Nigeria Times

By Kelly Agwambi

Amnesty International has been in the news in Nigeria for various reasons. It has, in most cases, advocated for the preservation of human rights and values. While this is commendable, however, there is more to the activities of Amnesty International in Nigeria that most political commentators and members of the unsuspecting general public seem to be missing.

Beyond the veiled global outlook, there is an agenda that is propelled by monetary gains, especially with the fact that the highest payers for services are the various terrorist organizations around the world. And I am not surprised that the Boko Haram conflict in Nigeria has provided that platform for Amnesty International to make a kill. And they somewhat succeeded.

Taking a cursory look at the activities of Amnesty International in Nigeria, one would be confronted with anomalies that defeat common sense, and the sincerity of heart and purpose because Amnesty International is a business organization solely for the aim of profit-making.

This fact has been corroborated in several countries that led to its expulsion for acts that undermine National security. Nigeria is also a victim of this international conspiracy that aided the festering of the Boko Haram/ISWAP imbroglio despite the proactive steps taken by the Nigerian government and the Nigerian Military.

The Nigerian Military is the worse hit by activities of Amnesty International in Nigeria. I recall that there were instances where some bold Nigerians took to the street demanding for the expulsion of Amnesty International from Nigeria for acts that undermine our national security.

In the eyes of Amnesty International, the Nigerian Military is committing human rights violations in the persecution of the war against terrorism, while the Boko Haram/ISWAP group is fighting a just cause with the killing of women and children, as well as elderly ones whose crimes are the fact that they are from North-East Nigeria.

Back to the crux of the issue, it is indeed a statement of the fact that Amnesty International does not mean good for Nigeria. Their sympathy has always been with the Boko Haram group and other militant groups such as the Indigenous People of Biafra and the Islamic Movement in Nigeria that have perpetrated crimes against humanity, that have consistently violated all known tenets of human rights. The list is endless.

As typical in other climes experiencing terrorism, there is always an intellectual wing that assists these groups in recruitments and other sundry issues. And this intellectual task is usually contracted to NGOs such as Amnesty International.

The case of Nigeria provides that vivid example. Have we ever wondered why when the Nigerian Military is making gains in the Boko Haram war, Amnesty International will come up with half-truths accusing the Nigerian Military of human rights violations against the Boko Haram group. As funny as this might sound, this is the starkness of the reality on the ground.

In some quarters, it has been stated that Amnesty International is the mouthpiece of Boko Haram. Some scholars have likened their activities to that of intellectual terrorism that provides them with these services in return for a fee. It didn’t end there as they have also been acting in the interest of other militant organizations whose stock in trade is to cause sorrow and anguish to unarmed women and children.

I can’t but agree because there are abounding pieces of evidence that support this position. Amnesty International would cry wolf and accuse the Nigerian government of gross human rights violations. However, when the Boko Haram group kills innocent women and children, it maintains an unholy silence.

Amnesty International also gives tactic support to some International NGOs operating in North-East Nigeria aiding and abetting the activities of the Boko Haram group. This much they have been consistent with over the years in return for pecuniary benefits. I dare to say that not until the generality of Nigerians realize that Amnesty International is out to destabilize Nigeria, we are in for a big mess.

They not only act as the mouthpiece of Boko Haram, but they also carry out recruitment by proxy on behalf of the group. I recall that this much was stated at a forum where multiple pieces of evidence were presented with regards to the fact that Amnesty International is involved in activities that bolsters the operations of the Boko Haram group.

This is nothing but intellectual terrorism, and I dare say that its part of the overall strategy of Amnesty International to ensure that it continues to remain in business, but at the detriment of innocent lives that have been lost over the years.

The worrisome aspect is that Amnesty International is not remorseful about their actions which are hinged on deceit and the propagation of falsehood at the behest of their paymasters that have vowed to destabilize and disintegrate Nigeria. It consequently behooves on Nigerians to wake up to this realization and demand for an end to the nefarious activities of Amnesty International in Nigeria.

For as long as Nigerians continue to remain silent in the face of the atrocities of Amnesty International in Nigeria, we should be ready to live with the consequences for as long as possible. In all of these, we must realize one thing, which is the fact that those against the interest of Nigeria would not relent until they achieve their aim.

They would continue to push and push till Nigerian reaches the brink. I am not convinced that our offence is beyond that fact that the country is blessed with a political leadership that is committed to putting Nigeria on the path of sustainable growth and development.

Students of international relations and politics would agree with me that Nigeria has been under sustained attack led by Amnesty International and their affiliates. But there is a limit to which the resilience can last, which makes it crucial that citizens are enlightened to understand what their country is going through and how they should not be brainwashed into becoming facilitators for the destruction of their country with a concept that is locked on destroying the “military and the country is gone” principle.

Today, we seem to be comfortable with the fact that Amnesty International is undermining our national security. But what tomorrow holds for the future of Nigeria is bleak. That is if we still have a country to call our own. We must open our history books and take a critical look at countries that failed to act as at when necessary to curtail the nefarious activities of these NGOs parading themselves as proponents of the people.

It must be stated that it is a collective endeavor that requires commitment from the government and the people to address this anomaly. Nigerians must henceforth question Amnesty International in their elements. Nigerians must see to that fact that their strategy to destroy Nigeria by constantly attacking our Armed Forces is thwarted. If we do not do this, I wonder who would do it for us.

We must not allow Amnesty International to destroy our country as this generation of Nigerians and indeed the future generations have nowhere else to call home. The ball is in our court. We must act wisely and timely as time is of the essence. This is my opinion.

Agwabi is a public affairs analyst based in Abuja.

By Richard Murphy

There is something obsessive about the way and manner Amnesty International carries on with its mandate as an international NGO in Nigeria. The organization carries on with this “our way or the highway” approach to issues, oftentimes dictating terms for the Nigerian government or agencies with the tone of an imprimatur – the kind of attitude that should come from a supra-national body like the United Nations because even regional supra-national organizations like the Economic Community of West African State (ECOWAS) has not dared behave toward Nigeria in such manner.

While Amnesty International operates in other countries of the world, the kind of power it arrogates to itself in Nigeria is only found in Syria, where the White Helmets, possibly the NGO’s proxy there is practically coordinating the war aimed at toppling that country’s President Bashar al-Assad. A war so misguided that only a few people can still recall what the killing is about while terrorists like the al-Nusra Front has been canonized into sainthood irrespective of the atrocities they have committed or the fact that they are not really disparate from the Islamic State.

The White Helmets’ shady dealing in Syria is provocative to the point where it actively shares intelligence with terrorists, conveniently labelled as “rebels” to confer some degree of legitimacy on the crime they are committing. White Helmets’ operatives have helped to frame attacks targeting al-Nusra terrorists as crime against humanity, in instances when they cannot find actual attacks, they stage some with the help of movie producers and directors. Also, it is not unusual to find the group using its identity to provide cover for the terrorists. It is a situation that leaves a sour taste in the mouth but when big money speaks truth is the first casualty.

Perhaps because it has not found a credible local franchise to play that role, Amnesty International is Nigeria’s own White Helmets. It is the group that helps manage terrorists propaganda by crafting pseudo-reports that absolves terrorists of wrongdoing while criminalizing government troops that are fighting to end a decade-old campaign of terror that has left too many families bereaved and the economy of an entire region shattered in addition to an entire generation that has been lost to the wanton killing that is Boko Haram’s legacy perpetuated and defended by Amnesty International.

Although it is marketed as an international brand, the NGO uses a strategy of engaging indigenous mid-level to management staff supervised by an expat overlord, often a westerner, a situation that has deepened a culture of racism, abuse and harassment. The overlords, often working from the comfort of the organization’s headquarters in London, have the singular role of pressuring staffers into delivering damning reports against the country of operation, irrespective of the reality on ground. The incitement to commit crimes against their country is worded to the staffers in NGO-speak, which they have been indoctrinated to understand, fear and obey; an email with terms like ‘benchmarking, KPI, RoI, appraisal etc’ have meanings other than what people understand them to mean on the streets – they are the trigger words that remind Amnesty International’s Nigerian staffers of how easily they could lose the rare privilege of earning in foreign currency in an economy where such income source is considered as divine gift.
Such toxic work environment has been known in the past to trigger suicides among the NGO’s employees, something that triggered international concern in the recent past. While several top bosses at the charity have been thrown under the bus to create an impression that the problem of toxic work culture has been addressed, the practice of pushing staffers to author misleading reports has not stopped to Amnesty International’s workers remain miserable because they recall at all times the damaging lies they have to tell to earn those dollars. This has not been helped by the knowledge that they are helping terrorists like Boko Haram evade justice.

The only other thing that send Amnesty International staffers into depression worse than its toxic work culture is its finances which is a sure recipe for a moral dilemma in terms of its sourcing and spending; the NGO’s money is mostly sourced from questionable (almost criminal) corporate organizations and spent on terrorists and criminals.

For instance, in 2016 by its own financial report, the Amnesty International earned £68,407,000 from various sources. Pro-imperialist and war dependent groups like Ford Foundation pitched in £468,000 while an “Anonymous Foundation” threw in £667,000 in addition to 236 “anonymous donors” that contributed £725,000. Hiding within the ranks of these “anonymous” donors are the arms dealers, crisis entrepreneurs and mercenaries that have been contracted to overthrow governments in emerging countries or create instability that will have the same result. These kinds of donors are the ones that write the scripts that Amnesty International play out in Nigeria, often it is about emasculating the Nigerian military and build capacity for groups like Boko Haram, Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and Islamic Movement in Nigeria (IMN).

Other sub-heads of income sources should give the media and some ‘activists’ sleepless nights. Are they aware that Amnesty International is a profit-making body and that whatever actions it is taking in Nigeria are geared towards increasing donations, improve marketability and boost other revenue sources? Yes. It received £62,751,000 from its offices across 30, mostly western, countries; although it marked these funds as “unrestricted” but who says the donors would not show up with a shopping list of the kind of destruction that should be caused in Nigeria? Even more interesting is an entry like “Activities for generating funds” under which it made £102,000 as Gain on Acquisition of AI Nigeria. It also made some money from Sales of Campaign Materials. Discerning minds should be asking how this transactional disposition tallies with the marketed image of human rights campaigner.

Amnesty International’s 2017 is even more worrisome than its revenue source, irrespective of the fact that it found euphemisms for the nefarious ends to which its financial resources were committed. Its report showed that it spent €290,000,000 in that year half of it, 49.50% expended on Human rights research, advocacy, campaigning, raising awareness and education. In layman’s terms these expressions are respectively: money paid to fake witnesses to procure fraudulent interviews, money spent on recruiting for terrorist groups, money spent on harassing legitimate governments, money given to terrorists to fund their indoctrination and radicalization programmes. Almost a quarter, 23.76%, of its 2017 expenditure went into “Building our support base” and that is another euphemism for “money spent on expanding our terror networks”.

Interestingly, Amnesty International has not stopped “building this support base” or “raising awareness” or providing “education”. It recently ramped up its recruitment drive in Nigeria, asking people to “Join for free”, something that is guaranteed to catch attention and mostly likely encourage action in a country where the ravages of COVID-19 has ravaged the economy and left citizens in want. Those who sign up for this free membership must be warry. This round of recruitment is not likely to be rosy – unlike when the NGO recruited voice actors to pose as anonymous interviewees for its reports meant to discredit Nigeria’s war on terrorism.

This time around, anyone with as many as 100 brain cells should ask question as to why Amnesty International is on a volunteer drive at about the same time that Boko Haram has lost hundreds of its fighters to the ongoing military operation to stamp it out of Nigeria. Anyone that enlists into Amnesty International’s offer of free membership may just find themselves at the wrong end of the gun barrel, especially now that more details are known about the group. The warning is to the Nigerian youth: joining Amnesty International is the same as joining Boko Haram and the consequences will always be dire.

Something else that must be said is the need for the federal government to shake off its complacency where Amnesty International is concerned. The military cannot be given marching orders to wipe out Boko Haram and the government will do nothing when that assignment is being hampered by the well-funded interference from Amnesty International, which now looks set to attempt recruiting new members for Boko Haram. Just at the youth were warned above that this round of enlisting into Amnesty International will land them in the laps of Boko Haram, the government is similarly warned a successful recruitment of terrorists for Boko Haram by Amnesty International will alter the equation as those to be onboarded in this exercise would be educated, savvy and problematic to deal with. The best case scenario is to stop our youth from joining Amnesty International/Boko Haram for free.

Murphy is a security expert and wrote this piece from Calabr.

By Best Agbese

The history of the Boko Haram crisis in Nigeria dates back to 2009 when the sect began its violent campaign against Nigeria. However, before the 2009 Boko Haram uprising, Nigeria was bedevilled by ethno-religious conflicts with devastating human and material losses. But the Boko Haram uprising of July 2009 was significant that it did not only set a precedent but also reinforced the attempts by conservative Islamic elements at imposing a variant of Islamic religious ideology on a secular state.

According to Abimbola Adesoji in her work “The Boko Haram Uprising and Islamic Revivalism in Nigeria” she posited that the Boko Haram uprising was not the first forceful attempt to impose a religious ideology on a secular Nigerian society. However, like the first significant attempt and subsequent small-scale attempts, it widened the scope of the efforts at Islamic revivalism. More significantly, despite the brutal suppression of previous attempts, the gallantry of the Boko Haram soldiers, the spread and swiftness of its military organization and the belief of its leadership – and perhaps its membership that it could successfully engage a modern state in a military duel all show an extraordinary commitment to the cause.

I agree with her position that the way and manner the Boko Haram sect has been able to engage a modern state in a military duel successfully shows not only an extraordinary commitment, but it further reinforces the conspiracy theory that states that some external forces might be the brain behind the resurgence of the activities of Boko Haram over the years.

Having stated the above, it is pertinent to do a critical analysis of the Boko Haram crisis and how the Nigerian Military has fared. In doing that, emphasis must be placed on certain variables such as quality of weaponry, professionalism, political will and effective military coordination.

Starting with the quality of weaponry of the Nigerian troops, there is no doubt that the Muhammadu Buhari administration has made a substantial investment in the procurement of arms and ammunition for the Nigerian Armed Forces since 2015. This commitment potentially eliminated that public concern about the lack of modern weapons in the prosecution of the Boko Haram war. But it wasn’t enough.

The issue of professionalism was also a factor that hindered the progress in the war against terrorism in Nigeria. This is so because, before the coming of the Muhammadu Buhari administration, we were regaled with tales on how soldiers would embark on tactical retreat and scamper for safety when they come face to face with the Boko Haram fighters. I dare say that the morale of the troops was at the lowest ebb and this translated into the inability of the troops to lead a sustained offensive against the Boko Haram terrorist group.

The political leadership at that time didn’t wield enough political willpower in ensuring the defeat of the Boko Haram sect. In some quarters, it was said that the lackadaisical attitude by the political leaders was deliberate. Be that as it was then, the Boko Haram group grew in strength and numbers and they laid siege to the country.

The issue of effective military coordination is one that if taken seriously, Nigeria would win the war against terrorism in no distant time. A good example can be seen in the recent relocation of the Chief of Army Staff to the theatre of operations, where several accounts state that he has been coordinating the counter-terrorism operations.

It must be stated that the last few months have witnessed a sustained military onslaught against the Boko Haram terrorist group and this is could be attributed to the presence of the Chief of Army Staff in the trenches with the troops, as well as the cooperation of other services like the Air Force, the DSS and the Nigerian police.

This is indeed commendable and reinforces the views of renowned peace and conflict studies expert, Prof Isaac Olawale Albert, who asserted that these collaborative efforts are often complex, requiring integration of the full range of multiple missions and occasionally crossing the boundaries of civilian, intelligence, homeland security, and military agencies.

In these situations, cross-functional and cross-agency teams jointly apply centralized control and decentralized execution to coordinate adaptable and agile efforts against security threats posed by Boko Haram. He further asserted that centralized control and decentralized execution exerts control through clear guidance and accountability. It also increases execution ability and agility by delegating authority to those with the precise knowledge and capability to execute.

So, therefore, inter agency collaboration in the war against terrorism in Nigeria has created and leveraged on superior knowledge in the battle space, it has also enabled the decision of superiority, and reduced operational risk, while increasing the pace, coherence, and effectiveness of military operations.

The Chief of Army Staff is singled for commendation in this regard because he has demonstrated that effective military coordination is essential for the final victory over the Boko Haram/ISWAP group.

Another example of effective military coordination is the decision by Chad and Niger to expel Boko Haram/ISWAP terrorist from the fringes of their countries. The implication of the above is that there would be no hiding place for training and regrouping.

This was made possible from the renewed commitment from the Multinational Joint Task Force at the instance of the Chief of Army Staff. Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai, who has in recent times taken the bull by the horns by ensuring that there is effective military coordination in the theatre of operations in North-East Nigeria.

According to Ifure Ataifure, genuine leadership inspires confidence, trust and innate followership. It provides direction and sets the agenda, as well as defines timeframes of accomplishing identified targets. Nigerians often say an ideal leader is one who markets himself as servant-leader to the people. But it takes courage to resist the temptation of bossiness to condescend to such levels.

Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai in all gradations embodies the strength of leadership courage. Leading an Army to victories against terrorism and insurgencies in Nigeria is a grueling task. It demands much more than kitting troops; restocking armories’ and ferrying soldiers to the frontline for battles.

It requires courage to enforce Rules of Engagement (ROE), discipline, and implement indiscriminate redeployment of troops and even the courage to take the war to the doorsteps of the enemies. Gen. Buratai’s courage in leadership knows when to condescend to the level of his troops; knows when the spirit of his troops is dampened and what tonic he can administer to animate it.

This explains why he has made it a conscious policy to persistently visit troops at the frontline, spend nights and devote a good time to them in the open fields; hook them unto interpersonal interactions to understand their feelings and insight into their peculiar problems.

It is thus my considered opinion that the significant difference experienced so far in the war against terrorism in the North-East of Nigeria points in the direction of effective military control as led by the Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai.

Agbese is a PhD student working on Oil and War in the United Kingdom.