USAID Effects On Nigeria Security Level

USAID's Alleged Funding of Boko Haram

With a new administration in power, the United States financial sector has been under intense scrutiny regarding the management of funds during the previous administration. Investigations have uncovered alarming findings: USAID, a U.S. government agency designed to provide foreign aid, under Barack-Biden administration has allegedly funded certain terrorist activities—one of which has severely escalated Nigeria’s security crisis.

The Chibok Girls Abduction: A Dark Chapter in Nigeria’s History

Following the passing of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, his vice, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, was sworn into power in 2010. However, his tenure was far from smooth. Economic downturns, including a steep increase in fuel prices and a declining Naira-to-Dollar value, defined much of his leadership.

Yet, the most devastating and lingering crisis of his administration was the abduction of the Chibok girls in 2014. In what is considered one of the highest-grossing acts of terrorism in Nigeria, 275 schoolgirls were kidnapped by the notorious terrorist group, Boko Haram.

This event sent shockwaves across the world. The fear was palpable among Nigerians, and the movement for the girls’ return gained international traction. Former U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama was notably seen holding a placard that read, “Bring Back Our Girls”—a slogan that became the rallying cry of global protests.

USAID’s Alleged Role in Funding Boko Haram

In a startling revelation, U.S. Congressman Scott Perry alleged that USAID funneled $697 million annually into Boko Haram, raising serious security concerns in Nigeria. These funds were reportedly channeled under the administration of former U.S. President Barack Obama and were allegedly used to support not just Boko Haram, but also ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

During a previous interview, former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan expressed his deep disapproval of U.S. interference in Nigeria’s internal affairs. He specifically pointed out how the Obama administration’s overwhelming influence hindered his chances of re-election in 2015.

This revelation sheds light on why Goodluck Jonathan may have been viewed as an obstacle to a certain undisclosed U.S.-Nigeria relations. It raises the question: Was Muhammadu Buhari’s ascension to power a more favorable outcome for the Obama administration?

How the USAID Funding Allegedly Strengthened Boko Haram

Terrorism is not a movement sustained by mere threats or crude weaponry—it is an expensive operation that requires strategic backing and financial resources. With USAID allegedly channeling funds to Boko Haram, the group gained:

•  Advanced Weaponry and Mobility

The weapons wielded by Boko Haram operatives were far from homemade neither did they look like they were stolen from the Nigerian military. Their possession of sophisticated war tanks and high-caliber machine guns suggested an external source of funding. Their level of organization, communication, and strategy indicated that they were not just a group of scattered extremists but a well-equipped insurgent force with significant backing.

• Destabilization of Nigeria’s Security

The Chibok girls’ abduction was more than an act of terror—it was a direct attack on the credibility of the Nigerian government. By highlighting the government's inability to protect its citizens, the kidnappings fueled mass protests that portrayed Goodluck Jonathan as weak and ineffective. This, in turn, eroded public trust and reshaped political dynamics in the country.

• Economic Devastation in Northern Nigeria

As Boko Haram intensified its attacks, businesses crumbled, and people fled from areas under threat. The once-thriving northern states became war zones, leading to widespread economic losses. Even today, the effects of Boko Haram’s reign of terror persist, especially in North-Central Nigeria, where successor terrorist groups like the Armed Fulani Herdsmen continue to wreak havoc.

The implications of foreign governments allegedly funding terrorist activities in Nigeria cannot be overstated. The unchecked flow of money into terrorist organizations has not only fueled the insurgency but has also created ripple effects, leading to the rise of newer, equally dangerous militant groups.

While investigations continue, one thing remains clear: Nigeria’s security landscape has been deeply scarred by these revelations. The question remains—how much longer will foreign powers meddle in the sovereignty of African nations?

The allegations surrounding USAID’s funding of Boko Haram are yet to be debunked, bringing forth unsettling truths about the role of global politics in Nigeria’s security crisis. As the current U.S. administration conducts financial audits, Nigerians can only hope that justice prevails.