Boko haram

CONTENTS 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 2 2. Research problem/focus ............................................................................................................... 3 3. Theory and Research Questions ................................................................................................... 3 3.1. Armed conflict as a socio-political phenomenon .................................................................. 4 3.2. Horizontal inequalities theory ............................................................................................... 5 3.3. Greed and grievances theory ................................................................................................. 7 4. Methodology ................................................................................................................................ 8 5. Analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 9 5.1. General Background .............................................................................................................. 9 5.2. Accessing the Insurgency through Greed and Grievance Theory Lense ............................. 11 5.2.1 Financial aspect .............................................................................................................. 11 5.2.2 Recruitment .................................................................................................................... 12 5.2.3 Geography ..................................................................................................................... 13 5.3 Accessing the Insurgency through Horizontal Inequalities Theory Lense .......................... 13 5.3.1 Cultural Dimension ....................................................................................................... 13 5.3.2 Political Dimensions ................................................................................................... 14 5.3.3 Economic Dimension .................................................................................................. 15 5.3.4 Social Dimension ........................................................................................................ 16 6. Discussion .................................................................................................................................. 16 7. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 20 References ...................................................................................................................................... 21

2

1. Introduction During the 20th century, humankind witnessed more disastrous violence and brutal warfare than had ever been known. In the 21st-century, violence has not decreased. The end of the Cold War between the United States of America and the Soviet Union has resulted in new expectations. However, these expectations have been erratic and caused chaos throughout the world. Contemporary conflicts between various actors, with different motives, goals, impacts and financial sources have caused complications, making difficult to generalize the causes of conflict (Kaldor 2001). Present day conflicts, which are often termed as New Wars (Kaldor 2001), Postmodern wars (Gray 1997), Wars of the third kind (Rice 1998), and Peoples wars (Holsti 1996), are localized, but the global, cross-regional, and transnational connections can be clearly visualized (Kaldor 2001: 2). Thus, it is difficult to establish whether it is aggression or repression, or whether it is local or global or whether it is motivated by certain causes. The New Wars that started with the end of the Cold War have been studied by the Academy from the perspective of a greeds/grievances dichotomy. Academic discussion of the causes of contemporary armed conflict concentrates on economic and socio-political drivers of civil war. First, we will explain Paul Collier and Anke Hoefflers' Greed and Grievances Theory and the Horizontal Inequalities (HIs) Theory of Frances Stewart. It will attempt to review the main arguments made by each theory. Collier and Hoeffler (2000) argued that their studies of various conflicts illustrate economic motivations as primary causes for outbreaks of violent conflict. The role of horizontal inequality in outbreaks of conflict is of less concern to some political scientists who see vertical inequality as a primary cause of conflict (Collier & Hoeffler, 2004; Fearon & Laitin, 2003). However, the idea of horizontal inequalities as significant contributors to conflict is also under consideration (Cederman, Weidmann, & Gleditsch, 2013). Next, we will examine Boko Haram Insurgency from various perspectives. We will analyse the applicability of Greed and Grievances Theory and Horizontal inequalities theory in the context of Boko Haram Insurgency. The Boko Haram Insurgency in Nigeria has indeed caused a great deal of disturbance in the region, both socio-politically and economically. Many governmental and regional attempts to suppress the Boko Haram insurgency with force have been futile, and subsequently, the association of the group with various extremist terrorist organizations has added further complications and challenges to overcoming it. After analysing Boko Haram Insurgency in the purview of greed and grievances theory and horizontal

3

inequalities theory, discussion and conclusion of the essay shall be assessed in terms of their concordance with said theory. Moreover, other aspects and challenges related to the conflict shall also be identified.

2. Research problem/focus The intra-state conflict between the government of Nigeria and Boko Haram has various underlying causes, proximity causes and, escalating causes attached to it. Data collected for the research field are mostly collected via media outlets, and on rare occasions, investigation in the field. Hence, the research output does not reflect all aspects of Boko Haram and conceptualization of the actor is mainly examined on the basis of political violence. More comprehensive and holistic debate on Boko Haram is quite possible. Although the case of Boko Haram has been approached from the religious dimension, multidimensional aspects of the problem have not been well examined. Furthermore, it seems that the research area is heavily dominated by value-laden approaches. Lack of academic neutrality

...