US Aid or US Conspiracy? A Chronology of Nigeria’s Tumultuous Path to Destabilization – By Dr Umar Osabo

 

“The increasing militarization of U.S. assistance to Nigeria has also raised concerns about the long-term sustainability of peace in the country. While security measures can provide short-term relief, they do not address the structural issues that lead to conflict in the first place. In this context, some argue that U.S. aid may be inadvertently contributing to the instability it seeks to alleviate”

PEGASUS REPORTERS, LAGOS | FEBRUARY 18, 2025

*Introduction

Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country, has long struggled with political instability, economic challenges, and severe insecurity. For decades, its government has faced mounting difficulties in addressing systemic issues like corruption, widespread poverty, and weak governance, often compounded by extremist groups. Among the key challenges has been the rise of violent non-state actors such as Boko Haram, the Fulani militia, and the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).

The United States, a key international ally, has played a significant role in Nigeria’s modern history, offering foreign aid and various forms of assistance aimed at fostering peace and stability. However, this assistance, particularly from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), has become a topic of increasing debate.

While USAID has positioned itself as an agent of progress and humanitarian relief, critics argue that its operations may have indirectly contributed to the destabilization of Nigeria, providing a fertile ground for the rise of extremism. These concerns are not without merit, especially considering how the dynamics of foreign intervention and assistance intertwine with local political, social, and economic factors. This article aims to explore how U.S. aid, intended to uplift Nigeria and enhance development, may have inadvertently played a role in its destabilization, contributing to the growing influence of violent groups. By tracing Nigeria’s turbulent path from the rise of terrorism to contemporary conflicts, we will delve into the complex relationship between foreign aid and internal violence.

*The Emergence of Terrorism and Violent Non-State Actors in Nigeria

Boko Haram is at the forefront of Nigeria’s Struggles. Boko Haram, one of Nigeria’s most notorious terrorist groups, was founded in 2002 by Mohammed Yusuf. Operating primarily in the northeastern region, Boko Haram emerged from the confluence of factors such as poverty, government neglect, lack of educational opportunities, and religious extremism. The group’s main objective, as articulated by its leadership, was to create an Islamic state governed by Sharia law. However, over time, it grew increasingly violent, engaging in bombings, assassinations, kidnappings, and attacks on civilians and military targets.

Boko Haram’s first major act of violence occurred in December 2003 when the group attacked a police station in Gombe. However, it was in 2009, following a bloody uprising in the northeastern town of Maiduguri, that the group truly gained national and international attention. The Nigerian government responded with a heavy-handed military crackdown, which led to the killing of Mohammed Yusuf, the group’s leader, by Nigerian police. After his death, Boko Haram was taken over by Abubakar Shekau, who intensified the group’s violent campaign, leading to widespread devastation in the northeast and beyond.

One of the most shocking events that brought Boko Haram into global focus was the abduction of over 200 schoolgirls from Chibok, Borno State, in April 2014. The international outcry that followed, particularly the BringBackOurGirls campaign, led to the involvement of foreign governments and non-governmental organizations, including the United States, in efforts to rescue the abducted girls. While the Chibok incident was one of the most publicized events, it was by no means the only atrocity committed by the group. Boko Haram continued its insurgency, causing the deaths of tens of thousands and displacing millions of people.

While Boko Haram is widely recognized as a terrorist organization, its rise is deeply rooted in the socio-political context of northern Nigeria, where years of neglect, a lack of infrastructure, and an entrenched cycle of poverty laid the foundation for extremism. In this environment, external actors like the United States, through USAID and other agencies, became partners in addressing developmental deficits and players whose influence some argue has exacerbated the situation.

*Fulani Militia and the Escalating Violence in the Middle Belt

Alongside Boko Haram, another major security threat has emerged from the Middle Belt, an area straddling Nigeria’s central region. Here, ethnic violence and conflicts between farmers and herders have escalated in recent years, fueled by land disputes and competition for resources. The Fulani militia, often linked to the larger Fulani ethnic group that traditionally practices cattle herding, has increasingly resorted to violent tactics. These militia groups carry out attacks on farming communities, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of people and the displacement of many more.

The conflict between Fulani herders and local farming communities has led to an upsurge in ethnic and religious tensions, as farmers often belong to different ethnic and religious groups than the herders. The government’s inability to adequately address the violence has left these regions vulnerable to further instability. Additionally, the presence of Boko Haram and other insurgent groups in the northeastern region has complicated the situation, with some believing that these groups have formed alliances with Fulani militias or exploited the chaos to expand their influence.

*The Rise of IPOB and the Call for Secession

In the southeastern part of Nigeria, the agitation for Biafra’s secession from the Nigerian Federation has been an ongoing issue since the Nigerian Civil War (1967-1970). The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), led by Nnamdi Kanu, has emerged as the most vocal and organized pro-Biafra movement in recent years. IPOB’s advocacy for an independent Biafran state has been met with stiff opposition from the Nigerian government, which considers IPOB a terrorist organization.

While the IPOB movement draws inspiration from the failed Biafran secession of the 1960s, its motivations are also influenced by the perceived marginalization of the Igbo people and other southeastern ethnic groups. The economic and political exclusion of the region from national decision-making processes, as well as the unresolved grievances from the civil war, continue to drive calls for self-determination. The Nigerian government’s use of military force to suppress IPOB protests and activities has led to further violence, with many accusing the government of human rights abuses against members of the movement.

The connection between external aid and IPOB’s rise, particularly USAID’s involvement in the region, remains a topic of debate. Critics argue that the influx of foreign aid may have inadvertently empowered groups like IPOB by providing resources for organization and mobilization. Others suggest that the lack of targeted development assistance in the southeastern region has contributed to the perceived neglect that fuels secessionist sentiments.

*The Role of U.S. Aid in Nigeria’s Struggles

The United States, through USAID, has played a prominent role in providing aid to Nigeria. The agency’s work in the country has focused on a variety of issues, including health care, education, governance, and economic development. Much of USAID’s programming is designed to foster long-term stability by addressing root causes of conflict and extremism. For example, USAID has funded initiatives aimed at improving agricultural productivity, promoting human rights, strengthening governance, and building the capacity of local civil society organizations.

In the realm of counterterrorism, USAID has provided support for programs that aim to reduce radicalization and provide alternatives to joining terrorist groups like Boko Haram. However, the effectiveness of these programs has been called into question. Critics argue that while USAID’s intentions are undoubtedly humanitarian, its projects may have been co-opted or manipulated by local actors for political purposes, inadvertently enabling insurgent movements to gain further momentum.

One of the key criticisms of U.S. aid in Nigeria is the perception that it has sometimes prioritized political or strategic goals over the real needs of Nigerian citizens. For example, the U.S. government has occasionally focused its efforts on counterterrorism measures rather than addressing underlying socio-economic issues. In some cases, the resources provided to Nigeria have been channelled into military and security programs rather than developmental aid which might reduce the appeal of groups like Boko Haram and IPOB.

*USAID and Counterterrorism: Unintended Consequences?

While USAID’s counterterrorism programs are intended to mitigate violence and prevent the spread of extremist ideologies, some critics argue that they may have had unintended consequences. By focusing on military assistance and security initiatives, U.S. aid has often strengthened the Nigerian military, which has been accused of human rights violations in its fight against Boko Haram and other insurgent groups. This has led to a distrust of the government and its forces, further alienating local communities and fueling insurgent recruiting efforts.

Moreover, the focus on security over development may have inadvertently worsened the economic conditions that fuel radicalization. Many regions of Nigeria that are under siege by insurgents suffer from extreme poverty, lack of basic infrastructure, and limited educational opportunities. USAID’s development programs, while significant, have often been spread thin across various sectors and regions, with limited impact on alleviating the deep-rooted grievances that drive groups like Boko Haram and IPOB.

The increasing militarization of U.S. assistance to Nigeria has also raised concerns about the long-term sustainability of peace in the country. While security measures can provide short-term relief, they do not address the structural issues that lead to conflict in the first place. In this context, some argue that U.S. aid may be inadvertently contributing to the instability it seeks to alleviate.

*The Larger Geopolitical Context: The U.S. and Nigeria’s Strategic Importance

The geopolitical significance of Nigeria cannot be overstated. As Africa’s largest economy and a key player in regional stability, Nigeria is of great strategic interest to the United States. The U.S. has long viewed Nigeria as a critical partner in counterterrorism efforts in West Africa, particularly in combating Boko Haram and other extremist groups in the Sahel region. As a result, U.S. foreign policy towards Nigeria has often prioritized security concerns over other issues.

In addition to counterterrorism cooperation, Nigeria’s vast oil reserves make it a key player in global energy markets. The U.S. has sought to maintain a positive relationship with Nigeria to secure its energy interests and ensure access to Nigerian oil. This has led to a complex balancing act for the U.S., as it navigates between supporting the Nigerian government in its fight against insurgents and ensuring that its support does not exacerbate existing conflicts or human rights abuses.

*Conclusion: The Paradox of U.S. Aid in Nigeria

The relationship between U.S. aid and Nigeria’s path to destabilization is a paradox. While the United States has provided significant support to Nigeria in areas such as counterterrorism, economic development, and humanitarian relief, the unintended consequences of this aid may have contributed to the very instability it sought to resolve. The rise of groups like Boko Haram, the ongoing violence between Fulani herders and farmers, and the secessionist ambitions of IPOB illustrate the complexity of the situation. As Nigeria continues to grapple with these challenges, it is essential for both the Nigerian government and its international partners, including the United States, to reassess the effectiveness and long-term impact of foreign assistance. Ultimately, the path to stability in Nigeria will require a comprehensive approach that addresses both the symptoms and root causes of conflict while fostering genuine development and peacebuilding.

Follow Dr Umar Osabo on PegasusReporters

************************************

PLACE YOUR ADVERT HERE: CALL THE EDITOR ON +234-815-444-5334

******************************************

Tell us you were here by replying to this story in the comment section below. You can share it, too.

Pegasus Reporters: making news that reaches your audience | Advertise with us! | Join our Readers’ Channel on Telegram (+234 815 444 5334) Follow us on Twitter11@pegasusreporter | We are on Facebook; The PegasusReporters | Chat with us on WhatsApp (+234 815 444 5334) | Contact the Editor, Mallam Oyakhamoh Y. Carl-Abu’Bakar with your adverts and articles via editor@pegasusreporters.com

Read Our Preceding Story: Science & Tech: Bill Gates reveals the only 3 professions that will survive Ai

EXPLORE PEGASUS REPORTERS