Free Essay About Mercenaries Join Nigeria’s Military Campaign Against Boko Haram

Adam Nossiter’s article in the New York Times, ‘Mercenaries Join Nigeria’s Military Campaign Against Boko Haram’ and Ben Van Raaij’s article in deVolkskrant, ‘'Fonds Verenigde Naties nodig voor strijd tegen Boko Haram' talk about the Nigerian government’s war against the terrorist group Boko Haram and the unofficial presence of mercenaries from other countries, mostly South Africa. The articles also touch upon the military aid provided by Nigeria’s neighbors in the war against Boko Haram and mention that the mercenary presence has increased because of the impending elections in Nigeria. Although the two articles cover the same news, the reporting style is different and their emphasis lie in different issues.
Both the articles cover the presence of mercenaries in Nigerian military’s latest offensive against Boko Haram and its relation to the impending presidential elections. Thy mention the presence of South African mercenaries and point out that this is not officially admitted but is a ground reality. Both articles also make mention of the fact that Nigeria’s neighbors like Chad, Benin, Cameroon and Benin have sent troops and promised more help and that the mercenaries are not only from South Africa (although they form the majority) but also from former soviet countries. Mention is also made of ISIS endorsing Boko Haram as part of its organization. Although the two reporters are covering the same news item, there are a lot of differences in how the news item has finally come out in both the reports.
Nossiter’s article on the use of mercenaries by the Nigerian military in the war against Boko Haram is more detailed and has direct quotes from various sources such as military officials in Nigeria, intelligence officers diplomats in the country, Nigeria’s head of defense intelligence, academicians and researchers like Paul Lubeck of Johns Hopkins University and Jakkie Cilliers, executive director of the Institute for Security Studies in Pretoria and South African military. The article is largely comprised of these opinions of these people and a little information about Boko Haram and the South African Mercenaries. The Dutch news article however is a little different as there are fewer quotes from the officials and more borrowed stuff from Reuters and New York Times. While there are a lot of soundbites in the New York Times article about the mercenaries with different officials talking about their presence, their activities, modus operandi and success and possible repercussions for the mercenaries in South Africa, the Dutch article focuses less on the mercenaries and mentions about the resolution that is being sent to the UN by the African countries and also the revenge attacks of Boko Haram. The New York Ties article does not mention any attacks in response to the presence of mercenaries, nor does it mention the amount that is paid to these mercenaries on a daily basis.
It is evident that the news item has been given more importance by the New York Times as there are excerpts of interviews from government officials and diplomat while the Dutch paper is content with quoting Reuters and New York Times and including a few direct quotes. While there is a resident reporter for the New York Times helps in making the report detailed the Dutch news article mentions everything in a very concise manner. This perhaps reflects the position taken by each country and their media on the war against Islamic militants. The Americans are very involved in the war against terror and ISIS while the Dutch are not involved directly and this explains the tone of the articles. The New York Times article although detailed does not comes across as biased as the reporters tries to bring in the views of everyone involved in the crisis. The Dutch news article however covers it in a fleeting way. It is more like informing its local readers of what is happening and does not go into the details too much. Both the articles mention the stance taken by the South African officials about the mercenary issue. It is understandable as the mercenaries are pro-Apartheid soldiers, a part of their history that the South Africans have no admiration for and would like to forget (Tshabalala 2015). The New York Times article takes a cautious approach and does not talk about the revenge attacks from Boko Haram while the Dutch article does not exercise such caution and mentions the attacks. Perhaps the New York Times catering mainly to the Americans does not want to talk about the possibility of a counter attack by Boko Haram while the Dutch reporter has no such compunctions.
The differences in both the articles reveal the different ways news is reported around the world and how it caters to its audience. A country like America involved in the war against terror would obviously demand more news about any group remotely linked to ISIS while a Dutch news article does not have such expectations to fulfill.

References

Nossiter, Adam (2015, March 12). Mercenaries Join Nigeria’s Military Campaign against Boko Haram. New York Times. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/13/world/africa/nigerias-fight-against-boko-haram-gets-help-from-south-african-mercenaries.html?
Raaij.V. Ben (2015, March 13). Fonds Verenigde Naties nodig voor strijd tegen Boko Haram. deVolkskrant. Retrieved from: http://www.volkskrant.nl/dossier-boko-haram/huurlingen-helpen-nigeria-in-strijd-tegen-boko-haram~a3900269/
Tshabalala, Sibusiso (2015, March 16). Hiring ex-Apartheid mercenaries by Nigeria is awkward for modern South Africa. Quartz. Retrieved from: http://qz.com/362954/hiring-ex-apartheid-mercenaries-by-nigeria-is-awkward-for-modern-south-africa/