Image Text:

POWER PLAYERS: President Goodluck Jonathan with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang (left) and Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, in Abuja

NIGERIA RECENTLY overtook South Africa to become the largest economy in Africa. This is no easy feat and should be a moment of celebration. Developments like this are important as they signal economic momentum, productivity, prosperity and the fact that the country is a good place to invest.

This huge stride forward was overshadowed by Boko Haram’s kidnapping of 234 (or 279) schoolgirls in the village of Chibok, in Nigerian’s northeast state of Borno.

Rather than Nigeria being promoted as a place of significant interest to investors and innovators, in this moment anyway, it has become a place of interest to multinational security firms and international armies.

Six weeks ago most people couldn’t name the president of Nigeria.

Now, not only is Goodluck Jonathan a household name but his reputation has taken a battering akin to sharing a lift with Solange Knowles – without a bodyguard.

With that said, although Jonathan may be unpopular, and Nigeria is indeed wanting in certain areas, facts remain facts.

And facts should be reported. I watched, read and listened often in shock, not at Boko Haram’s terrorist actions (not to belittle this situation but there is nothing new there), but at what was passing for news coverage and ‘expert’ analysis of Nigeria.

Each of the statements below comes from mainstream British news outlets:

‘The Nigerian regime…’
The average person would think little of the clause above, but they should, because politically speaking it is an undermining slur.
In recent times the word regime has been bastardised to describe one of two forms of government – anti-western authoritarian dictatorships (e.g. North Korea but certainly not Saudi Arabia) and legitimate democracies that refuse to ‘play ball’ with the west (e.g. Venezuela). The Nigerian government was legitimately elected on a free and fair basis. Less than effective it may be, but to describe it as a regime is to needlessly insult the Nigerian people.

‘The Boko Haram phenomenon is a result of corruption and inequality…’
Yes, there is corruption and inequality in Nigeria but this doesn’t justify the actions of a terror group. That aside, it is just not true. Boko Haram is not a socialist anti-corruption outfit. Their objective is to spread their interpretation of sharia law via militant means. Boko Haram has as much to do with corruption and inequality as Al Qaeda did the Dotcom bubble. This is deeply insensitive. Boko Haram is a tragedy for Nigeria. When 9/11 and 7/7 happened no one in the western media dared link it to anything. Even western actions that were plausible causes such as the Iraq war were off limits. Yet Nigeria’s terrorism woes are easily chalked up to inequality?

‘All you need to do is drive from Lagos to the north of Nigeria to see great economic inequality’
Save the petrol. You don’t need to drive 600 miles to experience inequality in Nigeria. All you need to do is drive from Victoria Island (Lagos) to Mushin (also Lagos) or to drive from Ikoyi (Lagos) to Ajegunle (also Lagos). The dangerous, false and lazy implication here is that Nigeria is divided along ‘rich southern Christian’ and ‘poor northern Muslim’ lines and this is fuelling Boko Haram. Nothing could be farther from the truth. There is mass poverty, inequality as well as sizeable numbers of Muslims and Christians across Nigeria. The stereotypes don’t work. This is a lot more complex.

‘70 per cent of all northern Nigerians lives on less than $1 a day’
Someone once said that statistics are like bikinis: they reveal a lot but they conceal the more crucial parts. The statement above is technically true. However, the facts are that 70 per cent of all Nigerians live on less than $1 a day.

‘If it had been boys who were kidnapped the government would have acted’
Framing Boko Haram’s actions as terror exclusively on girls is false. For example, Boko Haram recently massacred dozens of schoolboys with a bullet to the head each. This is an indiscriminate terror group.

‘In Lagos car bombs have become as routine as grinding poverty’
Oh no they haven’t.

‘On returning to democracy in 1999 there was a gentleman’s agreement in Nigeria that the presidency would be rotated between north and south. In 2015, it is meant to return to the north. However, Goodluck Jonathan (a southerner) may run again so the north feel they are not getting their rights. This fuels Boko Haram’.
Slight caveat. There was a gentleman’s agreement within the now decimated People’s Democratic Party (which has held power since 1999). Not within Nigeria. PDP is not Nigeria in the same way the Tories are not Britain.

‘Nigeria has no culture of street demonstrations and that’s why the turnout for the Bring Back Our Girls demos are low’
Really? The masses who demonstrated for and against Abacha, Babangida, Abiola, June 12, Occupy Nigeria, the fuel subsidy removal – to name a few – would strongly disagree with you.

‘Nigeria is a country in fear of becoming the next Rwanda’
Requires no further comment.

‘David Cameron: The girls are probably being held in the jungles of northeast Nigeria’
There are no jungles in northeast Nigeria, Mr Prime Minister.
I could go on and on. The actions of Boko Haram are terrible for Nigeria but distorting facts and spreading falsehoods will not help anyone, and it certainly won’t help to ‘bring back our girls’.