[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 2]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 3035-3036]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         NIGERIA ON THE BRINK?

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                       Friday, February 27, 2015

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, Nigeria is Africa's most 
populous nation and is the continent's largest economy. Unfortunately, 
Nigeria is beset by various challenges that threaten the peace and 
stability of this African giant. The terrorist group Boko Haram 
continues its bloody reign of terror, now threatening to establish a 
``caliphate'' on the model of ISIS in the Levant. Religious and ethnic 
discord, which pre-dates Boko Haram's emergence, continues unabated. 
Lower oil prices have serious damaged an economy significantly 
dependent on oil revenues. Meanwhile, the prospect of a violent repeat 
of the 2011 post-election scene has ratcheted up tensions in Nigeria 
even further. A hearing that I recently held examined the situation in 
Nigeria and the U.S. efforts to maintain positive relations with the 
largest U.S. trading partner in Africa and a major ally in 
international peacekeeping.
  U.S.-Nigeria relations were understandably rocky during the military 
rule of Sani Abacha in the 1990s. However, the advent of democracy with 
the 1999 elections ushered in an improved atmosphere of cooperation. 
Nigeria consistently ranks among the top recipients of U.S. bilateral 
foreign assistance and is the second-largest beneficiary of U.S. 
investment in Africa. In recent months, though, our relations have 
deteriorated. Apparently, some in the government of President Goodluck 
Jonathan feel the United States is meddling in their internal affairs, 
especially when it comes to our noting deprival of the due process 
rights of citizens by Nigerian military and security forces. Our view 
is that friends don't just stand by when friends commit human rights 
abuses.
  The subcommittee that I chair held a hearing last July 10th to 
examine the complaints that human rights vetting was a major obstacle 
to U.S. counterterrorism. What we found was that the State Department 
estimated that half of Nigerian forces would pass our vetting process, 
which we found is slowed by too few staff working on these important 
issues. Still, the Nigerian Government must be more cooperative. Some 
units in larger divisions may have human rights issues, but if replaced 
by units without such baggage, there would be created an entirely 
acceptable division for training. Late last year, the Nigerian 
Government cancelled the counter-terrorism training of one of its 
battalions, which now places the entire training program on hold. We 
are making arrangements for discussions in the near future with 
Nigerian Military officials and Members of Congress and the Obama 
administration to overcome the current stalemate and resume the 
cooperation necessary to meet the challenge posed by Boko Haram.
  This terrorist group has wreaked havoc on the people of Nigeria, 
particularly in the northeast. It is estimated that more than 5,500 
people were killed in Boko Haram attacks last year alone, representing 
more than 60% of the more than 9,000 deaths caused by this group

[[Page 3036]]

in the past five years. As many as 2,000 people may have perished in 
the Boko Haram attack on the town of Baga and nearby villages last 
month. More than a million Nigerians have been displaced internally by 
the violence, and tens of thousands of others are now refugees in 
neighboring countries. Clearly, Boko Haram violence is escalating 
drastically.
  Boko Haram has become part of the global jihadist movement and 
threatens not only Nigeria, but also Cameroon, Chad and Niger. While 
the terrorist group may not be an official affiliate of al-Qaeda or 
ISIS, they appear to be trying to create an Islamic caliphate in 
Nigeria. Various press reports estimate that the group has seized as 
much as 70% of Borno state, with additional territory under its control 
in neighboring Yobe and Adamawa states. In fact, Reuters calculated 
that by mid-January of this year, Boko Haram was in control of more 
than 30,000 square kilometers of territory--an area the size of the 
state of Maryland. For approximately two years, I pressed the 
administration to designate Boko Haram as a Foreign Terrorist 
organization (FTO). I argued that, like cancer, early intervention can 
mitigate its spread, severity and duration. I traveled to Nigeria twice 
and convened three hearings during the last Congress on why an FTO 
designation might help, only to be told by then-Assistant Secretary of 
State Johnnie Carson that ``the phenomenon of Boko Haram is one of 
discrediting the Central Government in power for its failure to deliver 
services to people.''
  On the very day of our hearing to consider a bill on FTO designation, 
the state Department, led by Secretary of State Kerry announced that 
Boko Haram was being designated a Foreign Terrorist organization.
  Meanwhile, Nigeria faces the prospects of post-election violence 
after presidential voting. The race pits President Jonathan against 
former Nigerian military ruler General Muhammadu Buhari in a re-run of 
the 2011 elections. This time, however, Buhari's All Progressive 
Congress (APC) is a coalition of major opposition political parties and 
includes defectors from President Jonathan's People's Democratic Party 
(PDP), such as Speaker of the National Assembly Aminu Tambuwal.
  Some PDP officials have referred to their opponents as ``Nigeria's 
Muslim Brotherhood,'' while APC officials accuse the Jonathan 
administration of representing only Christian southerners. Party 
spokesmen on both sides have warned of potential violence if their 
candidate doesn't win. Out of nearly 69 million registered voters in 
Nigeria, political observers believe this race could be decided by as 
few as 700,000 votes. Lack of action by the government to ensure that 
internally displaced voters can participate in the elections, delays in 
the distribution of voter cards and in the recruitment and training of 
poll workers places in question the effectiveness of the February 
elections.
  Moreover, the election laws require that a winning presidential 
candidate must achieve a majority of the votes and at least 25% of the 
vote in two-thirds of the states. With so much territory in the control 
of Boko Haram or under the threat of their violence in the North, the 
northern-based APC likely would question a loss even though they have 
refused to accept a delay in voting to ensure that pre-election 
preparations are complete.
  According to a recent Gallup poll, only 13% of Nigerians have 
confidence in the electoral process. This makes the ``Quick Count'' 
being planned by a coalition of Nigerian civil society groups vital in 
providing any confidence that the vote on February 14th reflects the 
will of the people.
  In the face of all the challenges faced by Nigeria, its allies--such 
as the United States--must understand fully the context of this 
situation in order to determine how best to be of help. We hope that 
the Nigerian Government resulting from the February elections will be 
accepting of outside advice and assistance. Nigeria is the proverbial 
``too big to fail'' nation. A collapse of its economy, increase in 
refugees to its neighbors or spread of its homegrown terrorism to the 
region and the broader international community clearly will be 
problematic for more than just Nigeria. Religious extremism already is 
a problem elsewhere in the Sahel region. Last month, Muslim extremists 
destroyed more than 40 Christian churches in Niger because of what they 
felt was irreverent depictions of the prophet Mohammed--not in Niger 
but in Europe. The hearing was just the beginning of our renewed 
efforts to help Nigeria address the problems that threaten its 
stability. We must be honest with Nigerians and ourselves about the 
difficulties we both face. This is why we have asked our witnesses to 
give their honest assessments of where we are in the various situations 
Nigeria encounters and to suggest what actions our Government can and 
should take to be most helpful. It is in our mutual interest to do so, 
and therefore, we will continue our efforts to restore full military 
and security cooperation between our two countries.

                          ____________________