its territory, repeated Islamic State attacks on domestic Afghan targets, and the firing of rockets into Tajikistan and Uzbekistan call into question the group’s ability to do so.

To be sure, granting Al Qaeda leaders shelter does not by definition amount to Taliban acquiescence of the group launching attacks from Afghan soil.

The questions are particularly acute given that Mr. Zawahiri was killed days after the Taliban engaged with representatives of 30 countries at a conference in the Uzbek capital of Tashkent in a bid to unfreeze some US$7 billion in Afghan foreign currency reserves.

Days later, Tashkent hosted foreign ministers of the Shanghai Cooperation Council (SCO), who had Afghanistan high on their agenda. The SCO groups India, Russia, China, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan.

The Taliban regime has yet to be officially recognized by any country. Countries across geopolitical divides have insisted that the Taliban first demonstrate their willingness and ability to control all of Afghanistan and curtail militant groups.

The international community also required the Taliban to form an inclusive government and ensure women’s rights. The Taliban have yet to deliver on any of its promises.

Reporting to the United Nations Security Council in January, UN Special Representative for Afghanistan Deborah Lyons noted that “the existence of numerous terrorist groups in Afghanistan remains a broad international and especially regional concern. The desire of the de facto authorities to take on this threat across the board remains to be convincingly demonstrated.”

Ms. Lyons’ remarks have seemingly gone unheeded in Kabul. In response to the Islamic State attacks on Tajikistan, home to Russia’s largest foreign military base, the Taliban are building a watchtower on the two countries’ border with the help of a Tajik group bent on changing the regime in Dushanbe.

Adding insult to injury, graffiti near the tower celebrates Muhammad Sharipov, aka M. Arsalon or Mahdi Arsalon, a Tajik national wanted by authorities for the past eight years on terrorism charges.

During talks last month, Tajik President Emomali Rahmon cautioned his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, against a possible recognition by Moscow of the Taliban regime. Mr. Putin insisted that he would consider Tajik concerns about ethnic minority rights in Afghanistan.

While ethnic minority rights may be a Tajik concern, the opposite may be true for China. China fears that the militant Turkestan Islamic Party (TIP), also known as the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), hardened by the war in Syria, may want to use Afghanistan as a launching pad for attacks in retaliation for China’s brutal crackdown on the Uyghur Turkic Muslim minority in the northwestern province of Xinjiang.

A United Nations Security Council report said last month that the  group had built strongholds in Badakhshan near the Chinese border in northeast Afghanistan, where it had “expanded its area of operations and covertly purchased weapons, with the aim of improving its capabilities for terrorist activities.”

The Taliban suggested that they had moved the estimated 1,000 Uyghur fighters away from the Chinese border to other parts of Afghanistan last October. China has long pressed the Taliban to curtail the group’s activity.

Creating distance between Uyghur militants and the Chinese border may not be good enough. The Islamic State sought to make that clear when it employed an Uyghur as a suicide bomber in an attack last October on a Shiite Muslim mosque in the Afghan city of Kunduz.

The message was: Uyghur militants have alternatives. The Taliban may not be their best bet.

Continue Reading

Terrorism

Afghanistan on the Verge of Religious Terrorism and Sectarian Warfare

Published

on

In Afghanistan, the Taliban’s position towards the Salafists has become punitive and ruthless once again. Albeit followers of numerous religious Sects live in Afghanistan, such as Ismailia, Shia, Jafri, Ahle-Hadith/Wahhabis, and Sunni-Hanafi. The position of the Taliban militants concerning the Sunni-Hanafi religion is soft and the level of danger to its followers is very low and even zero, compared to followers of other religions. Nevertheless, there are three religious sects, whose followers are utmost risk, and are under the greatest threat and danger.

These three religious groups are particularly tarnished in Afghanistan, since they are assumed to be the elements of foreign intelligence organizations and are used for a common intelligence goal.     The first category is the Shias, whose lives are currently under threat in the country, and there are always deadly attacks on their religious ceremonies. Even the Taliban militants intervene in their rites, while disrupting their religious rituals and beating them up. Meantime, attacks against the Shia religions by the Daesh group or using the name of this group have been intensified, while slaying them, are tactics of foreign intelligence especially CIA.

Steering an intelligence war tactics in the name of religion between Daesh/Salafi and Shia religions in Afghanistan, like Mosul and other parts of Iraq, which will in turn strain the relations between the new administration of the Taliban of Afghanistan and Iran, is part of the CIA’s policy. Because it will   force Iran to use the Fatimun proxy group to defend the right of the Shia religion’s followers in Afghanistan. Thus, the practice of anti-Taliban armed forces and fronts against the Taliban to indirectly control the Taliban in Afghanistan is a special part of the US foreign policy. Nonetheless, if the US wants to directly control the Taliban, then they are supposed to intervene militarily, or apply tremendous external pressure on the Taliban, to get them abide by the US policy.

However, after August 15, the United States used some methods to directly control the Taliban, but the result was deleterious. Because the relationship between America and the Taliban has strained and the United States almost lost control over, this organized and faith-based armed militia. Consequently, the United States, with the help of the Daesh group or using its name, incited the followers of the Shiite religion against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

As they want to create such anti-Taliban fronts against the Taliban in Afghanistan letting other countries support them financially, providing them with training centers and sanctuaries, and on the international level, they will be defamed, while benefiting America indirectly.  The United States will keep the Taliban amused by claiming to defend the Taliban against those groups, and in some cases, the United States will conduct airstrikes to defend the Taliban against the anti-Taliban fronts. Actually, the US tries to wage a religious and ethnic war in Afghanistan, by means of the Daesh group to multiply the heat of the civil war in Afghanistan.

Moreover, the first juncture of the civil war, is the use of the Daesh group against the Shia religions in Afghanistan, and for the defense of Shia sects, Iran will deploy its proxy-armed groups, namely Fatimiun fighters.  Keeping the ethnic war upward in Afghanistan, the main victims are supposedly Tajiks, Hazaras and other non-Pashtun tribes, but the likely victims of this war will be Pashtuns as well.

The second sect’s follower whose lives are under severe threat and danger, are Ahle-Hadith/ Wahhabis/Salafis. The Wahhabi religion has many followers in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Malaysia, and Indonesia. In Afghanistan, Wahhabis are called by the Taliban as Khariji and the pedigrees of ISIS. Henceforth, its followers have been either killed, missing or persecuted.

Wahhabis, whose financial supporters are said to be the Gulf countries, customarily some of their citizens are active members of Daesh.

The third sect of which followers’ lives are currently under threat in Afghanistan are the Ahle-tasawuf/ Sufis, whose followers were targeted and their worship places have been blown up recently.

Subsequently, a new phase of intelligence warfare between the US’ CIA and Iran’s VAJA, thru their proxies will begin, and Afghanistan will turn into a hotbed of state sponsored Jihadi terrorism, which will in turn extensively divide Afghanistan into numerous fronts. Moreover, the contemporary values such as democracy, peace, political stability, republicanism and social-market economy will remain vague and unachievable.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Trending