Category: MIL-OSI

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Leila Patel, Professor of Social Development Studies, University of Johannesburg

There is now a growing global consensus that additional measures are needed to support the agency of social protection beneficiaries. Such support will strengthen their self-sustaining livelihoods and pathways that would accelerate social and economic improvements and participation in the labour market, and promote wider social and political stability.

For instance, emerging evidence from 104 programmes around the world has found a net gain of US$4-$5 when cash and livelihood support are provided. Cash plus labour activation programmes for youth that are designed to address barriers to economic inclusion were effective human capital investments, leading to improved outcomes.

South Africa, which has one of the largest cash transfer programmes, is reviewing its social protection system. At issue is what complementary cash plus employment and livelihoods interventions government needs to consider if it is to introduce some kind of basic income support grant.

Calls for such a grant in South Africa have gained momentum since the government introduced the COVID-19 social relief distress grant in May 2020. It now stands at R370 (about US$21) a person a month, reaching over 8 million recipients.

These issues were discussed at a recent two-day policy colloquium on the future of social protection and its potential to promote economic inclusion hosted by South Africa’s Department of Social Development and the Presidency. South Africa will also draw from lessons learnt from the Second World Summit for Social Development in Doha. Lessons learnt will be shared from countries such as Brazil, Indonesia and Ghana. These countries are attempting to integrate or craft economic and social inclusion policies onto existing cash transfer programmes.

The exponential growth in social assistance, especially cash transfers, has helped to alleviate extreme poverty globally. Over the last decade alone, the cash transfers have reduced poverty by 11% on average and extreme poverty by 37% in low- and middle-income countries.

The University of Johannesburg’s Centre for Social Development in Africa has done extensive research in this area over almost two decades.

The centre’s research findings are that social grant beneficiaries in South Africa are pointing the way. Beneficiaries already use grants to improve livelihood outcomes. There is much to learn from how grant beneficiaries are using their agency to improve income and meet consumption needs.

Reimagining social grants

Here I share stories drawn from our research on grants, livelihoods, employment and services over the years. All names are anonymised.

Nandi was 23 years old when our colleague, the late Tessa Hochfeld, interviewed her in 2018. She left school at the end of grade 9. She had three children; one died of pneumonia at 20 days of age.

She is one of four out of 10 primary caregivers who receive the child support grant nationally – now a basic R560 (US$32) a month – who did not pursue any livelihood activity. Livelihood activity is anything that a person does to make a living to meet their basic needs.

Nandi was unemployed and likely to face long term unemployment. Her children are part of the country’s largest cash transfer programme. It is one of the 10th largest in the world, reaching 82% of poor children.

Nandi’s story is similar to that of other young women who are beneficiaries of the child grant. It tells of the complexity of human needs, risks and vulnerabilities that young women face, which is carefully documented in Hochfeld’s book.

Supplementing incomes

Only a quarter of all grant beneficiaries were engaged in informal work in 2021.

They said they were variously motivated to engage in complementary livelihood activities by a desire for self-efficacy, and a strong desire to work rather than sit at home.

They engaged in informal, micro-livelihood activities on the streets as well as in their homes and backyards. These included buying and selling goods, supplying goods, building, repairs, photography and running restaurants or taverns. They also engaged in renting out accommodation, traditional healing, fahfee betting, recycling, farming, community gardening, beadwork, sewing and shoe making.

They received very little support from the government. Some received support from an NGO. Another received one-off technical support from the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs. The majority turned to their families for support, or to informal borrowing, and used grant money to start their businesses.

Luthando is a 41-year-old ex-offender who wanted to reintegrate into the community. His girlfriend challenged him to earn an honest living instead of robbing other people.

She gave him R150 (about US$8.66) out of his son’s R560 ($32.33) child support grant to buy goods for resale. He borrowed another R300 (about $17.32) from a mashonisa (money lender). He now runs a micro business. He said proudly, displaying his wares:

I can say that everything you see on this table today started with R450 (about $30).

Sthandiso used part of the child support grant for his two sons to become a photographer and a videographer. Two other child support grant recipients pooled their money to buy chickens, pluck them and sell them on grant days. “This way we doubled our money.”

But they faced many obstacles such as a lack of jobs, safety issues, childcare, high transport costs, lack of access to capital and credit, lack of experience, knowledge and information as well as skills in financial literacy, mentorship and coaching.

Sphamandla’s story tells of how his life changed:

I have not yet reached financial independence because I have not gotten to where I want. Having money to feed my family and do some little things is different from being financially independent … It is true that I no longer borrow or depend on anybody to feed my family, but I still have the problem of not having money to buy a house and do other things that I need. But I am hopeful that slowly I will get there through these things I am doing for money. That is why we save money little by little every month.

Looking forward

These stories dispel myths that grants create dependency on government. They do not idolise the grant beneficiaries but open the door to thinking differently about how to support the agency of the millions of men and women who rely on social grants by building their livelihood capabilities.

The stories of the recipients show that there is scope for exploring new areas of employment growth and support for informal workers. A thorny issue is whether there should be behavioural conditions attached to a redesigned Social Relief of Distress grant that would compel recipients to pursue employment and livelihoods.

Given South Africa’s huge unemployment rate, this is not an option. Supporting beneficiary choice and aligning hard and soft incentives could go a long way to supporting human capabilities of people that have been left behind, in promoting social and labour market inclusion and inclusive growth.

One way to do this is to grow and strengthen grant beneficiaries’ participation in the informal economy, which could be an important driver of employment in the country.

– Can South Africa’s social grants help people make a better life? Research offers hope
– https://theconversation.com/can-south-africas-social-grants-help-people-make-a-better-life-research-offers-hope-268994

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Olayinka Ajala, Associate professor in Politics and International Relations, Leeds Beckett University

Terrorism and insurgency have ravaged parts of Nigeria since 2009, especially in the northern regions. Tens of thousands of Nigerians have been killed and millions have been displaced by the violence. Nigeria was ranked sixth in the 2025 Global Terrorism Index, with a score of 7.658, moving up from eighth place in 2023 and 2024.

US president Donald Trump declared Nigeria a “country of particular concern” in November 2025.

This was the result of a campaign by US congressman Riley Moore, who alleged that there was an “alarming and ongoing persecution of Christians” in the west African country. The congressman stated that 7,000 Nigerian Christians had been killed in 2025 alone, an average of 35 a day.

Trump also threatened to take direct military action against Islamist militant groups operating in Nigeria.

In response, Nigeria’s President Bola Tinubu objected, stating that the US characterisation of Nigeria did not reflect the country’s reality or values. He said successive governments had made efforts to uphold peaceful existence among diverse faith communities.

I have been researching conflicts, terrorism and the formation of insurgent groups in Nigeria for over a decade.

To understand the degree and intensity of terrorist and insurgency activities in Nigeria in the last 10 years, I analysed data from Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED), an independent violence monitor.

The analysis shows it is difficult, if not impossible, to delineate the killings based on religious affiliations. All the religions in the country have been affected, and there have been fatalities across several ethnic and religious lines.

Is there a religious genocide in Nigeria?

Religious violence started in Nigeria in 1953, seven years before the country gained independence.

Successive military and civilian regimes have since struggled to curtail the string of religious violence, which is often linked to issues such as ethnicity, resource management, competition for resources and colonial boundaries. (British colonialists placed different ethnic groups with sometimes different values in one country.)

Figure 1 shows that while the number of attacks carried out by terrorist and insurgent groups have been roughly similar in the last four years, the number of fatalities has declined.

This chart does not explain the categories of people attacked. To understand whether there is a disproportionate attack on Christians, I compared the number of attacks on churches and mosques in Nigeria in the last 10 years.

The data shows that non-state actors have attacked both churches and mosques in Nigeria. While there have been more attacks on churches in the last six years, the data reveals that there were more attacks on mosques in 2015 and 2017.

Generally, Nigeria’s population is considered to be roughly evenly split between the two religions, with only around 0.6% adhering to traditional African religions or other beliefs.

Although it is difficult to extract the number of fatalities in these cases, the number of attacks on places of worship is an indication that both Christians and Muslims are under attack by terrorist and insurgent groups in Nigeria.

Trump’s history with Nigeria

This is the second time Trump has designated Nigeria as a country of particular concern. The first time was in December 2020, when he stated that the government of Nigeria was not doing enough to protect the safety of Nigerians, especially Christians. This was under the regime of former president Muhammadu Buhari.

Events leading to the designation of Nigeria as a country of particular concern this time started in March 2025, two months after Trump was sworn in for a second term. The US House foreign affairs sub-committee on Africa approved measures urging the president to impose sanctions on Nigeria due to the widespread persecution of Christians.

In addition, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom report on Nigeria (2025) argued that religious freedom in Nigeria remains poor. It said the federal and state governments in Nigeria continue to “tolerate attacks or failed to respond to violent actions” by non-state actors on Christians in the country.

The commission recommended that the US government designate Nigeria as a country of particular concern for “engaging in and tolerating systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom, as defined by the International Religious Freedom Act”.

What the designation means for Nigeria

The “country of particular concern” status is an official classification under the US International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. The act requires the president of the US to declare this status where the government of a country has “engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious freedom”.

Such violations include arbitrary execution based on faith, torture or inhuman treatment based on religion as well as other denials of the rights to life, liberty, or security because of a person’s religion.

In the case of Nigeria, there is no evidence that any of these acts have been carried out by the government.

The designation of a country as country of particular concern requires the US government to consider a range of options for ending the violations identified. The first steps include diplomatic or direct engagement, public condemnation or withdrawal of assistance. This could be followed by further actions such as economic sanctions and withdrawal of aid or other forms of economic assistance.

The US government, rather than engaging in diplomatic or direct engagement with the Nigerian government as a first step, has already threatened sanctions such as the withdrawal of aid and direct military action.

What should the US do to support Nigeria?

To assist the country in its fight against terrorism, the US needs to reconsider the classification of Nigeria and revert to the first step identified earlier: diplomacy and direct engagement.

Second, the US should support Nigeria’s effort to identify the sponsors of these groups and their sources of finance within and outside the country.

Third, there is a need for a regional and international approach to curb the menace of terrorism in Nigeria and the west African and Sahel region. The US could play a significant role in supporting organisations such as the Multi-National Joint Task Force which was set up to fight terrorism in the region.

– Is there a Christian genocide in Nigeria? Evidence shows all faiths are under attack by terrorists
– https://theconversation.com/is-there-a-christian-genocide-in-nigeria-evidence-shows-all-faiths-are-under-attack-by-terrorists-268929