Category: Africa

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Alexander M. Laskaris, Visiting Scholar, University of Florida

Kidnapping for ransom has a long history in the west African Sahel. In 1979, a rebel group led by Chad’s future president Hissène Habré kidnapped a French archaeologist and a German medical doctor in the north of the country. The kidnappers asked for the release of political prisoners, among other demands.

Over the decades kidnapping became an industry in the Sahel. Governments were willing to pay financial and political ransoms even if they denied it publicly. This industry fuelled the expansion of jihadist groups from Algeria to the Sahel (south of the Sahara) between the early 2000s and mid-2010s. The most spectacular of these kidnappings was the abduction of 32 European tourists in 2003. It was carried out by the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat in the Algerian Sahara. A €5 million ransom was reportedly paid for the hostages.

Using conflict data from the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project, we examined the evolution of abductions and forced disappearances in 17 west African countries over the last 24 years. We are scholars with personal experience as a former ambassador to Chad and Guinea and a geographer.

We analysed nearly 58,000 violent events. These events have caused the death of more than 201,000 people from January 2000 through June 2024.

Our findings suggest that the kidnapping industry has experienced a major shift. We discovered that most of the victims of kidnappings for ransom were westerners until the end of the 2010s. Since then violent extremist organisations have turned to local civilians. Both western and local hostages represent lucrative resources that ultimately fuel insurgencies in the west African Sahel.

A lucrative industry

Armed groups have learned that seizing a western hostage is a low-risk and high-reward proposition. It leads to financial gain and political accommodation. The exact amount of money paid is difficult to assess due to the opacity of the negotiations and the number of intermediaries involved. An estimated US$125 million was paid by European countries to liberate hostages captured by al-Qaida and its affiliates in this region from 2008 to 2014.

These resources have fuelled the international development, training and arms purchases of armed groups. For example, in October 2025, the United Arab Emirates allegedly paid a US$50 million ransom. They also allegedly delivered military hardware to al-Qaida-affiliated militants for the release of Emirati hostages in Mali.

The revenues generated from ransom payments have facilitated the development of alliances between militant groups and local leaders. They have also made the recruitment of young combatants from Mali, Niger, Mauritania and Burkina Faso easier for extremist organisations, by offering significant financial incentives.

As security expert Wolfram Lacher explains, kidnapping for ransom was the most important factor behind the growth of al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb in northern Mali.

The common perception is that when a westerner is taken hostage in the Sahel, a mighty military apparatus is deployed to rescue them. However, there is little to suggest that western military pressure on terrorist or criminal networks contributes to hostage recovery. Indeed, the most likely outcome of an armed rescue operation has proven to be the death of the hostage. Most of the time, the reason for their release has been ransom and concessions negotiated by local partners.

Local civilians increasingly targeted

In the last decade, the number of foreigners living or travelling in the Sahel has plummeted. Due to terrorism and political unrest, travel to the region is strongly discouraged by western countries.

Jihadist militants have therefore turned to local targets and started abducting a growing number of civilians from the region. Our report reveals that abductions and forced disappearances have experienced a twenty-fold increase since Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM) was formed in 2017.

Kidnappings tend to occur both along major transport corridors and in rural areas. There, jihadist groups have implemented a predatory economy based on looting and ransoming civilians. In the central Sahel, this kidnapping economy has spread to most rural areas. This includes the south of the Wagadou forest in Mali to the W National Park at the border between Burkina Faso, Benin and Niger.

The brutal local economics of kidnap for ransom is also vibrant in the Lake Chad region. Although the kidnapping of westerners is, on a per capita basis, far more lucrative in the Sahel, these groups are doing a brisk business of kidnapping civilians, as shown on the map below.

In late November 2025, for example, more than 300 children were kidnapped by unidentified gunmen in a Catholic school in western Nigeria. Our analysis shows that about a third of these events involve abductions of girls and women.

Civilians are usually released unharmed shortly after their motorbikes, food items, phones and animals have been taken, or ransom has been paid.

Should ransoms be paid?

The question of whether hostage situations should be resolved by paying a ransom depends on the parties involved.

For Sahelian governments, acceding to ransom demands weakens their political position and provides material support for those who threaten them. The same applies to foreigners in the Sahel – relief workers, missionaries, business people, tourists – for whom every ransom paid makes their position more precarious.

For western governments responsive to family, media and political pressure, however, bringing hostages home via ransom is always the easiest solution. Media coverage focuses on joyful reunions, not moral hazard.

In the United States, the 2020 Robert Levinson Hostage Recovery and Hostage-Taking Accountability Act reorganised the internal hostage response capacity of the government. By streamlining the process by which accommodations are made to the kidnappers, the act established clear lines of authority, while giving families both better support and access to decision-makers.

Left unresolved is the tension between the prohibition on paying ransom to terrorist organisations and the reality that, for kidnapping victims and their families, the best response is to pay. Given the vastness of the Sahel and the lack of any effective security response, caving to ransom demands is the best hope for a successful resolution.

We should not criticise families for demanding action from their governments, for acceding to terrorist organisations’ ransom demands, or for rejoicing when hostages are liberated. At the same time, however, one should also not be afraid to state the obvious: their joy leads inevitably to another westerner’s or African’s trauma.

– Kidnapping for ransom in the Sahel: analysis of 24 years of data shows a new trend
– https://theconversation.com/kidnapping-for-ransom-in-the-sahel-analysis-of-24-years-of-data-shows-a-new-trend-270714

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Shirley C. Strum, Professor of the Graduate Division, School of Social Sciences and Emerita, Department of Anthropology, University of California, San Diego

Conflict between humans and baboons can tear communities apart. Shirley C. Strum has studied wild olive baboons in Kenya for more than 50 years. In that time she’s come to understand the species intimately. In this article she argues that humans have taken from nature (without asking) for too long. And that now it’s time for us to rethink this relationship.

What have you learnt about baboon behaviour and habits over the past 51 years?

During my studies I have found that baboons are smart and sophisticated, and they need each other to be successful because of an unwritten “golden rule” – “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”.

---

Read more: Baboon bonds: new study reveals that friendships make up for a bad start in life

---

Baboons aren’t yet endangered, because they adapt to new human environments. Part of this adaptability includes flexible primate hands (not trunks or hooves), primate intelligence, and the combined knowledge of their social group.

My research over the decades has provided a great deal of evidence of this.

As far as conflict with wildlife is concerned, you can’t ignore the growth in human population everywhere. In 1972, when I started my research, Kenya’s population was 12 million. Now it is pushing 60 million people.

This rate of population growth means more land is used for infrastructure and food. Development has converted wildlife areas into rural, suburban and urban human environments over the last 50 years.

As a result, human-wildlife conflict has increased. In Kenya, most wildlife exists in parks, reserves and surrounding areas. Kenya Wildlife Service recorded 10,000 episodes in these areas in 2024.

My research demonstrated that the cost of raiding has to outweigh the benefits for the baboons. Once tasted, human foods, including field crops, are ideal. Baboons are a special case of conflict because they can outsmart most humans. And baboons can be very destructive when they lose their fear of humans as they have in some parts of Cape Town, South Africa.

How can baboons be stopped from raiding farms and homes?

This depends on both the context and the history of baboon troops in the area.

The best solution to resolving conflicts is to prevent them. Changing human behaviours is difficult. And preventing bad baboon behaviour – like raiding human foods – is easier than trying to change baboon behaviours once they occur.

But this is an increasingly rare opportunity today because of the humanisation of the landscape.

What approaches have been tried and which ones have been successful?

The Gilgil Baboon Project – after translocation it became the Uaso Ngiro Baboon Project – started on a 45,000 acre (18,000 hectare) cattle ranch with more wildlife than cattle. We tried many control techniques, old (guarding and chasing) and new (playback of baboon alarm calls, leopard scats and lithium chloride taste aversion).

The ranch was then sold to Gikuyu Embu Meru Association, which distributed land to its members. Baboons began enjoying the new foods, raiding crops regularly.

Research demonstrated that the costs of raiding had to outweigh the benefits for baboon to stop raiding. It might surprise you that baboons do not eat human food out of spite but because of deep evolutionary imperatives. Their foraging aim is always to get the most nutrition for the least expenditure of energy.

Once tasted, human foods are special. They are large packages of easy to digest fare, the equivalent of baboon fast food. This makes baboons very difficult to control given the benefit of eating human food.

Some observations about solutions.

Boundaries: To prevent baboons raiding, you must draw a line beyond which baboons cannot go and reinforce it frequently and consistently. Given how much a baboon has to gain, she or he can devote plenty of time to waiting for the right moment.

Because of the growth of human population, many places already have baboon raiders. In this case, fields must be guarded by people all the time, homestead doors and windows can’t be left open (unless window bars prevent baboons of any size getting in) and many other human time-consuming and costly coping behaviours have to be used to control baboon raiding.

---

Read more: Fast, cheap calories may make city birds fat and sick

---

Remember, to control raiding the cost must exceed the benefit. You have to use up baboon time, forcing them to look for other things to eat. But harming a baboon doesn’t work unless it is directly linked to the raiding and in full view of the rest of the group.

If the baboon habit of eating human food has become a “tradition”, it is difficult to extinguish.

Translocation: If you have enough money and time, translocating the baboons might be an alternative. Translocation means moving them to a new place in their historical range. I pioneered translocation for primates in 1984 when I moved three troops from Kekopey Ranch near Gilgil, Kenya to a place where crops couldn’t grow, the Eastern Laikipia Plateau in Kenya.

Today, however, there are very few places left where baboons can’t get into trouble.

Killing: The final option is to remove the baboons. I call it “killing” because fancy names don’t hide the reality. However, it isn’t as easy as it sounds. You first need to understand baboons. Second, the baboons can’t be killed by a helicopter gunship or even professional hunters. They are too wily. Killing a whole baboon group has its challenges. Even if you succeed (which I doubt), removing one group from a population means another troop will soon take its place.

These are hard choices that I don’t take lightly. It is one thing to view wildlife from the safety of your home or vehicle but another to have baboons steal your food, take your livestock, or decimate your crops.

What needs to change?

Human views about baboons have changed over the last 50 years from positive to negative. Today, social media is rife with conflict between baboons and humans in southern Africa. Nature is real, but our ideas about nature are cultural and based on our experiences and attitudes.

We are faced with a difficult dilemma: humans cause the problem but wild creatures pay the price. Conflict between baboons and humans won’t change unless human behaviour and attitudes change.

Dr Strum has a new book published by Johns Hopkins University Press: Echoes of Our Origins: Baboons, Humans and Nature. It is available on Amazon US and Amazon UK.

– Managing conflict between baboons and people: what’s worked – and what hasn’t
– https://theconversation.com/managing-conflict-between-baboons-and-people-whats-worked-and-what-hasnt-264821

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Nicolette V Roman, SARChI: Human Capabilities, Social Cohesion and the Family, University of the Western Cape

At the end of the year, many families reunite to enjoy time together. These times can be happy, yet sometimes they reveal tensions, unsatisfied needs and difficult relationships. The reality is that being together does not necessarily mean you are connected. Families can be both joyful and anguished or distressed at the same time.

These contradictions are brought into focus during festive periods. They show just how strong the ties of a family are, and remind us that family life is not just a social structure but a continuous practice of connecting and caring.

In our work at the Centre of Interdisciplinary Studies of Children, Families and Society at the University of the Western Cape in South Africa, we pose what seems on the surface a very simple question: what do families do to not only survive, but thrive together?

We find repeated themes in our research: families thrive (or do well) when trust is fostered, when care is given and when all members feel they belong.

Family cohesion enables individuals to feel safe and connected. It is not about being perfect or agreeing always, but being able to trust and get along with each other.

We’ve found that more unified families can:

• communicate openly

• adapt to change

• support each other in the trials of life.

These virtues are not something to be assumed. An example is trust, which is not automatic. It is constructed gradually, by respecting each other, the consistency of a present caregiver, the fairness of shared tasks, the assurance that a person’s voice is heard.

In cases where trust breaks down, families tend to say that they feel uncertain, or even unsafe, in their own homes. Yet when trust is strong, it creates the invisible thread which helps families to survive change.

Our studies show that disagreement can coexist with closeness, provided families have ways to repair relationships after tension. One parent in our research said it best:

We fight, we cry, but we still sit together for supper.

That small act of sitting together is part of the work of care that holds families intact.

South African families

South African families and households are diverse in their structures: nuclear, single-parent, multigenerational, child-headed or based on emotional connection and choice. That’s the result of cultural richness as well as the heritage of apartheid, which disturbed traditional family life through forced migration, labour relations and systemic marginalisation.

---

Read more: Policies in South Africa must stop ignoring families’ daily realities

---

In our qualitative research in urban communities, families mixed both traditional values and contemporary realities. Grandmothers are usually key figures in caregiving and young people contribute meaningfully to family and household life. But families face significant pressures. Many struggle to meet basic needs, like shelter and food, as well as intangible needs like love, respect and understanding. Family cohesion may be eroded when these needs are not met.

Unmet needs also reflect what we call “bad care”. By that we mean not getting care, or getting inadequate care.

The impact of bad care on people is among the most interesting things that we discovered during our research. It occurs when care-giving responsibilities are not shared equally, when intangible needs are not met or when family members can’t talk to each other. The consequences of unmet intangible needs are usually quite powerful.

For example, a grandmother may make sure her grandchildren are fed, dressed and safe every day. But if her desire for love, connection, or relaxation is not met, she may feel like no one cares about her or that she is being taken for granted. As one grandmother described it, being “the glue” that kept the family together meant her personal needs for rest, emotional support, or simply being cared for were overlooked.

---

Read more: Older South Africans need better support and basic services — and so do their caregivers

---

Some families expect their younger members (daughters in particular) to take care of other people, even if they are not prepared or haven’t consented. In our study, one interviewee said that since the death of her grandmother, she was supposed to be the one who would keep the family together though she did not consider herself ready. Her personal needs such as being heard, respected and given space to grieve were placed on hold.

A care-giver who feels as though no one is noticing or supporting them might end up feeling depressed, angry, or burned out. They might not ask for help, for fear of being judged or rejected. One woman said she never talked to her family about her concerns since they “have their own problems” and “don’t want to listen”. This silence, which can be caused by pride, fear, or a lack of trust, can hurt relationships and make people feel even more alone.

Bad care also refers to being given care that is not responsive to all the needs of a family member. Families who only consider aspects like food, shelter and money might lose sight of emotional and spiritual needs. And as those are not fulfilled, the emotional fabric of the family starts to fall apart.

During the holidays, these family behaviours tend to get worse. Being back under one roof brings out disparities in money, values, or hopes. Adult children come home with fresh experiences, parents remember the sacrifices they made, and grandparents hope their traditions will live on.

Care becomes the language that connects people of all ages in this mix. It can be said in words, like when people talk, laugh, or say they’re sorry. It often happens softly, like when people share a meal made with love, offer to help, or take a moment to listen.

Care is not seasonal. It is every day and intentional. The family is not a luxury; it is the pillar of wellbeing. Once the decorations are packed away and the noise fades, what remains are the relationships we have tended.

– Family time: how to survive – and even thrive – over the holidays
– https://theconversation.com/family-time-how-to-survive-and-even-thrive-over-the-holidays-269035