'Nigeria: the context for violence' (2006-2013)

[AdamG]

Several people have been killed by a bomb blast at a bar near a barracks in Nigeria's capital, Abuja.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12099176

Copied verbatim, blame their web-editor.

JOS, (Nigeria), Dec 25 ((agencies): The death toll from a series of Christmas Eve blasts in central Nigeria has risen to 32, the police commissioner said Saturday, while attributing the explosions to attacks with homemade devices.

police said, with the incident occurring in an area that has seen hundreds killed this year in sectarian clashes.

http://www.thefinancialexpress-bd.co...ate=2010-12-26

BOMB BLAST: Al Jazeera Out to destabilse Nigeria – Presidency.
Headlines Jan 1, 2011
By Kingsley Omonobi

The presidency reacted angrily to a foreign media report that President Goodluck Jonathan has blamed Friday’s bombing at the Mogadishu barracks on the Islamic Sect, Boko Haram saying he couldn’t have said so since security agencies have not pin pointed any group as investigations was still on going.

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2011/01/b...ia-presidency/

See also
http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=1079

[AdamG]

ABUJA, Nigeria – A team of U.N. weapons experts and observers examined a seized Iranian weapons shipment found at Nigeria's biggest port, authorities said Tuesday, a step toward possible new international sanctions against Iran.

Inside 13 cargo containers marked as building materials, inspectors in October found 107 mm artillery rockets, rifle rounds and other arms. Those rockets can accurately hit targets more than 5 miles (8.5 kilometers) away with a 40-foot (12-meter) killing radius. Insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq have used similar rockets against U.S. troops. China, the United States, and Russia manufacture versions of the rocket, as does Iran.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/af_nigeri...50ZWFtZXhhbWlu

LAGOS, Nigeria, Jan. 18 (UPI) -- A trial in Nigeria at the end of the month is expected to expose details of an Iranian arms smuggling operation in Africa run by the Revolutionary Guards' clandestine arm, the al-Quds Force.

An Iranian, Azim Aghajani, identified by Nigerian authorities as a senior officer in the al-Quds Force, faces charges of smuggling 13 shipping containers loaded with weapons and ammunition that were uncovered Oct. 26 at the port of Lagos.

He was charged Nov. 25 along with three Nigerians for importing and attempting to export arms.

A second Iranian sought by the Nigerians, Ali Akbar Tabatabaei, listed as the commander of al-Quds Force operations in Africa, claimed diplomatic immunity when the arms were discovered.

He took refuge in the Nigerian Embassy in Abuja. He was flown to Tehran with Iranian Foreign Minister, Manuchehr Mottaki, who had made an emergency trip to Nigeria in November to soothe the diplomatic standoff triggered by the scandal.

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Sec...#ixzz1BPe5VuiL

[Jedburgh]

ICG, 20 Dec 10: Northern Nigeria: Background to Conflict

Violence in northern Nigeria has flared up periodically over the last 30 years. Mainly in the form of urban riots, it has pitted Muslims against Christians and has seen confrontations between different Islamic sects. Although there have been some successes in conflict management in the last decade, the 2009 and 2010 troubles in Bauchi, Borno and Yobe states involving the radical Boko Haram sect show that violence still may flare up at any moment. If the situation were to deteriorate significantly, especially on Christian-Muslim lines, it could have serious repercussions for national cohesion in the build up to national elections in April 2011. To deal with the risks, community level initiatives need to be reinforced, a more subtle security response should be formulated and the management of public resources must be improved. While some in the West panic at what they see as growing Islamic radicalism in the region, the roots of the problem are more complex and lie in Nigeria’s history and contemporary politics.....

[Bob's World]

Agree that the issues in Nigeria have little to do with ideological radicalization; this is a populace that has been "radicalized" by their situation. The discovery of oil and its effects on the south of the country, and modern ideological salesmen peddling Islamist propaganda are merely working to turn up the heat in this troubled nation. Religion here is geographic and also makes clear breaks on interactions between segments of the larger populace. BL, these people are "radicalized" by their situation, not by their religion.

It's great that USAID wants to help, but such grassroots efforts serve ease our own consciences more than they work to address the problems driving such issues. My concern is the vast amount of oil coming out of Nigeria (I read somewhere that there is the equivalent of an Exxon Valdez oil spill in Nigeria every year due to lax rules (hard to believe that western oil companies would profit at the harm of the environment when rules allow them to...). More importantly the U.S. is like a teenage boy talking to a beautiful girl in such situations. Our judgment becomes impaired, and we do and put up with ridiculous crap that makes our friends shake their heads in wonder.

I suspect we are fearful to press the Nigerian government to make the substantive reforms that could mend the growing rifts in their populace (or address the damage to the global environment) due to a mix of strong lobbying by US Oil companies and concern that China, who is very strong in Africa, will supplant us as the main developer/consumer of this resource (much like we Blue Falconed Great Britain on the Saudi market years ago).

A bilateral US/China approach might be the most effective way to approach this, or a trilat US/EU/China approach. This is about economics and politics; so security constructs such as NATO are really not appropriate to the mission at hand. Unless we continue to ignore the problem and it erupts in a major way, that is.

[davidbfpo]

A short article, which on a quick late read, is both pessimistic and hopeful. Almost sounds like "muddling through" is a colonial legacy that lives on.

Link:http://www.opendemocracy.net/carolin...tip-of-anarchy

[Dayuhan]

I suspect we are fearful to press the Nigerian government to make the substantive reforms that could mend the growing rifts in their populace (or address the damage to the global environment) due to a mix of strong lobbying by US Oil companies and concern that China, who is very strong in Africa, will supplant us as the main developer/consumer of this resource (much like we Blue Falconed Great Britain on the Saudi market years ago).

A bilateral US/China approach might be the most effective way to approach this, or a trilat US/EU/China approach. This is about economics and politics; so security constructs such as NATO are really not appropriate to the mission at hand. Unless we continue to ignore the problem and it erupts in a major way, that is.

The flaw in this reasoning lies in the apparent assumption that the US, or for that matter the EU, China, or any combination of the above, has the capacity to force "substantive reform" on the Nigerian government. I don't see any reason why that should be the case. They are not financially dependent - they will always find someone to buy the oil - and they know very well that no outside party is going to use force to get them to do what they don't want to do. If we try to push for reform they will either make a tepid cosmetic attempt to superficially satisfy us or simply tell us to shove it. If they do, what will we do?

Not intervening in the internal affairs of other nations doesn't necessarily mean that we are ignoring the problem. It can also mean accepting that it's not our problem to solve and that our capacity for positive influence is limited or nonexistent. We are neither the source of nor the solution to every problem in the world, and sometimes we have to let the people sort their issues out on their own. It's not always about us.

It is very likely - I would almost say inevitable - that Nigeria's problems will at some point "erupt in a major way". That's very likely to be a necessary step in Nigeria's political development. It's very likely that Nigeria's government will fall or be overthrown: certainly it deserves to be overthrown. When that happens we can work with pro-democracy forces (if there are any) to a limited extent: if we overdo it we're likely to do more harm than good. I don't think we should try to sustain or support the government, but taking the opposite route and trying to initiate or direct the process of political change can end up turning it into our process instead of theirs. That won't help.

We cannot "fix" Nigeria. Yes, it's a very unstable situation and it's likely to get more so. Yes, that's likely to cause significant disruption in oil markets and could hand us a severe price spike. That would not be in our interests, or China's, or the EUs, but to think that we can protect our interests by circumventing the political process and transforming the Nigerian government without conflict or disorder would be hubris of the highest degree.

[AdamG]

I just stumbled upon this and considering how the Angolan Civil War set the stage for South African involvement in the 80s, thought it'd be of interest -

The fact that as many as 5,000 Nigerian troops fought in Angola around 1976-77 may be the most widely-unknown fact in the annals of Nigeria’s very long history of foreign military operations.

http://beegeagle.wordpress.com/2010/...rst-civil-war/

I read IN SEARCH OF ENEMIES as a kid and the Nigerians were never mentioned in it.

http://www.amazon.com/Search-Enemies.../dp/0393009262

Moderator's Note

This originally appeared in South Africa's COIN War and was moved due to it's potential value in a new thread. Original thread:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=10859&page=3

[davidbfpo]

There are a few threads on Nigeria on other matters, there is not one on its history of military intervention across sub-Sahara, mainly in West Africa and as AdamG id'd today way-back in Angola.

[davidbfpo]

AdamG,

I too was surprised at this discovery and looking at the cited sources I am not totally convinced.

Robert Moss was a skilled Cold War journalist, of decidedly "hard line" views and reliant on sources not normally available, such as intelligence agencies and IMHO the South Africans. There are a couple of strange phrases in his report, for example:

...UNITA claims to have intercepted radio communications in English (the common language between the Nigerians, the Cubans and the MPLA)..

There was no common language, although I understood Spanish and Portuguese are not too apart.

The beegagle story refers to:

..It has now emerged..

Hardly, it refers to a 1977 story by Robert Moss and one solitary photo taken in 1977, which is sourced to un-named 'intelligence sources'. The photo used is actually of Nigerian troops in Somalia, a few years ago.

Without any cited sources Wikipedia's entry on the Nigerian Army refers to:

In December 1983, the new Major General Muhammadu Buhari regime announced that Nigeria could no longer afford an activist anti-colonial role in Africa.

With a few years Nigeria changed that stance, with the large scale ECOWAS intervention(s) and Wikipedia refers to:

Smaller army forces have been previously sent on UN and ECOWAS deployments in the former Yugoslavia, Angola, Rwanda, Somalia, and Sierra Leone.

See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_Army

This later quote almost word for word appears in the US Sate Dept. backgrounder on Nigeria:http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2836.htm

[Bill Moore]

In a foot locker I have a lot of historical resources on Africa, but a quick search of the web indicates that Nigerian support from the MPLA was mostly political. If the West didn't constrain their behavior, they may have provided more.

http://countrystudies.us/nigeria/80.htm

Relations with the Rest of Africa

The prevailing perception in Nigeria's foreign policy was that, as predominant the African leader, it should play a bigbrother role in relations with African states. Nigeria was a founding member of the OAU and often channeled major policy initiatives through that organization. Most of its relations with other African states took place outside the OAU framework but were guided by OAU principles. Nigeria's primary African commitment was to liberate the continent from the last vestiges of colonialism and to eradicate apartheid in South Africa. Promoting liberation had grown from a weak and conservative stance during the 1960s to an increasingly firm push after the civil war. This commitment was pursued most actively after Murtala Muhammad successfully backed the Movimento Popular de Libertao de Angola's ascent to power in Angola in 1975 by providing the swing vote in the OAU decision to recognize the MPLA. Nigeria had played a role in the independence of Zimbabwe and in the late 1980s was active in assisting Nambibia to achieve independence of Namibia. In the latter case, it contributed about US$20 million to assist the South West Africa People's Organization in the 1989 elections and other preparations for Namibian independence. The country also contributed financially to liberation movements in South Africa and to the front line states of Zambia, Tanzania, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe, which were constantly harassed by South Africa. Although Nigeria's armed forces were among the largest in black Africa in the early 1990s, sizable military might has rarely been used in foreign policy.

http://www.mongabay.com/history/ango...an_states.html

Nigeria, which led the OAU in recognizing the MPLA-PT regime in 1975, went on to seek a leadership role in the campaign against South Africa's domination of the region, but Nigeria never forged very close ties with Angola. Nigeria's own economic difficulties of the 1970s and 1980s, its close relations with the West, and other cultural and political differences prevented Luanda and Lagos from forming a strong alliance.

[AdamG]

Not spending alot of time digging into this, but the following was interesting -

(3) Eight Soviet fighters, probably MiG-17s, are reported being assembled in Luanda. These fighters arrived from an unknown source at the end of December. Eight MiGs, type unknown, are expected to be sent to Angola from Nigeria, numerous Cuban pilots arrived during December. The pilots are operating many aircraft now available to the MPLA including a Fokker Friendship F-27. The Cubans will operate the MiGs.

From a report by Henry Kissinger of 13 January 1976 gives an insight into the activities and hostilities in Angola
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/...gleijeses1.pdf

[M-A Lagrange]

Have a look at Angola:Anatomy of an oil state, Tony Hodges, African Issues.
There is at least 3 pages on the problematic of competition between Angola and Nigeria to be Africa biggest oil producer. And why an at war Angola was better than an at peace one for Nigeria.

[Dayuhan]

Have a look at Angola:Anatomy of an oil state, Tony Hodges, African Issues.
There is at least 3 pages on the problematic of competition between Angola and Nigeria to be Africa biggest oil producer. And why an at war Angola was better than an at peace one for Nigeria.

I'm curious... why would it matter who produces more? Certainly there's no shortage of buyers, and there's not exactly a lot of downside price pressure. Geographically Angola is better positioned to ship to India and Asia, Nigeria is well positioned for shipping to Europe and the US. Can't really see how an increase in Angolan production hurts Nigeria, or vice versa.

[Stan]

We use to call the interaction of African political and military elites “casual relationships”, which were relevant to all of Sub-Sahara when it came to interest in natural resources (even if they aren’t yours ). Having personally reported on the blood diamonds and trade for weapons in Angola, I can safely say we are either all walking around with blinders on, or, we are ignoring our “minuscule” role (such as then support to UNITA and wealthy oil multinationals).

Illicit natural resource revenues in the 80s were a good way for the cleptocracies to stay afloat and preclude negotiating loan repayments to the IMF. Ironically, those same resources were also used as collateral in obtaining even more loans. The trouble nowadays is responsiveness to OPEC (controlled “reported” production) to maintain OPECs comfort zone. Angola is simply playing on global oil supply and demand (playing on the fact Nigeria can’t keep up).

[davidbfpo]

I do recall during the Angolan civil war noting that the oilfields in Cabinda were US-owned and operated - cannot recall which company now. The operating company was in effect making a large contribution to the MPLA side; with their Cuban, East German and other allies alongside. Whilst the USA, private parties and notably South Africa were supporting UNITA.

Cabinda is separated from Angola by the DRC, with a spluttering insurgency by FLEC:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_f...ave_of_Cabinda

The oil factor:

Cabinda produces 700,000 barrels (110,000 m3) of crude oil per day. Cabinda Oil is associated with Sonangol, Agip Angola Lda (41%), Chevron (39.2%), Total (10%) and Eni (9.8%).

Link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinda_(province)

[ganulv]

I do recall during the Angolan civil war noting that the oilfields in Cabinda were US-owned and operated - cannot recall which company now.

Chevron, formerly Gulf before the merger of the two companies.

[Misifus]

I do recall during the Angolan civil war noting that the oilfields in Cabinda were US-owned and operated - cannot recall which company now. The operating company was in effect making a large contribution to the MPLA side; with their Cuban, East German and other allies alongside. Whilst the USA, private parties and notably South Africa were supporting UNITA.

Cabinda is separated from Angola by the DRC, with a spluttering insurgency by FLEC:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_f...ave_of_Cabinda

The oil factor:

Link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinda_(province)

The company was owned by Gulf Oil back then. It is now owned by Chevron. I have been there plenty. The official name of the company is Cabinda Gulf Oil Company, Ltd. It is a Bermuda based company owned by Chevron. The company operates on a concession type agreement from the government of Angola, however, the company does not "own" the oil. Yes, back during the civil war the Cuban army protected the camp. An ironic twist of the Cold War. The protection was largely from Cabinda insurgents not UNITA insurgents. Cabinda had its own guerrilla movement so that it could breakaway from Angola. These guerrillas usually resided in one of the two Congos. Culturally Cabinda was not really part of Angola. The Portuguese joined the two administratively as they were pulling out. Angola decided to keep it that way due to the oil. The inhabitants of Cabinda speak as much French as they do Portuguese.

Ronald Reagan considered forcing Gulf to shut down it's operations and leave Cabinda but rethought the situation.

[davidbfpo]

The recent attacks in Nigeria by the Boko Haram group had little coverage here, this is a link to a BBC News interview with a US academic observer:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15620601

Link to a BBC report on the attacks:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15597114

An in depth commentary, especially around the tactics used - the VBIED - is provided in 'The Rising Threat from Nigeria's Boko Haram Militant Group' is republished with permission of STRATFOR:http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20111...111110&utm_ter

One wonders if the group really rely on external training assistance. I have m' doubts.

[KingJaja]

I'm Nigerian, I live in Nigeria and I have watched the Western discourse on Boko Haram and Nigeria with interest. I have a few comments.

Boko Haram is not all about Al Qaeda. There is a historical aspect to Islamic fundamentalism in North-Eastern Nigeria.

About thirty years ago, the Nigerian government dealt with the Maitatsine sect. The insurrection was put down and 4,000 were killed. Maitatsine seem to be the intellectual forebears of the Boko Haram movement. In addition, there has always been a strain of Islam in Nigeria that has not fully accepted the influence of the British and Western Civilisation.

There is also the economic dimension. The rise of Boko Haram strongly correlates with the decline of the booming textile mills of Northern Nigeria. Mass unemployment and low literacy rates lead to a very volatile situation. Pervasive corruption (three governors were accused of stealing $600 million), inflames already angry youth, making them prime targets for recruiting.

This fuels an insurrection against the established order which is seen as corrupt.

Boko Haram's initial targets include the brother of the Shehu of Bornu (one of the most respected traditional rulers) and government officials. Police incompetence and brutality led to an escalation of attacks against security agents (Abuja bomb blasts, Damaturu etc). The attack on Western interests is merely a logical extension of this.

The rank and file of the Nigerian Military is largely drawn from Northern Nigeria. So it is not inconceivable that some members of the Nigerian Military are sympathisers. Bomb-making in Nigeria is not new. As far back as 1986, a prominent Nigerian newspaper editor was assassinated by parcel bomb - the suspects were Nigerian military operatives. General Sanni Abacha went on a large bombing spree in the 1990's. So the source of bombs and bomb making could be closer home than we imagine.

This is a speculation, but it should be considered.

Why would Westerners be targeted? This might have something to do with the cosmic struggle between the good old US of A and Al Qaeda, but it may also have more to do with a common perception (held by both Muslims and Christians alike), that the West is the major force behind Nigeria's venal, corrupt and decadent leaders. The formation of AFRICOM and the Wikileaks revelations of secret visits by top US diplomats to Nigeria's most detested ex-military ruler (Ibrahim Babangida) might have something to do with it.

There is also a possibility that Boko Haram is being manipulated by several powerful elements in Northern Nigeria in order to destabilise the Jonathan administration (Jonathan is a Christian from Southern Nigeria).

The US has the best military technology on offer, but has close to zero understanding of the what is going on in Nigeria. And neither do many arm-chair pundits - take their opinions with a pinch of salt. There is no point creating expectations that you can intervene decisively if you don't understand the first thing about what's going on locally. There are many factors at play, there is a complex web of ethnicity, religion, poverty, government legitimacy, corruption, violence, propaganda and malice at play here. If the US couldn't distinguish between Sunni and Shia, they sure can't distinguish between Hausa-Fulani and Kanuri.

Short story: it's our fight, leave us alone to fight it.

[omarali50]

I agree with Jaja. Leave the Nigerians to manage Nigeria. But as outsiders, we can still find general patterns and make very general predictions. I make some at http://www.brownpundits.com/2011/11/...ia-boko-haram/