While the world’s attention was riveted on the acts of Islamic terrorism in France where 16 victims died, deeds of Islamic terrorism far more deadly were being carried out in Africa in the nation of Nigeria by the Islamic terror army of Boko Haram. It was Boko Haram that kidnapped hundreds of young girls a few months ago, presumably to sell them into some form of sex slavery. Boko Haram is known for its acts of brutal killings of innocent villagers in northeast Nigeria.
The two links below report that Boko Haram may have just perpetrated its worst massacre of civilians ever. According to the second link which utilized satellite imagery analysis as well as local reports, approximately 2000 innocent people were massacred by Boko Haram. The first link also reports Boko Haram is forcing young girls to be suicide bombers, killing more innocent civilians in various terror attacks. The government of Nigeria, which has an obvious vested interest in minimizing the totals, estimates “only” 150 were killed. What do you think the world’s reaction would have been if 2,000 or 150 French citizens had been killed in the recent Islamic terrorist attacks in France instead of 16 citizens? The calls for global warfare vs. Islamic terrorism would have been deafening, I believe. However, 2000 more Nigerian citizens may have just died in Nigeria at the hands of Islamic terrorist and the world…essentially yawns.
The first links reports that Boko Haram has now taken control of about 20% of Nigeria, and is expanding operations into Chad, Niger and Cameroon. This makes Boko Haram seem much like an expanding African version of ISIL or the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. While the Nigerian military seems to be either incompetent or unwilling to protect its own people from Boko Haram, the next-door nation of Cameroon apparently has a real army. It reportedly killed 143 of Boko Haram’s fighters in a single battle (first link). Nigeria seems to have an army composed of what I’d call “parade troops.” They likely look good marching around in starched uniforms and holding rifles in good formation, but there is no evidence yet that it can actually fight. The first link cites “weaknesses” in the Nigerian military, including “soldiers refusing to fight and mutinies.”
The first link reports that Nigeria is the tenth-largest oil exporter. Just as ISIL in Syria and Iraq seized oil-production facilities to finance itself, Boko Haram may do the same in Nigeria, attacking and seizing Nigerian oil infrastructures. If fighting occurs which destroys part of the Nigerian oil facilities, this will put a serious dent in global oil supplies and may move the price of oil back upwards somewhat. The ineptness of the Nigerian military so far is certainly inviting an attack by Boko Haram on Nigeria’s oil fields.
Is the world community sufficiently outraged to send troops to Nigeria to root out Boko Haram? The answer is obviously “no.” There may be diplomatic huffing and puffing by the world, but until 1000s of heavily-armed troops appear on the scene to do the work the Nigerian military should be doing, the answer is “no.” This should surprise no readers as the world has still not been sufficiently moved to send 1000s of “boots on the ground” into the Mideast to fight ISIL either. The only effective “boots on the ground” vs. ISIL are the Kurds, who are fighting for their lives.
Matthew 24:6 prophesied the latter-days would be a time of “wars and rumors of wars,” and the Apostle Paul prophesied in II Timothy 3:1-4 that mankind’s societies in the latter days would degenerate into being characterized by very evil traits. These things are certainly happening.
I fear for the people of Nigeria. They are being increasingly abandoned by the world to the Islamic terrorists of Boko Haram. The weakness of the Nigerian military and the lack of any meaningful world response to their atrocities in Nigeria will only encourage Boko Haram to kill more people and expand their atrocities into a wider territory. Nigeria’s leader, who has the unusual name of “Goodluck Jonathan,” perhaps ought to have his name legally changed to “Badluck Jonathan.” At least that name would reflect the state of Nigeria’s condition with him as its chief-of-state.