Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1515638258-scaled

Nigerian military’s forced abortions raise questions about US aid

The shocking revelation is the latest in a long line of alleged human rights abuses carried out during the fight against Boko Haram.

Africa
google cta
google cta

Since 2013, the Nigerian military has “run a secret, systematic and illegal abortion programme in the country’s northeast,” leading to the termination of at least 10,000 pregnancies, according to a new report from Reuters.

The campaign, which targets women who have been raped by Islamist fighters, stems from the idea that “the children of insurgents are predestined, by the blood in their veins, to one day take up arms against the Nigerian government and society,” according to report.

Reuters confirmed the programs existence through interviews with victims, soldiers, and health workers who have been instructed to carry out the forced abortions, which legal experts say could amount to crimes against humanity. Nigerian authorities strongly deny the allegations.

The shocking revelation is the latest in a long line of human rights-related accusations lodged against the Nigerian military in recent years. Alleged abuses include “extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrests and incommunicado detentions,” according to Amnesty International.

The report comes just eight months after the United States approved a $1 billion sale of military equipment to Nigeria. Though officials had initially delayed the sale over human rights concerns, the deal went through after including a mandate of “special training on the law of armed conflict and human rights, and air-to-ground integration to minimize civilian harm in air operations.”

The news will add pressure on leaders in Washington to reduce or end U.S. military support for the country, which, between direct aid and arms sales, has totalled more than $2 billion since 2000.

As journalist Nick Turse wrote earlier this year, “Nigerian armed forces have not only failed to defeat militants but routinely commit grave human rights abuses in the name of counterterrorism without repercussions from the United States.” This pattern has continued despite years of U.S. training aimed at encouraging soldiers to protect civilians and reduce human rights violations.

Beyond concerns about rights abuses, experts have also questioned whether Nigeria’s expensive, militarized approach to Boko Haram and the Islamic State has made any progress in destroying the groups. 

“The United States should support nonviolent peacebuilding programs, and the Nigerian government must prioritize its spending to address the same,” wrote Nigeria analysts Charles Kwuelum and Iyabo Obasanjo earlier this year. 

“In a place where high percentages of the population are food insecure and lack adequate health or educational opportunities, the expenditure of nearly $1 billion for weapons will further erode trust in the Nigerian government,” Kwuelum and Obasanjo added. “While we fully support the need to address insecurity, more weapons won’t solve Nigeria’s security crisis.”


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

(Shutterstock/ Bumble Dee)
google cta
Africa
What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?
Top image credit: Voodison328 via shutterstock.com

What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?

Global Crises

Earlier this month in Geneva, delegates to the Antipersonnel Mine Ban Treaty’s 22nd Meeting of States Parties confronted the most severe crisis in the convention’s nearly three-decade history. That crisis was driven by an unprecedented convergence of coordinated withdrawals by five European states and Ukraine’s attempt to “suspend” its treaty obligations amid an ongoing armed conflict.

What unfolded was not only a test of the resilience of one of the world’s most successful humanitarian disarmament treaties, but also a critical moment for the broader system of international norms designed to protect civilians during and after war. Against a background of heightened tensions resulting from the war in Ukraine and unusual divisions among the traditional convention champions, the countries involved made decisions that will have long-term implications.

keep readingShow less
The 8 best foreign policy books of 2025
Top image credit: Dabari CGI/Shutterstock

The 8 best foreign policy books of 2025

Media

I spent the last few weeks asking experts about the foreign policy books that stood out in 2025. My goal was to create a wide-ranging list, featuring volumes that shed light on the most important issues facing American policymakers today, from military spending to the war in Gaza and the competition with China. Here are the eight books that made the cut.

keep readingShow less
Why Russians haven't risen up to stop the Ukraine war
Top image credit: People walking on Red square in Moscow in winter. (Oleg Elkov/Shutterstock)

Why Russians haven't risen up to stop the Ukraine war

Europe

After its emergence from the Soviet collapse, the new Russia grappled with the complex issue of developing a national identity that could embrace the radical contradictions of Russia’s past and foster integration with the West while maintaining Russian distinctiveness.

The Ukraine War has significantly changed public attitudes toward this question, and led to a consolidation of most of the Russian population behind a set of national ideas. This has contributed to the resilience that Russia has shown in the war, and helped to frustrate Western hopes that economic pressure and heavy casualties would undermine support for the war and for President Vladimir Putin. To judge by the evidence to date, there is very little hope of these Western goals being achieved in the future.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.