从革命战争的视角看 "博科圣地 "的长期存在

Q4 Social Sciences
Juras Kimbartas
{"title":"从革命战争的视角看 \"博科圣地 \"的长期存在","authors":"Juras Kimbartas","doi":"10.47459/lasr.2023.21.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since 2009 Boko Haram has been carrying out terrorist attacks in the northeastern part of Nigeria. In 2015 the group was seen as the world‘s deadliest terrorist organization, however, due to internal disagreements in 2016, Boko Haram split into two factions, namely the Islamic State – West Africa Province (ISWAP) and Jamā’at Ahl as-Sunnah lid-Da’wah wa’l-Jihād (JAS), which is still often referred to by its original name – Boko Haram. While the competition between these factions made way for the Nigerian government to retake formerly lost territories, attacks from Boko Haram continue, and government forces have yet to fully quell the insurgency. This article surveys the protracted survival of Boko Haram through their operating practices by basing itself on the two primary models of revolutionary warfare (people’s war by Mao Zedong and Foquismo by Che Guevara). It takes note of the similarities between traditional revolutionary and contemporary jihadist ways of thought. Despite these similarities, crucial distinctions can also be made between the two factions of Boko Haram in order to explain their comparatively different levels of success. The article is divided into 3 primary bodies, each examining one of the three pillars (ideological, popular-support and military) that are required for a successful revolution. Comparisons between ISWAP and JAS are made in each section. Finally, the addition and comparison of the results stemming from each part are summarized and aid in trying to understand the protracted survival of Boko Haram.","PeriodicalId":37780,"journal":{"name":"Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review","volume":"151 s620","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Protracted Survival of Boko Haram From a Revolutionary Warfare Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Juras Kimbartas\",\"doi\":\"10.47459/lasr.2023.21.3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Since 2009 Boko Haram has been carrying out terrorist attacks in the northeastern part of Nigeria. In 2015 the group was seen as the world‘s deadliest terrorist organization, however, due to internal disagreements in 2016, Boko Haram split into two factions, namely the Islamic State – West Africa Province (ISWAP) and Jamā’at Ahl as-Sunnah lid-Da’wah wa’l-Jihād (JAS), which is still often referred to by its original name – Boko Haram. While the competition between these factions made way for the Nigerian government to retake formerly lost territories, attacks from Boko Haram continue, and government forces have yet to fully quell the insurgency. This article surveys the protracted survival of Boko Haram through their operating practices by basing itself on the two primary models of revolutionary warfare (people’s war by Mao Zedong and Foquismo by Che Guevara). It takes note of the similarities between traditional revolutionary and contemporary jihadist ways of thought. Despite these similarities, crucial distinctions can also be made between the two factions of Boko Haram in order to explain their comparatively different levels of success. The article is divided into 3 primary bodies, each examining one of the three pillars (ideological, popular-support and military) that are required for a successful revolution. Comparisons between ISWAP and JAS are made in each section. Finally, the addition and comparison of the results stemming from each part are summarized and aid in trying to understand the protracted survival of Boko Haram.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37780,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review\",\"volume\":\"151 s620\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47459/lasr.2023.21.3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47459/lasr.2023.21.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自 2009 年以来,"博科圣地 "一直在尼日利亚东北部地区实施恐怖袭击。2015 年,该组织被视为世界上最致命的恐怖组织,然而,由于内部分歧,博科圣地在 2016 年分裂为两个派别,即伊斯兰国-西非省(ISWAP)和Jamā'at Ahl as-Sunnah lid-Da'wah wa'l-Jihād(JAS),后者仍经常被称为其原名--博科圣地。虽然这些派别之间的竞争为尼日利亚政府夺回前失地开辟了道路,但 "博科圣地 "的袭击仍在继续,政府军尚未完全平息叛乱。本文以两种主要的革命战争模式(毛泽东的人民战争和切-格瓦拉的 Foquismo)为基础,通过博科圣地的行动实践,探讨了博科圣地旷日持久的生存之道。报告注意到了传统革命思想与当代圣战思想的相似之处。尽管有这些相似之处,但博科圣地的两个派别之间也有重要区别,以解释其相对不同的成功程度。文章分为三个主要部分,分别探讨革命成功所需的三大支柱(意识形态、民众支持和军事)之一。每个部分都对 ISWAP 和 JAS 进行了比较。最后,对每个部分的结果进行补充和比较,以帮助理解博科圣地长期存在的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Protracted Survival of Boko Haram From a Revolutionary Warfare Perspective
Since 2009 Boko Haram has been carrying out terrorist attacks in the northeastern part of Nigeria. In 2015 the group was seen as the world‘s deadliest terrorist organization, however, due to internal disagreements in 2016, Boko Haram split into two factions, namely the Islamic State – West Africa Province (ISWAP) and Jamā’at Ahl as-Sunnah lid-Da’wah wa’l-Jihād (JAS), which is still often referred to by its original name – Boko Haram. While the competition between these factions made way for the Nigerian government to retake formerly lost territories, attacks from Boko Haram continue, and government forces have yet to fully quell the insurgency. This article surveys the protracted survival of Boko Haram through their operating practices by basing itself on the two primary models of revolutionary warfare (people’s war by Mao Zedong and Foquismo by Che Guevara). It takes note of the similarities between traditional revolutionary and contemporary jihadist ways of thought. Despite these similarities, crucial distinctions can also be made between the two factions of Boko Haram in order to explain their comparatively different levels of success. The article is divided into 3 primary bodies, each examining one of the three pillars (ideological, popular-support and military) that are required for a successful revolution. Comparisons between ISWAP and JAS are made in each section. Finally, the addition and comparison of the results stemming from each part are summarized and aid in trying to understand the protracted survival of Boko Haram.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review
Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊介绍: Lithuanian Annual Strategic Review is a bilingual (Lithuanian and English), peer reviewed scholarly magazine that is published once per year by the Strategic Research Center of the Military Academy of Lithuania in cooperation with Vilnius University (Institute of International Relations and Political Science) and Vytautas Magnus University in Kaunas (Political Science and Diplomacy Department). The journal focuses on the global, regional and national security problematique which directly or indirectly influence security and defense issues of Lithuania, the Baltic states and region around. The Review aims to sustain high profile scientific publications delivering rigorous analytical insights into security and defence problematique ofn the region and to be ranked as a regular and high-quality academic periodical. The Review reaches out for academic community and political practitioners and offer ample opportunities for scholarly visibility and potential impact.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信