The Quandary of the Boko Haram Kidnappings

Four years ago, when a large group of Chibok schoolgirls were kidnapped, Nigeria’s recurring kidnapping issue was brought into the international spotlight by a United States-based organization called “Bring Back Our Girls” (Matfess). The organization shed light on the actions of Boko Haram, a radical Islamic terrorist group that is responsible for much bloodshed in Nigeria (CNN). The international community and Nigerian parents alike were outraged with the lack of action taken by the Nigerian government, sparking the international campaign to rescue the girls. Four years later, most of the the Chibok girls are still missing, and Boko Haram has struck once again with another high-profile abduction of schoolgirls.

Founded in 2002, Boko Haram was originally created by Mohammed Yusuf with the intentions of resisting Western education (BBC). Sixteen years later, the terrorist group has expanded their vision to demand the practice of Sharia law, or the religious laws for living written in the Quran, in all of Nigeria. Though no written tenet of this religious text forbids the education of women (Johnson, Sergie), Boko Haram has radicalized many laws that do limit a woman’s power and translated it into revoking their rights to education. These religious claims are what have provoked the kidnappings of schoolgirls in Nigeria, and Nigerian government continues to negotiate with Boko Haram for the safe return of the girls (Adebayo).

However, many parents of the kidnapped girls are unsatisfied with the way the government has handled the kidnappings, and are particularly angry with President Muhammadu Buhari. The parents claim that the government has lied several times about the progress of the rescues, even going as far to telling the parents that successful negotiations have been made only for it to be revealed that no children would be returning (Searcey). Furthermore, the government has had a severe lack of information for the worried parents.

The government, however, seems to be caught in a dilemma not brought upon by themselves. While the “Bring Back Our Girls” campaign reached a large audience, garnering the support of celebrities and politicians alike, this did not create a completely positive impact. Though they certainly pressured the government to work more quickly on the negotiations, these new pressures also gave the upper hand to Boko Haram (Matfess). Knowing how important having the girls back is for the government allows for the terrorists to make bigger requests in return for the girls, knowing the government has to accept or otherwise face international critics for not rescuing the girls. With this quandary in mind, we must consider that the government may have previously kept the kidnappings quiet not only for their own benefit, but to better negotiate with the terrorists.

Furthermore, the American organizations that were working to rescue the girls reportedly used several survivors as “media props” (Matfess). All rescued Chibok girls were promised an opportunity for education in the USA, but the Nigerian government revoked the guardianship role a U.S. human rights lawyer had previously assumed, citing that “the plan is that the girls remain in the U.S. to pursue further education… in a safe and nurturing environment and away from the public glare, which was supposed to be the plan in the first place” (Matfess). In this light, the American organizations appear to be in the wrong, while the Nigerian government has their citizens’ best interest in mind.

[March 22 Update] Though the more recent kidnapping was recognized in several journal articles, there was no major social media campaign nor widespread recognition. The abducted children were reportedly returned to their hometown on the 21st of March following negotiations with the government in which the government did not exchange any other conditions (Busari). This is quite different from the Chibok abduction, where most girls still have not returned.

Though it is implausible for campaigns for freedom to stop on account of complicating negotiations with violent groups, it should be noted that such calls for freedom may do more harm than heal. As we look to Nigeria’s future, we can only hope the government makes the right decisions for their people’s safety.

Bibliography

Adebayo, Bukola. “Nigerian Army Vows to Recapture Boko Haram Commander Freed in Swap for 82 Chibok Girls.” CNN, Cable News Network, 8 Mar. 2018, www.cnn.com/2018/03/08/africa/nigeria-recapture-boko-haram-intl/index.html.

“Boko Haram Fast Facts.” CNN, Cable News Network, 1 Mar. 2018, www.cnn.com/2014/06/09/world/boko-haram-fast-facts/index.html.

“Boko Haram Militants Kill Aid Workers at Military Base in Nigeria.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 2 Mar. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/03/02/world/africa/boko-haram-nigeria.html.

“Islam: Governing Under Sharia.” Council on Foreign Relations, Council on Foreign Relations, www.cfr.org/backgrounder/islam-governing-under-sharia.

Matfess, Hilary. “Three Years Later, A Look at the #BringBackOurGirls Catch-22.” The Daily Beast, The Daily Beast Company, 14 Apr. 2017, www.thedailybeast.com/three-years-later-a-look-at-the-bringbackourgirls-catch-22.

“Return of #Chibok Schoolgirl, Maryam Ali Maiyanga.” Bring Back Our Girls, www.bringbackourgirls.ng/?p=2741.

Searcey, Dionne, and Emmanuel Akinwotu. “With Dozens of Schoolgirls Missing in Nigeria, Angry Parents Demand Answers.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 22 Feb. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/world/africa/schoolgirls-nigeria-boko-haram.html.

“Who Are Nigeria's Boko Haram Islamist Group?” BBC News, BBC, 24 Nov. 2016, www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-13809501.