How Nigeria should handle Boko Haram, by McCulley

The United States Ambassador to Nigeria, Terrence McCulley, incurred the wrath of the Federal Government last week over a statement he made about the way the country is handling the Boko Haram menace. Foreign Editor DAYO FABORODE was at the session where McCulley spoke on Mali and its connection to the dreadful sect.

Is there a link between the military operation in Mali and the terrorist activities of Boko Haram. Can we say the military operation in Mali has reduced the terrorist activities for Boko Haram in Nigeria?

I would say that, as my colleague pointed out, this issue has a regional dimension. And clearly the government of Nigeria is very concerned about the situation in northern Mali. We are all concerned with the influx, after the fall of Muammar Gaddafi, of weapons and extremists. We have seen reports for years of Boko Haram extremists travelling to Northern Mali for training and then returning to Nigeria. The Boko Haram phenomena has not stopped in Northern Mali. I do believe that Nigerians feel there is a link between terrorist activity in the Sahel and their internal extremist insurgency.

The government of Nigeria clearly needs to address this issue with what we called for, a multi-pronged approach that focuses generally on the security threat that Boko Haram represents, but also in addressing the economic and social conditions that exist in the North. 2,000 people have been killed since 2009. A comprehensive strategy that goes after extremists without injuring innocent civilians, without killing innocent civilians, respecting human rights and respecting the rule of law is required. But clearly, the crisis affecting Mali and the region in general has an effect upon the insurgency in Northern Nigeria.

Does the U.S. have any plans for drones to be used in Nigeria? Have Nigerian authorities asked any questions diplomatically about the use of these drones and how do you address mounting concerns about the US opening a drone base in Africa after some drone strikes have killed civilians in other parts of the world?

I think that question is probably best addressed by the Department of Defence or my colleague Ambassador Bisa Williams. The issue will still come up in the Nigerian press and it has been addressed by the Department of Defence. I don’t really think this is an appropriate forum to comment on that. The Nigerians have not raised this issue with us formally.

How do you see ECOWAS’s handling of the Mali war?

I am speaking also in my capacity as the United States Permanent Representative to the Economic Community of West African States. ECOWAS has a long and proud tradition of engagement in matters of peace and security in the West African region, going back to the crisis in Liberia and Sierra Leone and more recently the crisis in Guinea Bissau and Cote d’Ivoire. Since the beginning of the crisis in Mali last year, ECOWAS once again has shown great leadership and I would like to use this occasion to commend the leadership of the sitting President of ECOWAS, the Ivorian President, Alassane Ouattara, as well as the President of the ECOWAS commission, Ambassador Ouédraogo. Both of them have shown great engagement in bringing together ECOWAS for a quick consensus in condemning the coup, calling for the restoration of legitimate rule and calling for the deployment of force to ensure the territorial integrity of Mali. Throughout this process the United States has been a strong supporter of ECOWAS and of the efforts of President Ouattara and President Ouédraogo and their fellow heads of states throughout the West Africa region. We will continue to provide support to ECOWAS. My colleague Ambassador Leonard has outlined the material support that the United States is providing to AFISMA to the end of the fiscal year. I expect that that support will continue going forward. We look forward to working closely with ECOWAS, with the African Union, to restore peace in Mali, to bring about restoration of the country’s territorial integrity and to ensuring that countries of the ECOWAS zone have what they need to get the job done, and beyond that, other countries that have been associated with this mission, notably Chad, beyond the ECOWAS zone. Let me stop there so that we can have time for questions, but again I would like to thank you all for coming.

Can you speak more on French and other nations’ involvement in Mali?

In the first place, the French forces remain in Mali and remain actively engaged in so far I can tell from reading the news reports. With regards to U.S. support to AFISMA, we are providing training through our Africa contingency operations training, which is our peacekeeping package, which is managed by the Department of State. Traditionally, we are providing lifts to the some of the troop-contributing countries. Certainly we do not envisage having U.S. forces on the ground. We are looking at training in-country, whether it be in Togo or Niger. The Nigerian contingent that is part of AFISMA, the 333rd, has just finished the training in Jaji up in Kaduna, before they were deployed to Mali. So, from the U.S. side we very much look at this as a train and equip package and a sustainment package, which will provide life support to the troops on the ground in Mali and pre-deployment training.

Sure, I think as Ambassador Leonard pointed out in her opening remarks, the United States has already committed $96 million this fiscal year alone to help train, equip and provide life support to AFISMA and I would say that the response of ECOWAS and countries beyond the ECOWAS zone line, like Chad, has been quite impressive. In fact, according to the last count, there are already over 6,200 AFISMA troops deployed. I believe that the U.S. has a plan to provide additional training to troops that are going to be deployed to AFISMA. It is clearly a challenging environment. And from what we see, the Chadians and French in the north are really carrying the fight, but the expectation is that as we transition to a fully operational AFISMA, that it is going to effectively play the role that ECOWAS and the African Union has set out for it and I think the expectation is that AFISMA will also transition to a UN peacekeeping operation. So I think that there has been a robust response from ECOWAS thus far, given that we are really only 12 months from the outset of the crisis. The political reaction from ECOWAS was timely and once the decision was made to deploy AFISMA it was deployed with alacrity and there are many troops on the ground now.

The funding for AFISMA has been very slow in coming. How effective do you think they will operate without funds?

I would say that the funding for AFISMA has not been slow in coming. We committed very early on and provided already, an initial $34 million has been notified to Congress, $52 million is in the pipeline to provide support for equipment training and logistics. We believe that this is an international effort though, and as Ambassador Leonard pointed out in her statement, there are gaps which we hope that other donors will step up and provide support for AFISMA. We have ongoing training, we have a contract underway to provide life support to AFISMA so I would say that the money has not been slow in coming and the United States will continue to do what we can to provide support for this important mission.