Lake Chad Basin: Violence and displacement
As Boko Haram exploits shrinking resources and fragile security, communities face impossible choices — return home under threat or stay in limbo.
In this episode of Pinch Point, explore how conflict, climate change, and geopolitics are shaping this crisis.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
10 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
What has triggered deadly clashes at Uganda's border with South Sudan?
Fighting between the armies of Uganda and neighbouring South Sudan, which are longtime allies, erupted this week over demarcations in disputed border regions, leading to the death of at least four soldiers, according to official reports from both sides. Thousands of civilians have since been displaced in affected areas as people fled to safety amid the rare outbreak of violence. A gunfight began on Monday and comes as South Sudan, one of the world's youngest countries, is facing renewed violence due to fracturing within the government of President Salva Kiir that has led to fighting between South Sudanese troops and a rebel armed group. Uganda has been pivotal in keeping that issue contained by deploying troops to assist Kiir's forces. However, the latest conflict between the two countries' armies is raising questions regarding the state of that alliance. What has happened? There are conflicting accounts of the events that began at about 4:25pm local time (13:25 GMT) on Monday, making it hard to pinpoint which side struck first. The two agree on where the fighting took place, but each claims the site as being in its own territory. Ugandan military spokesperson Major-General Felix Kulayigye told reporters on Wednesday that the fighting broke out when South Sudanese soldiers crossed into Ugandan territory in the state of West Nile and set up camp there. The South Sudanese soldiers refused to leave after being told to do so, Kulayigye said, resulting in the Ugandan side having 'to apply force'. A Ugandan soldier was killed in the skirmish that ensued, Kulayigye added, after which the Ugandan side retaliated and opened fire, killing three South Sudanese soldiers. However, South Sudan military spokesperson Major-General Lul Ruai Koang said in a Facebook post earlier on Tuesday that armies of the 'two sisterly republics' had exchanged fire on the South Sudanese side, in the Kajo Keji County of Central Equatoria state. Both sides suffered casualties, he said, without giving more details. Wani Jackson Mule, a local leader in Kajo-Keji County, backed up this account in a Facebook post on Wednesday and added that Ugandan forces had launched a 'surprise attack' on South Sudanese territory. Mule said local officials had counted the bodies of five South Sudanese officers. Kajo-Keji County army commander Brigadier General Henry Buri, in the same statement as Mule, said the Ugandan forces had been 'heavily armed with tanks and artillery', and that they had targeted a joint security force unit stationed to protect civilians, who are often attacked by criminal groups in the area. The army general identified the deceased men as two South Sudanese soldiers, two police officers and one prison officer. The fighting affected border villages and caused panic as people fled from the area, packing their belongings hurriedly on their backs, according to residents speaking to the media. Children were lost in the chaos. Photos on social media showed crowds gathered as local priests supervised the collection and transport of remains. What is the border conflict about? Uganda and South Sudan have previously clashed over demarcations along their joint border, although those events have been few and far between. As with the Monday clash, the fighting is often characterised by tension and violence. However, heavy artillery fighting, which occurred on Monday, is rare. Problems at the border date back to the demarcations made during the British colonial era between Sudan, which South Sudan was once a part of, and Uganda. Despite setting up a joint demarcation committee (unknown when), the two countries have failed to agree on border points. In November 2010, just months before an anticipated South Sudanese referendum on independence from Sudan, clashes erupted after the Ugandan government accused the Sudanese army of attacking Dengolo village in the West Nile district of Moyo on the Ugandan side in multiple raids, and of arresting Ugandan villagers who were accused of crossing the border to cut down timber. A South Sudanese army spokesperson denied the allegations and suggested that the assailants could have been from the forestry commission. Uganda's President Yoweri Museveni and South Sudan's Kiir met a few days later and pledged to finalise the border issue, but that did not happen. Little was reported on the matter for several years after that, but in October 2020, two Ugandan soldiers and two South Sudanese soldiers were killed when the two sides attacked each other in Pogee, Magwi County of South Sudan, which connects to Gulu district of northern Uganda. The area includes disputed territory. Some reports claimed that three South Sudanese were killed. Each side blamed the other for starting the fight. In September 2024, the Ugandan parliament urged the government to expedite the demarcation process, adding that the lack of clear borders was fuelling insecurity in parts of rural Uganda, and Ugandan forces could not effectively pursue criminal cattle rustling groups operating in the border area as a result. Following the latest flare-up of violence this week, the countries have pledged to form a new joint committee to investigate the clashes, South Sudan military spokesperson, General Koang, said in a statement on Tuesday. The committee will also investigate any recurring issues along the border in a bid to resolve them, the statement read. Why does Uganda provide military support to South Sudan's President Kiir? Uganda's Museveni has been a staunch ally of South Sudan's independence leader, Kiir, and his Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) party for many years. Museveni supported South Sudan's liberation war against Sudan, especially following alleged collusion between the former Sudanese leader Omar al-Bashir and the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), a rebel group originally formed in Uganda but which regularly attacks both Ugandan and South Sudanese locations in its efforts to overthrow the Ugandan government. South Sudan gained independence from Sudan in January 2011. In 2013, Uganda sent troops to support Kiir after a civil war broke out in the new country. Fighting had erupted between forces loyal to Kiir and those loyal to his longtime rival, Riek Machar, who was also Kiir's deputy president pre and post independence, over allegations that Machar was planning a coup. Ethnic differences between the two (Kiir is Dinka while Machar is Nuer) also added to the tensions. Machar fled the capital, Juba, to form his own Sudan People's Liberation Movement-in-Opposition (SPLM-IO). The SPLM and SPLM-IO fought for five years before reaching a peace agreement in August 2018. About 400,000 people were killed in the war. Uganda deployed troops to fight alongside Kiir's SPLM, while the United Nations peacekeeping mission (UNMISS), which was in place following independence, worked to protect civilians. This year, a power-sharing deal has unravelled, however, and fighting has again broken out between South Sudanese forces and the White Army, a Nuer armed group which the government alleges is backed by Machar, in Nasir County, in the northeast of the country. In March, Uganda again deployed special forces to fight alongside Kiir's forces as fears of another civil war mounted. Kiir ordered Machar to be placed under house arrest and also detained several of his allies in the government. Are there concerns about Uganda's influence in South Sudan? Some South Sudanese who support Vice President Machar, who is still under house arrest, are opposed to Uganda's deployment of troops in the country, and say Kampala is overreaching. Since the Monday skirmish with Ugandan troops, some South Sudanese have taken to Facebook to rail against the army for not condemning alleged territorial violations by Ugandan soldiers, and mocked the spokesman, Koang, for describing the nations as 'sisterly'. 'I wish the escalation would continue,' one poster wrote. 'The reason why South Sudan is not peaceful is because of Uganda's interference in our country's affairs.' 'What did South Sudan expect when they cheaply sold their sovereignty to Uganda?' another commenter added. Since joining forces to fight the rebel White Army, South Sudanese forces and the Ugandan Army have been accused by Machar and local authorities in Nasir State of using chemical weapons, namely barrel bombs containing a flammable liquid that they say has burned and killed civilians. Nicholas Haysom, head of the UN mission in South Sudan, confirmed that air strikes had been conducted with the bombs. However, Uganda has denied these allegations. The South Sudan army has not commented. Forces local to Machar, including the White Army, have also been accused of targeting civilians. Dozens have died, and at least 100,000 have been displaced across northeastern South Sudan since March. In May, Amnesty International said Uganda's deployment and supply of arms to South Sudan violated a UN arms embargo on the country, which was part of the 2018 peace deal, and called on the UN Security Council to enforce the clause.
Al Jazeera
14 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
DR Congo and Rwanda hold first talks since signing of peace deal
The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda have held the first meeting of a joint oversight committee, taking a step towards implementing a peace deal even as other commitments are yet to be fulfilled. The African Union, Qatar and the United States joined the committee meeting in Washington on Thursday. The committee 'discussed progress on implementing the agreement', among other things, a joint statement released by Rwanda and DRC on social media said on Friday. The deal in June between Rwanda and DRC marked a breakthrough in talks held by US President Donald Trump's administration, which aims to bring an end to fighting that has killed thousands and attracted billions of dollars of Western investment to a region rich in tantalum, gold, cobalt, copper, lithium and other minerals. The deal outlines provisions for the 'respect for territorial integrity and halting hostilities' in eastern DRC, which are still yet to be implemented. It also includes economic measures, but has few details. In the Washington agreement, the two African countries pledged to implement a 2024 deal that would see Rwandan troops withdraw from eastern DRC within 90 days. The agreement also said DRC and Rwanda would form a joint security coordination mechanism within 30 days and implement a plan agreed last year to monitor and verify the withdrawal of Rwandan soldiers within three months. Congolese military operations targeting the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a DRC-based armed group that includes remnants of Rwanda's former army and fighter groups that carried out a 1994 genocide, are meant to conclude over the same timeframe. But 30 days from the signing have passed without a meeting of the joint security coordination mechanism, and operations targeting the FDLR and the withdrawal of Rwandan soldiers have yet to begin. 'Deal not off track' The joint oversight committee was established as a forum to deal with the implementation and dispute resolution of the peace agreement. The committee's meeting, due to take place within 45 days of the signing, was on schedule. Trump's senior Africa adviser, Massad Boulos, told reporters on Wednesday that the deal was not off track, adding that a meeting of the security mechanism was due to be announced in the coming days. Asked about the lack of progress on operations against the FDLR and withdrawal of Rwandan soldiers, Boulos said: 'There was no timeline for that … If you look at the chronology of what we've been able to do since April, it's been extensive, and it's been very much on point and very much in line with our aspirations. So it's not off track in any way.' Sources with knowledge of the negotiations recognised delays in the implementation of the deal, but added that they were not yet threatening the deal as a whole. Military and diplomatic sources told the Reuters news agency that the parties in conflict – including armed groups such as Rwanda-backed M23 and DRC-aligned fighters groups known as Wazalendo – have strengthened their military presence on the front lines.
Al Jazeera
15 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Africa's billionaire boom masks a crisis for the many
On July 9, 2025, I was overwhelmed by a profound sense of despair and disappointment upon reading a report from Oxfam International, a globally recognised NGO, revealing that just four of Africa's richest billionaires hold a combined wealth of $57.4bn. According to Oxfam, this figure exceeds the total wealth of approximately 750 million Africans, roughly half of the continent's population. Moreover, the top 5 percent of Africans now control nearly $4 trillion in wealth, more than double the combined assets of the remaining 95 percent. Titled Africa's Inequality Crisis and the Rise of the Super‑Rich, the report profiles the four wealthiest individuals on the continent. At number one is Aliko Dangote of Nigeria, estimated to be worth $23.3bn. Next is Johann Rupert and his family from South Africa, with about $14.2bn in wealth. Following them are Nicky Oppenheimer and his family, also South African, with a fortune of $10.2bn. Finally, Egyptian Nassef Sawiris holds approximately $9.4bn in net worth. I find myself among the bottom 95 percent, the hopeful yet under‑resourced individuals who have laboured for modest incomes while yearning for socioeconomic transformation. At the dawn of the 21st century, in 2000, Africa had no billionaires. Today it is home to 23 billionaires, predominantly male, whose combined wealth has soared by 56 percent over the past five years, reaching an astounding $112.6bn. Today, no two nations better illustrate Africa's stark wealth disparity and oligarchic dominance than Nigeria and South Africa, and no business leader exemplifies the rise of crony capitalism on the continent more than Aliko Dangote. Here is why. Twenty‑five years ago, Dangote was simply an ambitious multimillionaire businessman. Then, on February 23, 1999, he made a substantial donation to General Olusegun Obasanjo's presidential campaign. That seemingly benign investment proved decisive for his business trajectory. A year later, the Obasanjo administration embarked on a sweeping privatisation of state‑owned enterprises, aiming to liberalise the economy, attract private investment and foster domestic entrepreneurship under the Backward Integration Policy (BIP). Dangote acquired Benue Cement in 2000 and Obajana Cement in 2002, laying the foundations for Dangote Cement, now Africa's largest cement producer. Between 2010 and 2015, Dangote Cement reportedly paid an effective tax rate of less than 1 percent on profits of approximately 1 trillion Nigerian naira (about $6bn at 2015 exchange rates). Dangote himself became Nigeria's richest entrepreneur in 2007, attaining billionaire status amid the company's rapid expansion. Since then, the quid pro quo strategies between Dangote and the Obasanjo administration have become a conventional aspect of Nigerian politics and business, albeit a controversial one. Critics argue that the BIP has stifled competition and fostered monopolistic practices in key sectors like sugar and cement, disproportionately benefitting politically connected elites – including Dangote – at the expense of smaller enterprises and ordinary Nigerians. Nigeria is richly endowed with natural resources and possesses world-class human capital. Nevertheless, more than 112 million people, nearly half of Nigeria's population, live in poverty, based on the most recent population estimates of around 227 million. At the same time, the country's five wealthiest individuals, dominating sectors such as oil and gas, banking, telecommunications, and real estate, have amassed a combined fortune of $29.9bn. The dysfunctional system that has enabled Nigeria's 'big five' entrepreneurs and fostered oligarchic patterns is not unique to Nigeria. South Africa, Africa's most industrialised nation, confronts similar but distinct challenges in its post-apartheid era. After apartheid ended on April 27, 1994, the African National Congress (ANC) introduced Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) and Broad-Based BEE initiatives (BBBEE). These policies aimed to advance the effective participation of Black people in the economy, achieve higher growth, increase employment and ensure fairer income distribution. However, over time, the ANC itself acknowledged that these affirmative action programs have not appreciably benefitted most Black South Africans, especially Black women. In the 31 years since apartheid, economic conditions have only marginally improved. While a few Black business leaders have emerged, they continue to succeed within a system engineered to favour a narrow elite. One such example is Patrice Motsepe, a mining magnate and among Africa's richest individuals, with an estimated net worth of approximately $3bn. Supporters view him as a tangible beneficiary of post-apartheid economic transformation, but critics, including economist Moeletsi Mbeki, argue that his wealth reflects crony capitalism rather than broad-based entrepreneurship. Motsepe, who is also the brother-in-law of President Cyril Ramaphosa, remains a rare exception in a system marked by elite capture. By April 2025, South Africa's official unemployment rate stood at 32.9 percent, equating to about 8.2 million people actively seeking work, while the broader rate, including discouraged jobseekers, rose to 43.1 percent. Around the same time, approximately 34.3 million South Africans, or more than half the population, were living in poverty. Meanwhile, the Oppenheimer family, whose immense fortune in diamond mining has deep historical roots tied to South Africa's colonial past, continues to expand its wealth. A Harvard Growth Lab study published in November 2023 concluded that three decades after the end of apartheid, the economy is defined by stagnation and exclusion, and current strategies are not achieving inclusion and empowerment in practice. Unsurprisingly, the most prominent beneficiaries of BEE initiatives have been ANC insiders and aligned business elites, including President Ramaphosa, former Gauteng Premier Tokyo Sexwale, Saki Macozoma, a former ANC MP, and Bridgette Radebe, sister to Motsepe and wife of ANC stalwart Jeff Radebe. This distinct class of elites starkly contrasts with BEE's intended beneficiaries, everyday South Africans. Instead, these individuals are grappling with the lingering consequences of oligarchic state capture, widespread corruption, poor service delivery, and sustained cuts to education and health budgets. Nigeria shares this pattern. At the very least, Dangote's vast wealth should represent the pinnacle of success in a thriving African economy. Instead, he exemplifies Africa's most prominent and wealthiest oligarch, demonstrating how proximity to political power can create controversial paths to fortune. Regrettably, almost every African country has its own Dangote or Motsepe whose influence hinders fair and inclusive economic development. Crony capitalism is a sharp break from free market ideals, where political connections override merit and innovation. This distortion breeds corruption, economic inefficiency and social inequality. It also weakens democratic norms by allowing private interests to gain excessive influence over public policy. A 2015 study by Columbia University concluded that wealth accumulated by politically connected oligarchs has a strongly negative impact on economic growth, while the fortunes of unconnected billionaires have little effect. This finding suggests African economies could grow more rapidly if the enormous influence of politically connected elites was curtailed. Now is the time for meaningful reform. African nations must implement a wealth tax on high-net-worth individuals and direct the revenue towards essential services in impoverished areas. According to Oxfam, a modest tax increase consisting of a 1 percent levy on wealth and a 10 percent income tax on the richest individuals could generate $66bn annually, equivalent to 2.29 percent of Africa's gross domestic product, and help close critical funding gaps in education and electricity access. Above all, African countries must adopt economic policies focused on equity to reduce poverty and improve wellbeing. We, the neglected and disenfranchised 95 percent, stand against oligarchy. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
