Forum on the Arms Trade
  • Home
  • Experts
  • Emerging Experts
  • Expertos y Expertas Emergentes
  • Trump's First 100 Days
  • Events
  • Arms Transfers to Ukraine
  • U.S. Arms Transfers to Israel - Trump
  • Biden Arms Transfers To Israel
  • Jobs Corner
  • Media directories
    • Middle East
    • General US arms sales
    • Ukraine
  • Major Arms Sales Notifications Tracker
  • U.S. Conventional Arms Transfer (CAT) Policy
  • U.S.-Saudi Arms Sales
  • U.S. Arms Sales to Taiwan
  • U.S. Arms Sales to India
  • U.S. Landmine Policy
  • Resource Page - Under Threshold Arms Sales
  • Resource Page - USML Cat I-III to Commerce
  • HD State Tracker
  • Get on the list
  • About
  • Archives
    • All archives
    • Newsletter
    • Blog

Proposed Arms Sale Is Not the Road to Peace in Nigeria

5/8/2017

9 Comments

 
This is the twelfth and final entry in a series examining actions during the first 100 days of the new Trump administration and their possible implications on the arms trade, security assistance and weapons use in the future. This entry is authored by a member of the Forum's emerging expert program, designed to give opportunities to individuals beginning their careers on these issues.
​

Preskitt
Danielle Preskitt
In early April, rumors swirled of the Trump administration’s willingness to support Nigeria’s fight against Boko Haram by proposing a foreign military sale (FMS) of up to 12 Embraer A-29 Super Tucano aircraft with sophisticated targeting gear for approximately $600 million. This was not the first time news of a potential FMS sale to Nigeria created controversy. According to media reports, the Obama administration was prepared to move forward a 2016 request from Nigeria for the Super Tocanos until news of the military’s bombing of a camp of displaced persons reached the White House on January 17, just a few days before the end of his administration. Doctors Without Borders estimated the bombing resulted in 52 dead and over 200 wounded. However, various media outlets have reported different numbers, a top Nigerian military official told ABC news the military found approximately 100 bodies.  Some death counts have been reported as high as 200.
 
The timing of Obama’s decision suggests his lack of confidence in the Nigerian military and their targeting capabilities. “This large-scale attack on vulnerable people who have already fled from extreme violence is shocking and unacceptable,” stated Dr. Jean-Clément Cabrol, the director of operations for Doctors Without Borders. “The safety of civilians must be respected. We are urgently calling on all parties to ensure the facilitation of medical evacuations by air or road for survivors who are in need of emergency care.” Unfortunately, this incident was just one example illustrating the inefficiency of airstrikes in eliminating embedded terrorists.
 
How to prioritize addressing Boko Haram is challenging to calculate or assess from the safety of Washington, DC. Boko Haram’s barbaric tactics of imbedding themselves within civilian populations makes it difficult for the military to effectively target and destroy the terrorist organization. However, the organization poses not only an international security threat, but is the cause for Nigerians living in fear on a day to day basis.  A female Nigerian, who wishes to remain anonymous for safety reasons, said in an interview with me that “men are being killed on a daily basis and nobody is doing anything about this, my question is who is supplying these weapons to these terrorists?”
 
A lack of transparency and shadow of lies surrounds not only the status of Boko Haram and the accuracy of reported numbers of dead and wounded, but also the Nigerian government. When analyzing the efficiency of the Nigerian government, it is important to remember the government is distinct from the military. President Buhari of Nigeria has erratically stated on multiple occasions that Boko Haram has been defeated. However, the President’s wishful thinking is blatantly false as Boko Haram continues to carry out marketplace bombings in Nigeria and Cameroon, as well as multiple suicide bombings. “Why is the government trying hard to cover these killings?” said my interviewee. “Killings are still silently ongoing in Maiduguri, Adamawa, Kaduna, Jos, Yobe, and several environs on a daily basis… Soldiers are being brought in to the 44 General Hospital…, either amputated, maimed, or killed, and yet the media is saying nothing or less about this.”
 
For two years, civil servants have not been paid. When protests have erupted due to discontent and lack of payment, arrests were made. “The media is afraid of speaking because journalists have also been arrested for speaking out,” she said. As of 2015, the Nigerian government has a corruption rating of 136 out of 168. Many citizens are currently seeking asylum due to problems and security threats associated with the government, as well as Boko Haram. “The Nigerian government is currently unpopular, the people have lost faith and hope in the government and believes the government has an agenda yet to be revealed to the people,” she related.
 
In order for the Nigerian government to gain trust within the community, transparency and freedom of expression must be reinstated under President Buhari. No longer can the government hide Boko Haram’s existence or horrific actions, or act with impunity.
 
While many will argue, particularly the NGO community, that combatting terrorism requires education, poverty reduction, and government stability, the threat must be addressed immediately, while evidence suggests tackling those underlying issues is not the most effective response. Instead, aiding the military could be the solution- particularly in regards to the military’s intelligence and ground force capabilities.
 
During my interview, I was a bit shocked by a Nigerian assessment of the overall trust the military has earned with the population in recent years. The Nigerian population appears to understand the difficulty associated with targeting shielded Boko Haram insurgents during asymmetrical warfare. “The military is no longer a feared presence within the country, this is because we have been in a democratic regime for over 17 years now, and the military have been in the duty of protecting civilians…” The military, as a whole, has purposefully taken steps toward earning trust within the population. “We have also engaged the Armed Forces in several trainings on ‘Protection of Civilian Courses’,” she said.
 
In July of 2015, under a new joint United States Department of State and Department of Defense initiative, the Global Security Contingency Fund (GSCF) partnered with African nations in the fight against Boko Haram. However, since 2000 US security aid funding has significantly dropped. There was a small resurgence in 2012 and 2015, but 2016 remains to be the lowest since 2000.
 
When asked what had changed since Obama blocked the sale, Sarah Margon, Washington director of Human Rights Watch, stated: “President Trump has made really clear that fighting terrorism, as they define this, is going to be the top foreign policy priority. And that means that the consideration of mitigating circumstances and other issues that could create a problem in the long term will not be at the forefront.” While Margon may lament that situation, Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn., the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, stated, "We need to deal with human rights issues, but not on weapons sales.” Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said in mid-February he was "leery" of the sale due to the Nigerian military's impunity. "Ultimately we hope that the sale goes forward," Cardin added. "But there is progress that needs to be made in protecting the civilian population."
 
Airstrikes may eliminate terrorists. However, due to the nature of their tactic to embed themselves amongst civilians, the attacks will cause the death of many innocent lives, a loss of faith in the government, and criticism from the international community. Ground forces used to eliminate Boko Haram city by city may be more dangerous and costly to the Nigerian military, but it is the only way to a lasting and stable peace within Nigeria. Equipping the Nigerian military with better weaponry, ammunition, training, and intelligence support is a much more efficient and safer strategy for both Nigeria, as well as the international community.

Danielle Preskitt is an intern with the Forum on the Arms Trade 
and a participant in the Forum’s emerging expert program.
9 Comments

A View from the United Kingdom: Trump's First 100 Days

5/4/2017

3 Comments

 
This video blog is the eleventh entry in a series examining actions during the first 100 days of the new Trump administration and their possible implications on the arms trade, security assistance and weapons use in the future.
Butcher
Martin Butcher
In this video interview, Martin Butcher addresses these questions, at markers indicated below:

0:07 
How is President Trump perceived in the United Kingdom?
3:05  What trends are you seeing?
4:16  What advice do you have for the Trump administration?


Martin Butcher is Policy Advisor, Arms and Conflict, Oxfam International
3 Comments

A View from Brazil: Trump's First 100 Days

5/3/2017

2 Comments

 
This video blog is the tenth entry in a series examining actions during the first 100 days of the new Trump administration and their possible implications on the arms trade, security assistance and weapons use in the future.
Muggah
Robert Muggah
In this video interview, Robert Muggah addresses these questions, at markers indicated below:

0:07  What is Brazil's involvement in the arms trade?
1:39  
How is President Trump perceived in Brazil?
4:18  Do you have concerns about what you're seeing?
6:14  What advice do you have for the Trump administration?


Robert Muggah is Co-founder & Research Director at Igarapé Institute and the SecDev Foundation
2 Comments

A View from Canada: Trump's First 100 Days

5/1/2017

1 Comment

 
This video blog the ninth entry in a series examining actions during the first 100 days of the new Trump administration and their possible implications on the arms trade, security assistance and weapons use in the future.
Hunt
Erin Hunt
In this video interview, Erin Hunt addresses three questions, at markers indicated below:

0:05  How is President Trump perceived in Canada?
0:43  What trends do you see?
1:17  What advice do you have for the Trump administration?


Erin Hunt is the program coordinator at Mines Action Canada.
1 Comment

Trump’s First 100 Days of Foreign Military Sales Notifications Were More Than Eight Times That of Obama’s - No Restraint in Sight

5/1/2017

2 Comments

 
AbramsonJeff Abramson
This is the eighth entry in a series examining actions during the first 100 days of the new Trump administration and their possible implications on the arms trade, security assistance and weapons use in the future.

Occurring under the news radar, the general public was notified last Friday afternoon of an additional $2.6 billion in proposed foreign military arms sales, bringing the Trump administration’s first 100 day total to more than $6 billion. That figure dwarfs President Obama’s first 100 days, which included notifications totaling just $713 million.
FMS notifications that went online Friday, April 28
Recent FMS Notifcations
The Forum on the Arms Trade’s notification tracker maintains an overview and online spreadsheet of proposed government-to-government arms sales and services through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program. While just one of many sources of arms transfers, the FMS program is typically the largest and most visible, offering a good indication of what countries will be priority arms trade partners for the United States in the coming years.

The value of FMS notifications this calendar year totals nearly $6.7 billion (note: $418 million of which was officially notified the day before Donald Trump took office). While many of these potential arms sales were already in the works, the pace of notifications suggest that the weapons trade will be a significant part of the president’s approach to foreign policy. Tellingly, nearly half ($3.1 billion) of the potential sales are to countries in the Middle East (Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia) for pilot training, missiles, helicopters, naval guns, equipment for artillery and infantry troops, and other weapons and services. Other countries included so far in 2017 FMS notification are Australia, Canada, Greece, Kenya, NATO, New Zealand, Singapore, Slovakia, South Korea, and the United Kingdom.

At the hundred-day marker of Obama’s first term, FMS notifications only included Australia ($560 million) and Mexico ($93 million and $60 million) for helicopters and patrol boats. By the time his presidency ended, Obama had proposed approximately $430 billion in FMS, including a record-setting $103 billion in 2010 alone -- the vast majority of that going to Saudi Arabia.  

Given the United States’ dominance of the global arms trade market and the Obama administration’s high level of sales, it might have been difficult to expect a Trump presidency to further expand U.S. arms transfers. But that now appears likely as this administration moves controversial deals to Saudi Arabia and Bahrain that Obama had put on hold. While not yet publicly notified, they are making their way through Congress. Deals to those countries, especially without preconditions, would appear to only reward suppression of human rights (Bahrain) and reckless engagement in fighting that fails to protect civilians (Saudi Arabia). Unless Congress chooses to exercise its authority over arms agreements and deliveries, there appears to be no restraint in sight.    

Jeff Abramson is a senior fellow at the Arms Control Association and coordinates the Forum on the Arms Trade.
2 Comments

    About

    The "Looking Ahead Blog" features comments concerning short- to medium-term trends related to the arms trade, security assistance, and weapons use. Typically about 500-1000 words, each comment is written by an expert listed on the Forum on the Arms Trade related to topics of each expert's choosing.

    We have a number of special series including: 


    Looking Ahead 2025
    Looking Ahead 2024
    Looking Ahead 2023
    Looking Ahead 2022
    ​Looking Ahead 2021
    Looking Ahead 2020

    Looking Ahead 2019
    Looking Ahead 2018
    First 100 Days (April/May '17)

    Looking Ahead 2017

    Inclusion on the Forum on the Arms Trade expert list does not indicate agreement with or endorsement of the opinions of others. Institutional affiliation is indicated for identification purposes only.

    Archives

    May 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    September 2024
    March 2024
    January 2024
    November 2023
    October 2023
    August 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    April 2021
    January 2021
    July 2020
    May 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    July 2019
    April 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    May 2018
    December 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    October 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    June 2015
    May 2015
    March 2015

    Pdf's

    March 11 (2015)

    Categories

    All
    Adam Isacson
    Africa
    Alejandro Sanchez
    Allison Pytlak
    Amy Nelson
    Anna Stavrianakis
    Arms Sales
    Arms Trade Treaty
    Arms Trafficking
    Aude Fleurant
    Bonnie Docherty
    Brian Castner
    Child Soldiers
    Colby Goodman
    Corruption
    Cyber
    Dan Gettinger
    Danielle Preskitt
    Divestment
    Doug Weir
    Drones
    Emerging Experts
    End-use Monitoring
    Environment
    Erin Hunt
    Europe
    Exploration Of Arms Reduction And Jobs
    Explosive Weapons
    First 100 Days
    Frank Slijper
    Gender
    Global Trade Trends
    Harm To Civilians
    Hector Guerra
    High School Debate '19 20
    High School Debate '19-20
    Humanitarian Disarmament
    Human Rights Due Diligence
    Iain Overton
    Investors
    Jeff Abramson
    Jen Spindel
    Jobs
    John Lindsay Poland
    John Lindsay-Poland
    Jordan Cohen
    Kate Kizer
    Killer Robots
    Landmines/cluster Munitions
    Latin America
    Laura Boillot
    Lode Dewaegheneire
    Looking Ahead 2017
    Looking Ahead 2018
    Looking Ahead 2019
    Looking Ahead 2020
    Looking Ahead 2021
    Looking Ahead 2022
    Looking Ahead 2023
    Looking Ahead 2024
    Looking Ahead 2025
    Maria Pia Devoto
    Martin Butcher
    Matthew Bolton
    Middle East
    Military Expenditures
    Natalie Goldring
    Nicholas Marsh
    Non State Actors
    Paul Holtom
    Rachel Stohl
    Ray Acheson
    Robert Muggah
    Robert Watson
    Roy Isbister
    SALW
    Samuel Perlo Freeman
    Samuel Perlo-Freeman
    Security Assistance
    Seth Binder
    Shannon Dick
    Suicide Bombing
    Summit For Democracy
    Sustainable Development
    Tobias Bock
    Transparency
    Ukraine War
    UN Register
    Victim Assistance
    Wanda Muñoz
    War In Ukraine
    William Hartung
    Wim Zwijnenburg
    Yeshua Moser-Puangsuwan

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly