Boko Haram's kidnapped girls: Nigeria's side of the story

The Chibok girls were abducted in a state the size of Ireland that has 30,000 schools. Those basic logistics are not so easy to surmount.

|
Afolabi Sotunde/Reuters/File
A protester addresses the 'Bring Back Our Girls' protest group as they march to the presidential villa to deliver a protest letter to Nigeria's President Goodluck Jonathan in Abuja, calling for the release of the Nigerian schoolgirls in Chibok who were kidnapped by Islamist militant group Boko Haram, May 22, 2014.

A version of this post originally appeared on Africa in Transition. The views expressed are the author's own. 

Nigerian president Goodluck Jonathan and his administration have been subject to withering criticism at home and abroad over the government’s response to the Boko Haram kidnapping of some three hundred schoolgirls from Chibok.

There are ongoing demonstrations in Nigeria by women, united across ethnic and religious boundaries, calling for greater government engagement in finding and liberating them.

Abroad, the episode has highlighted Nigeria’s governance challenges, including corruption and the apparent near-collapse of its military. 

Amb. Olusegun Akinsanya, office director of the Institute for Security Studies in Addis Ababa, a former senior Nigerian diplomat, a businessman, and an academic, has written a thoughtful analysis of the Chibok kidnapping and why it has been so hard for the Nigerian government to overcome Boko Haram.

Though titled “The Chibok Girls—Nigeria’s Side of the Story,” the piece is not a whitewash of the government’s “slow and inadequate” response to the crisis.

But he does highlight some of the practical difficulties the government faces. He points out that Borno state is about the size of Ireland. There are over 30,000 schools in the state. The infrastructure is woefully underdeveloped. These factors limit, he suggests, what the army and government can do.

Amb. Akinsanya maintains that, in fact, the government has done much to recover the girls, but it has failed to adequately communicate its actions to the public.

He also looks at the deeper causes of Boko Haram: economic underdevelopment in the north, youth unemployment, climate change (including the drying-up of Lake Chad).

He notes the impact of the upcoming February 2015 national elections as well. Without developing the theme, he suggests that those elections “could serve to appease the political situation,” which seems counterintuitive given the bloodshed following the elections of 2011.

In his analysis of Boko Haram, I would have liked to see a discussion of the end of power alternation between north and south, the role of corruption, and his thoughts on the causes of the military’s collapse. He observed that “orthodox Muslims” do not approve of Boko Haram’s methods. Very true. But much of the traditional Islamic leadership in the north appears to be discredited on the “street.”

Perhaps in subsequent articles Amb. Akinsanya will be able to address some of these issues.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Boko Haram's kidnapped girls: Nigeria's side of the story
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/Africa-Monitor/2014/0624/Boko-Haram-s-kidnapped-girls-Nigeria-s-side-of-the-story
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe