We all hurt when anyone – child, adult, man, woman, herdsman, farmer – anyone at all is killed or maimed as a result of a clash, militancy, terrorism, or murderous intent. As a result, we all deserve sympathy from our government, and definitely from our president
President Buhari seems to have developed the knack of unwittingly talking down on his countrymen (luckily for me, he does not talk about the women), especially when he is out of the country. The last utterance that had us all screeching and flapping our wings was on the country’s youths and how shiftless he thought they were. This latest utterance has been aimed at the media, the president’s own BFEs: best friends ever.
There is no doubt that the president has enjoyed a lot of goodwill from… me. But even I had a lot of trouble dealing with this latest salvo. Briefly, as I understand it, the president was reported to have said in China that the Nigerian media did not make ‘enough efforts to study the historical antecedents of issues that are creating national problems for us’, particularly the herdsmen versus farmer’s clashes.
The president was further reported to have stated or implied that the “cultural and historical implications” of the “misunderstanding, especially between herders and farmers” were not taken into account. The president then mentioned two of such historical facts as the climate change and the shrinking up of the Lake Chad. The result of these was that cattle herders needed to seek better pasture for their cattle.
Presidential utterances are taken seriously. When I issue a presidential utterance from my kitchen, everyone listens. Well, if they don’t, then they can only have themselves to blame for not being in line early enough to catch one of the doughnuts that I do musical chairs with. So, when I say, ‘food is ready’, believe me, people believe me. I have found though that not all my presidential utterances are respected. For instance, when I say ‘the gari bin is empty’, everyone suddenly becomes tone deaf. So, I take our president’s utterances seriously.
Like I said, I had a lot of head scratching over this latest utterance though for some reasons. In the argument structure, it is common to look for premises that lead to a justifiable conclusion. The fact that I could not find this connection was what had me scratching my head. To start with I wondered how the climate change could be responsible for the killings which had been attributed to the herdsmen. I mean, with respect, last time I checked, climate change was, and still is, a world issue. It affects every citizen living on planet earth. Yet, there is nowhere on that earth where roaming cattlemen are allowed to kill settled farmers on account of it.
With more respect, I also cannot connect the shrinking of Lake Chad with the killing of farmers. Generally, men kill for money or passion. There have been the odd reasons of course. I am not a film aficionado so I cannot run through the entire gamut of reasons behind killings. Honestly, though, taking other people’s lives in several places as have been reported in Benue, Zamfara, Plateau states, etc., sounds a little more than just some angst over a body of water that is drying up.
Then, honestly, there cannot be anything to understand through any sociocultural or historical theory. As far as I know, according to the law, killing is, and has always been, killing. Indeed, from the perspective of the law, only the state can take a life legally through executions. A man thus has no right to even avenge the killing of his cat by a neighbour through another killing; especially killing a human being. Everything has to be brought before the law.
When the president started his presidency, he assured the country that he would ‘belong to everybody’ and would categorically ‘belong to nobody.’ Again, I am still scratching my head over what that means exactly, because, hey, I don’t know much English. As it is now, I cannot honestly claim that the president belongs to me. I cannot seem to get the required sympathy from him on account of my countrymen and women being killed every day from unnecessary clashes, hunger and governmental inaction. For this, I need lots of sympathy.
Rather, what one reads from that utterance appears to be state justification and cover for some individuals to act above and beyond and outside the law against other defenceless people. Rather than condemn the acts of aggression leading to death, the utterance now targets the media for not understanding the ‘historical’ background to the killings! Now, that thoroughly had me scraping my head. Was the president saying that some killings can be condoned provided there is a full understanding of the historical background?
I think that there must be another approach from the presidency. If two members of a family engage in an argument that leads to fisticuffs or even, God forbid, the picking up of weapons, I don’t think the head of the house should tie the hands of one of them and allow the other to finish him off. Who loses? The head of the house.
Clearly, there is a problem in Nigeria, and I believe it is one of attitude. For instance, we have not been told exactly what the herdsmen have against modern ranching that does not involve colonising other people’s lands. And, where the government should act to reduce clashes on account of this attitude, it is busy giving excuses.
I find it quite hard to believe that even in this twenty-first century, cattle are still being herded across the land the same way it was done many centuries ago. There is such a thing as progress, and it must catch up with the cows, whether we like it or not. This means respecting other people’s right to keep their property.
I actually expected the president to say something else. I expected him to tell the world that the country would adopt more proactive steps in solving this problem of inadequate grazing land. I expected him to tell the world that the herdsmen would be encouraged to settle into ranches which they own and operate so that modern technological systems can be brought into the production of milk and other dairy by-products for my consumption.
Every single Nigerian has the right to pursue his happiness in the land within the dictates of the law. No one should be killed just because someone else wants to pursue his own business, whether he is a farmer, a herdsman, a doctor or a lawyer. However, the president’s utterance can be read as covert support for a group against the rest of the people, which will not do.
Very importantly, I believe this problem has gone on long enough and the time has come to end it. Steps must be taken promptly. And whatever steps are taken should be those that will assuage nerves, salve hurts and also push for progress. That progress must include pushing for the education of the entire citizens of the country, including herdsmen.
Education should bring the herdsmen into modern living. It is no use anyone crying about the grazing routes of the fifteenth century for those did not include dairy farms, global village effect or AK 47s. That won’t wash. I was not alive in the fifteenth century; neither were the present herdsmen. The herdsmen of that period used what means were available to them to survive such as long grazing routes. We have more refined means.
I advocate therefore that the president’s utterances should be more inclusive of the entire country’s feelings. We all hurt when anyone – child, adult, man, woman, herdsman, farmer – anyone at all is killed or maimed as a result of a clash, militancy, terrorism, or murderous intent. As a result, we all deserve sympathy from our government, and definitely from our president.