Daveed Gartenstein-Ross
and Jacob Zenn
August
26, 2016
When
the Nigerian jihadist group popularly known as Boko Haram publicly
pledged its allegiance to the Islamic State in March 2015, this new
alliance made perfect sense to both groups. For the Islamic State, Boko Haram’s
pledge of allegiance (bayat) was a powerful symbol that it was winning the
intra-jihadist competition with its mother organization al-Qaeda, with one
observer describing
the Nigerian group’s shifting allegiance as “a huge defeat for
al-Qaeda and a huge coup for” the Islamic State.
The potential upside for Boko
Haram could also be discerned easily. One analyst observed
that the Islamic State has “the ability to export know-how,” and that doing so
in Nigeria could mean that “the already quite substantial problems of
containing Boko Haram become that much harder.” But this relationship did not
work out as planned.
During
the course of a strategic communication project we both worked on in Nigeria
earlier this year, we discovered that key leaders in Boko Haram almost
certainly regretted joining the Islamic State. Had it remained a part of
al-Qaeda, which has a far stronger African network, Boko Haram would almost
certainly be a more potent organization today.
After completing our work in
Nigeria, we co-authored
an article for Foreign Policy arguing that Boko Haram was
experiencing “buyer’s remorse” over its pledge to the Islamic State, and that
al-Qaeda would likely try to exploit this sentiment within the group by
attempting to peel Boko Haram away from the Islamic State (though it would not
necessarily want the organization to openly align with al-Qaeda). Shortly after
our article was published, Gen. Thomas Waldhauser, the nominee to lead the U.S.
Africa Command, said at his
nomination hearing that Boko Haram has fractured, with about half of
the group breaking off “because they were not happy with the amount of buy-in,
if you will, from Boko Haram into the ISIL brand.”
The Islamic State
subsequently announced
that Boko Haram’s erratic and enigmatic leader Abubakar Shekau, whose faction
was seen as too independent, had been replaced by Abu Musab al-Barnawi.
We
have many reasons to question the long-term sustainability of the relationship
between the new leadership that the Islamic State appointed in Boko Haram — which
has taken on the new name of the Islamic State’s West African Province — and
the Islamic State itself. Al-Qaeda will likely patiently wait for that
relationship to fail just as the relationship with Shekau failed, and then try
to pick up the pieces...
Daveed
Gartenstein-Ross is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and
the Chief Executive Officer of Valens Global,
a consulting firm that focuses on the challenges posed by violent non-state
actors. Jacob Zenn is a Fellow of African Affairs at The Jamestown Foundation,
a Senior Consultant at Valens Global, and an Adjunct Assistant Professor at
Georgetown University, where he co-teaches a course on violent non-state actors
with Gartenstein-Ross. Zenn also works on projects in countering violent
extremism in Nigeria.
This material, and other digital content on this blog-site, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express written permission from DANTE
0 Comments