Putting your reply within my quote makes it a bit more tedious to reply, but here we go:
Nigeria is presently part of the UN security counsel so it is necessary that they vote on such an issue. Nigeria has no business challenging the west on the situation in Ukraine. There is nothing wrong with the position they took.
But if they were as adverse to the Western agenda as you and others are claiming, wouldn't their voting record be more aligned with China and Russia? If you recall, they also were one of the first countries to vote yes for the strike against Libya
Nigeria has been the United States most important partner but that does not mean that Nigerian views and influence on the region is fully supported. We are talking about a Nigerian state that has clashed with the western world over various issues from apartheid, to Nigerias relenting efforts to assist thier african neighbors with breaking away from colonialism and getting thier Independence e.t.c
We aren't talking about the military governments, we are talking about the civilian ones. Which big disagreements have they had since 1999?
Of course, Nigeria, the US and the western world have always worked together and still work together. Just because American forces are training Nigerian troops does not mean America is all buddy with Nigeria. America at the end of the day has always worked to protect her interests and if working with Nigerian troops benefits her interests at that specific time then she will do so. No doubt the american government does not want Nigeria or west Africa to go down in a blaze because the economic effects will be astronomical. Afterall west african raw goods being shipped to europe are a great source of europes present wealth. That does not mean that America does not have her own motives. every nation has their motives and looks puts themselves at the forefront of their foreign policies.
I never stated that there were all "buddy buddy", but their relationship is far from being as adversarial as you've been claiming it is. There's no doubt that Nigeria is the strongest power in West Africa and the most important partner that the US has in that region. So why would undermine it if they are active partners?
your right Nigeria currently does not have any sanctions, that I know. Though america did threaten Nigeria with sanctions for the handling of the baga incident. That is what I said before linking the article. Though the article said that the ambassador to Nigeria had made comments towards withdrawing aid from Nigeria, as we all know that was never implemented.
Suspension of military aid is a far cry from sanctions bro. We both know this. Where has there been a threat of economic sanctions from US or UK?
The United States does not have any plans to destroy Nigeria. A destroyed Nigeria will introduce chaos across the continent. The AFRICOM/ECOMOG article just talks about how the US is still trying to establish her presence on the continent and how Nigerias growing influence has to be monitored and checked. Again that is the game being played. Nigeria has butted heads with the likes of France and the US over African issues. A stonger Nigeria with a more focused Pan Africanist agenda will be a able to checkmate western influence and promote african interests on the continent. This is something the west (especially France detest)
So the US calling for investment in nigeria does not guarantee thier innocence. All this is about establishing control, not Nigeria's destruction.
But didn't the articles that you quoted from explicitly state that the US is funding Boko Haram in order to destabilize Nigeria? And besides AFRICOM, what are the major issues that Nigeria has butted heads with the US over? In regards to investments, isn't that an effective form of influence? Its not possible to have total control over a country like Nigeria...especially not using military forces
I dont know about this. regardless it holds little meaning. After all There was really no other alternative apart from Buhari who was a former military ruler.
"A US ambassador cable released by Wikileaks details how American officials guided Goodluck Jonathan to take the reins of the presidency during Umaru Yar’Adua’s chaotic last days.
Diplomatic cables made public by WikiLeaks show that the American ambassador to Nigeria, Robin Sanders, instructed Goodluck Jonathan on how to get rid of former INEC Chairman, Mr. Maurice Iwu. Using the threat that the United States government would not support future elections if Iwu remained the INEC chairman, the ambassador suggested that Mr. Iwu be placed on terminal leave."
http://saharareporters.com/news-pag...ative-experience-jonathan-tells-us-ambassador
At the same time Unsecured weapons from Libya found thier hands into boko haarams hands and made the situation worse. Who is responsible for the current state of Libya?
The situation in Libya inadvertently caused weapons to be flooded into West Africa, and has played a role with the situations in the Western Sahara, Mali and of course Nigeria. But to say that was all intentional would be dishonest.
plus here is an article which highlights how americas blunders in the middle east is fueling boko haram. So america is basically helping us and stabbing us at the same time.
Well once again, where is the proof that the weapons going to Boko Haram are intentionally being sent there from the US? That’s what most of your links are explicitly stating.
Nigeria takes little interest in matters outside the continent. 9 times out of 10 Nigeria will align herself with the wishes of the majority
That may be correct, but , didn’t Naija vote in favor of the strike on Libya and also for recognition of the transitional council?
France cant be trusted. Frances has 60,000 troops on the continent and have great control over thier former colonies and as you know the majority are situated in west africa. Nigeria who has always pushed an african empowerment agenda has never been to close with France. Regardless of Nigerian and french/ british forces working together.
France has investments in Nigeria and wants to protects its investments. Exactly how would it be a benefit to them to fund Boko Haram? You do realize that Cameroon is also being adversely affected too right? Are they also funding the folks causing trouble in CAR and Mali?
To summarize, this is all a battle for influence. A Nigeria with leaders who are completely loyal to western interests on the continent will be a dream come true for the west
And the US wants more influence by utilizing more investment, diplomacy and more aid. Not by funding terrorist groups:
"Ambassador Carson informed the Foreign Minister that the U.S. had decided to open up a Consulate in Kano as a way to strengthen outreach to more than 75 million Muslims in Nigeria's
Northern States. Maduekwe, in turn, informed Ambassador Carson of the recent designation of a new Ambassador to the United States, whom he described as a "seasoned and professional career diplomat," now awaiting word from the State Department. Maduekwe regretted the events surrounding the previously-designated Ambassador had caused considerable strain and delays in identifying and appointing a new Ambassador."
Wikileaks Cable:
10ABUJA163
"Fawthrop asked the A/S whether he was in Nigeria to deliver a message or was it more of a fact-finding trip? A/S Carson stated that he was in Nigeria for both reasons in that he wanted to listen and engage with Nigeria. Nigeria is the most important country in Africa for the United States due to: the size of its population; presence of hydro-carbons; peace keeping role in ECOWAS, especially in Sierra Leone and Liberia; its seat on the United Nations Security Council; along with the strength and size of its financial markets the A/S continued. Nigeria has enormous potential and is the seventh largest Muslim country in the world with an Islamic population that will eclipse Egypt by 2015 according to A/S Carson. Having no United States presence in Northern Nigeria is akin to having no presence in Egypt and is why the United States is considering opening a Consulate in Kano."
CONTINUING FURTHER DOWN:
"Some places are more important than others within the Federal system of Nigeria and Lagos is one of the more important places, according to A/S Carson. Consulate General Lagos is bigger and more important than Embassies Benin and Togo together. Lagos is significantly more important than Cape Town even though the latter is 100 times better in terms of livability. The United States must be in Lagos in a significant way, A/S Carson declared.
The statements of the A/S sounded wonderful from a Hausa viewpoint, but nothing was mentioned about Southern and Eastern Nigeria, Fawthrop pointed out. The A/S agreed that Fawthrop was correct. The United States is underrepresented diplomatically, economically, commercially, militarily and from a security standpoint. When the A/S served in Nigeria from 1969-1971, the United States had the Embassy in Lagos with Consulates in Ibadan, Kaduna, and briefly in Port Harcourt, before the Civil war, and also a USIS post in Kano. With the Nigerian population at 50 million the United States was better and more broadly represented in a Nigeria that produced almost no oil. With an Embassy in Abuja and a Consulate in Lagos, the United States has experienced a “huge loss” in Nigeria today, per A/S Carson. The United States must get back into Enugu and Port Harcourt. “No presence means no access, which leads to no influence. Without influence you have nothing.”
Wikileaks Cable
10LAGOS75
