Terrorism, State Fragility, and Regional Stability
The security crises in Africa are often seen as purely ideological, when in reality they’re highly multicausal. Economic tensions, inequality, terrorism, and the fight for respect of human rights are all causes, and even they have their sub-reasoning. Terrorism surges when State authority is fragmented, weak, with questionable governmental legitimacy, or when it fails to control the territory completely.
While this is one cause of insecurity, it’s only part of the full picture. There’s also food insecurity, forced displacement, external intervention, and major tensions around the democratic system model.
Terrorism in Africa
Terrorism is a highly debated term that has no internationally accepted definition. For the purpose of this article, we will consider the classifications of typologies, and the ‘terrorism checklist’ that includes violence, political message, recipient, and audiences.
As a general pattern, there is a large presence of Islamic inspired liberation movements. They often affiliate with ISIS or Al Qaeda to gain resources and recognition, with the common goal to remove ‘bad governments’ (including foreign influences), and create a regional caliphate. Their financing comes from organized crime and drug trafficking, using tactics such as Guerilla warfare, terrorist attacks, media, and propaganda.
Boko Haram as a Sui Generis Case
Boko Haram emerged from state weakness in northeastern Nigeria, which was experiencing social marginalization and the loss of political legitimacy. The cycle is a repeated pattern, protests suppressed by the State led to more violent actions, then more violent State, then extreme terrorism.
Boko Haram is a unique case because it’s one of the few groups that did not integrate into ISIS or Al Qaeda, they chose to stay very nationally focused instead of aligning regionally. Boko Haram prioritized their local territorial control and leadership autonomy in terms of powers, but that resulted in further fragmentation and armed conflict with ISWAP, the branch of ISIS near Boko Haram.
In the typologies of terrorism, Boko Haram is considered religious sectarian in a local insurgence. Specifically, they fall in the category of religious terrorism (the 4th wave of terrorism according to Rapaport), with sectarian violence. They use a radical interpretation of Islam, applying takfir (the declaration of ‘unbelievers’ that can include public punishment of opposers), and targets civilians. The civilians targeted include groups of religious minorities even within the same religious community, schools, and those seen as ‘corrupted’. Within Boko Haram, they don’t consider themselves a terrorist group. Their narrative frames their existence as moral purification and divine obligation.
The ultimate goal of Boko Haram is to overthrow the Nigerian state by local means, and to impose its own order. When part of the group did affiliate with ISIS/ISWAP, Boko Haram split and the factions fought each other.
A case study within this case study is the 2014 capture of 276 female nigerian students. The message was to delegitimize the Nigerian state as un-Islamic and incapable of protecting its citizens, plus demonstrating general state weakness. This message was sent using violence and coercion against civilians, and it had political-ideological intent instead of random criminal activity; the communicative purpose of the attack was aimed at multiple audiences. It was directed at the Nigerian state as well as educational authorities, demonstrating their discontent with the governmental westernization of education. The secondary audiences include the broader Nigerian population as well as the international community.
The “Failed State” Debate
The Failed State is a problematic concept with debates reaching decades back.
The term first came about in the 1990s by Herman & Rarter, which defines a failed state in terms of lost sovereignty, citizens at risk, regional neighbors at risk, and the perpetuation of more problems, crisis, etc. . Then Jean Marie Grose postulated that the term failed state doesnt exist, and there are really five categories to refer to these problems; the anarco-state, ghost, anemic, captured, and aborted states.
Robert Rotberg took a similar approach by subcategorizing ‘failed state’ with four types of State: strong, weak, failed, and collapsed. Collapsed is referred to as the total literal collapse, when only ash is left.
Two other relevant definitions come from Robert Jackson and Noam Chomsky which follow more generally the original 90s definition by Herman & Rartner. Robert Jackson defines a failed state as one without the minimal conditions to preserve its function, notably he blames both the government and the citizens. Chomsky simply says it’s a state who violates international law and fails to protect its population.
The biggest problem is that all of these definitions continue being biased and from the western-world-view based on eurocentrism. Looking at the history of Africa, centuries of stable monarchies and tribal committees ruled the lands before colonization. To categorize failed states is to imply that a healthy State (Nation-State, origin in Westphalia 1648) is the only valid form of governance.
Though the term ‘failed state’ is orientalist normalization of the European cosmovision, we do need some sort of term to talk about territories in distress. Shifting the term to ‘failed nation’ could be a possible solution because it immediately shifts the focus to cultural implications instead of solely governmental.
Security and Democracy
Formally, the vast majority of African states are democratic. On paper, they have constitutions, elections are held, and the presidents and courts operate formally. However, the quality of the democratic function is questionable. Africa’s own society has a 39% satisfaction rate with democracy or at least the idea of one. The functioning is ineffective, with leaders overstaying in power, frequent coups, and large terrorist presences throughout the continent.
The presence of terrorist organizations is a challenge to state authority and territorial control. Terrorist groups are in active pursuit of alternate legal systems, which leads governments to militarize their politics and prioritize defense over development. This causes frequent restrictions on civil liberties.
The recent wave of coups, especially in the Sahel, shows a dangerous pattern of military justification for restoring order and combating terrorism. The presence of coups weakens institutions and normalizes military intervention while suspending constitutional order. This perpetuates a cycle of democratic breakdown presented as security necessity.
The concentration of power is another major obstacle currently, leaders remain in power for decades by bypassing or ignoring their term limits. These political elites age while the societies remain young, creating a discordance between the governments and their populations; institutions lose legitimacy, lose trust, and citizens are left with democratic fatigue.
Democracy has become procedural in Africa, not participatory. The people vote, yet the power does not change coherently.
In conclusion, democracy in Africa operates in conditions of chronic insecurity. Institutions have to function without complete territorial control, economic stability, or social cohesion. Governments choose survival over liberal norms. The democratic erosion in Africa is often reactive instead of ideological.
Summary by Chat: Although many African states are formally democratic, the effectiveness of democracy remains limited due to persistent insecurity, political instability, and weak state capacity. Terrorism, armed insurgencies, and recurrent coups have led governments to prioritize security and regime survival over democratic participation and civil liberties. In addition, leadership entrenchment, the erosion of term limits, and growing social pressures — particularly among young populations — have undermined public trust in democratic institutions. As a result, democracy in Africa often exists in a procedural form, constrained by structural conditions rather than outright rejection.
Table: Regional Stability in Africa
| Region | More Stable States | Weaker / Less Stable States | Main Drivers |
| North Africa | Morocco | Libya | Institutional continuity vs state collapse |
| West Africa / Sahel | Senegal, Ghana | Mali, Burkina Faso | Democracy vs insurgency belt |
| Central / East Africa | Tanzania | Somalia | Cohesion vs total fragmentation |
| Southern Africa | Botswana | Mozambique | Governance vs insurgency + geostrategy |
No responses yet