Nigerian Troops in the War Against Boko Haram: The Civilian–Military Leadership Interest Convergence Thesis

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X211072894
• Published date: 01 April 2023
• Date: 01 April 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X211072894

Armed Forces & Society

2023, Vol. 49(2) 275 –309

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0095327X211072894

journals.sagepub.com/home/afs

Article

1134644AFSXXX10.1177/0095327X211072894Armed Forces & SocietyOriola

research-article2021

Nigerian Troops in the War

Against Boko Haram: The

Civilian–Military Leadership

Interest Convergence Thesis

Temitope B. Oriola

1



Abstract

This study interrogates the experiences of Nigerian troops in the war against Boko

Haram. The paper’s contribution is bi-dimensional. First, it adds to the empirical

literature on Boko Haram by analyzing the perspectives of rank-and-f‌ile troops. The

study f‌inds 10 forms of corruption affecting troops. These have contributed to the

inability to defeat Boko Haram. Second, the paper adds to theoretical scholarship on

civil–military relations and persistence of small wars. It challenges the bureaucratic-

organizational model and the focus of civil–military relations theory on civilian control of

the military. The study emphasizes the need to focus on the texture of the relationship

between civilian and military leaders. The paper argues that the bureaucratic-

organizational model has limited relevance to militaries in the postcolony and pro-

poses a civilian–military leadership interest convergence thesis. The f‌indings are relevant for

understanding the spread of terrorism in sub-Saharan Africa and the persistence of

small wars in non-Western, illiberal quasi-democratic societies.

Keywords

war against terrorism, intra-state war, armed conf‌lict, military bureaucracy, Africa,

civilian–military leadership interest convergence thesis

1

Department of Sociology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

Corresponding Author:

Temitope B. Oriola, Department of Sociology, University of Alberta, 5-21 Tory Building,Edmonton, AB T6G

2H4, Canada.

Email: oriola@ualberta.ca

276 Armed Forces & Society 49(2)

Boko Haram or Jama’atu Ahlis Suna Lidda’awati Wal Jihad (“the People Committed to

the Prophet’s Teaching and Jihad”) has attracted tremendous scholarly attention in the

last 10 years.

1

Scholars have focused on Boko Haram’s origins and ascendance

(Onuoha, 2010), the interpellation of elites and the political process (Iyekekpolo,

2020), transnationalization of attacks (Cannon & Iyekekpolo, 2018), factionalization

(Stoddard, 2019), gender performativity, particularly weaponization of young girls and

post-menopausal women (Oriola, 2017), connections with previous jihadi collectivities

(Aghedo, 2014) and dynamics of negotiations for release of captives (Obamamoye,

2018). Others have interrogated ensuing social issues such as human displacement

(Abdulazeez & Oriola, 2018), the victimization of children by all sides in the armed

conf‌lict (Onapajo, 2020) and reasons for lack of international intervention (Mickler

et al., 2019). Although there are a few studies on non-structural elements such as

religious ideology (Gray & Adeakin, 2015) and framing (Abdulazeez & Oriola, 2018;

S¨

andig, 2015), the literature is largely structuralist or macro-sociological in orientation.

There has been limited scholarly attempt to explore the perspectives of soldiers on

the frontlines of the war against Boko Haram. Much of the available evidence regarding

state forces emanate from three main sources. These are reports of human rights or-

ganizations such as Amnesty International (2015); media reports, which arguably focus

on sensational aspects such as the “soldiers without enough weapons to f‌ight jihadists

(Ross, 2015)”and anonymous videos and confessional statements of Nigerian soldiers

in particular regarding the poor welfare of troops. These sources provide important

insights but do not obviate the need for analyses based on sociologically informed and

non-sensationalized face-to-face in-depth interviews with soldiers deployed against

Boko Haram. This is crucial in order to understand the experiences of frontline state

forces and the ostensible intractability of the war.

This paper draws on the perspectives of Nigerian soldiers who have had at least one

deployment in the war against Boko Haram to understand the persistence of the war.

How do soldiers who have fought against Boko Haram make sense of their experi-

ences? What can their experiences teach us about the persistence of the war against

Boko Haram? What do these experiences speak to regarding the prevailing theoretical

perspective—bureaucratic-organizational model—of persistence of small wars and

civil–military relations theory? The paper’s contribution is twofold. First, it contributes

to the empirical literature on Boko Haram by analyzing the perspectives of rank-and-

f‌ile troops, who have been largely ignored by scholars. Second, the paper contributes to

the theoretical scholarship by proposing a civilian–military leadership interest con-

vergence thesis for understanding the persistence of small wars in an institutionally

weak context. The paper is divided into f‌ive parts. The f‌irst part engages with civil–

military relations theory and the bureaucratic-organizational model on the persistence

of small wars. The second part provides a brief context for the study. The third part

presents the data and methods of the study. Fourth, the f‌indings and analysis section

focuses on themes such as participants’perceptions about Boko Haram, narratives

about war experiences, corruption, cover-ups and military legitimacy. The conclusion

explores the implications of the f‌indings for the spread of terrorism in sub-Saharan

2Armed Forces & Society 0(0)

Oriola 277

Africa and the persistence of small wars in non-Western, illiberal quasi-democratic

societies. The paper argues that the civilian–military interest convergence thesis is a

more contextually appropriate approach for understanding the persistence of intra-state

war in Africa and other developing regions.

Civilian–Military Relations Theory, the

Bureaucratic-Organizational Model, and Persistence of Small

Wars

This section engages brief‌ly with two bodies of work. These are civilian–military

relations theory and the bureaucratic-organizational model on persistence of small

wars. The paper does not cover the vast volume of material. Rather, the analysis selects

critical insights in the literature and foregrounds the civilian–military leadership interest

convergence thesis proposed by the current study.

Civil–military relations have garnered tremendous scholarly attention particularly

since Huntington’sThe soldier and the state. Huntington engages with subjective and

objective civilian control of the military. While objective control seeks to entrench an

autonomous space for the military, which ensures a high degree of professionalism

among the off‌icer corps and subordination to legitimate civilian authority, subjective

control makes the military susceptible to the whims of the state by limiting its resource

base and political inf‌luence. Huntington’s theory articulates four conditions under

which objective civilian control of the military can be optimized. These are (a) isolation

from other parts of the social structure, (b) assigning the defense of society to military

groups that are (c) indifferent to political ideologies and social values and (d) operate

within a space concerned exclusively with “military imperatives”(Huntington, 1957;

Travis, 2017, 397).

However, Huntington’sfocus on control generally and objective control in particula r

has been severely criticized as inadequate for analyzing civil–military relations (Feaver,

2003) given its delineation of military and political domains (Rapp, 2015) although

much contemporary scholarship still focuses on control (Herspring, 2005). There is

growing recognition that focusing on civilian control of the military is too narrow.

Besides, Huntington’s objective control idea arguably presupposes “moral neutrality”

of the military (Travis, 2017, 398). Scholars of military ethics have engaged with the

debate over whether the proper role of the military is to adhere to the Huntingtonian

notion of “tool of the state”or exercise their moral agency (Coleman, 2009). Both have

implications for trust within and in the military (Garb & Maleˇ

siˇ

c, 2016).

Concordance theory provides another major strand of civil–military relations theory

(Schiff, 1999). Schiff (1999) speaks to shared values and collaborative accommodation

as critical factors that reduce military intervention. This presupposes that there is a

degree of consensus among the elites (political and military) as well as the citizens on

appropriate military conduct. Schiff’s approach is part of a broad culture-centered

approach (Levy, 2012). However, this theory has limited application in postcolonial

Oriola 3