The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • Egypt ignores Washington after U.S. policy missteps

    Egypt ignores Washington after U.S. policy missteps

    THE OBAMA administration dispatched Deputy Secretary of State William J. Burns to Cairo this week in an attempt to clarify to Egyptians where the United States stands on this month’s coup against the elected government of Mohamed Morsi. At a news conference, Mr. Burns delivered a clear message: The United States will “support an open, inclusive, tolerant democratic process” to restore civilian government; Egyptian authorities should refrain from “politically motivated arrests”; and a dialogue must begin with “all sides and all political parties” — meaning the ousted Muslim Brotherhood.

    The problem, as it has been so often during the past two years, is that Egypt’s generals are ignoring the message from Washington. Mr. Morsi, at least nine other top Muslim Brotherhood leaders and hundreds of activists continue to be imprisoned incommunicado. There are reports that prosecutors will soon indict the former president on the far-fetched charge of espionage, a crime that carries the death penalty. The new, military-installed cabinet, which features coup leader Gen. Abdel Fatah al-Sissi as deputy prime minister, includes no representatives of the Islamist parties that won 70 percent of the vote in parliamentary elections a year and a half ago. At least half a dozen members, including the foreign minister, previously served in the regime of Hosni Mubarak.

    Mr. Sissi himself is being glorified in state-run media and poster campaigns as a national hero comparable to Gamal Abdel Nasser, the former military dictator who rose to power following a 1952 coup. Like the previous military regime, his has not hesitated to use violence to consolidate power. Scores of Egyptians protesting the coup have been shot dead by troops and military snipers.

    The armed forces’ civilian allies are no more disposed to heed Washington. Leaders of the Tamarod movement, which organized the June 30 demonstrations that provided cover for the coup, refused to meet with Mr. Burns; one cited as a reason U.S. support for “the Zionist entity,” which is the term for Israel used by Arabs who refuse to recognize the Jewish state. Liberal Egyptians who dare to suggest that Islamists must be included in the new political order, or who worry about what former parliamentarian Amr Hamzawy called “fascism under the false pretense of democracy and liberalism,” have been vilified.

    This collapse of U.S. prestige and influence in Cairo is in part the result of a growing xenophobia that has been stoked by all Egyptian parties. But it also reflects consistent missteps by the Obama administration, which over the course of two years has repeatedly failed to speak up clearly against human rights abuses or to use the leverage of the $1.3 billion in annual U.S. aid delivered to the military. Despite a law requiring a suspension of aid to countries following a coup against an elected government, the administration is refusing to designate the coup as a coup and is proceeding with a new delivery of F-16s to the armed forces.

    The generals’ position is logical: Why heed advice from Washington if rejecting it will not stop the flow of U.S. arms? The contempt of civilian politicians for U.S. envoys is understandable as well: Why respect a government whose pro-democracy rhetoric has no connection to its actions?

    – Washington Post

     

  • Friend of renegades

    Friend of renegades

    What kind of democrat did President Jonathan betray by
    hosting an international outlaw and a local upstart?

    The Dr. Goodluck Jonathan Presidency has been exhibiting a most disturbing penchant for associating the country’s highest office with various kinds of renegades and lawless characters. For instance, in the aftermath of the recent Nigerian Governors Forum (NGF) election clearly won by Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State, President Jonathan received the minority faction of the association at the Presidential Villa, where he recognised the loser, Governor Jonah Jang of Plateau State, as chairman of the forum. Here was a man who scored 16 votes to Amaechi’s 19 in a free and fair process that was even captured on video. He thus threw the weight of his office behind the patently illegal, immoral, dishonest and anti-democratic stance of Jang and the other bad losers.

    Again, following the shameful fracas in the Rivers State of House of Assembly, with five members of a 32-member assembly claiming to have impeached the Speaker, Otelemabu Dan Amachree, President Jonathan once more demonstrated his tendency to identify with illegality, rascality and sheer lawlessness. Fully aware that the absurd attempt of a minority faction of the assembly to impeach the majority had been effectively foiled, the President still received the self-proclaimed Speaker, Evans Bapakaye Bipi, at Aso Rock. Bipi’s presence at the villa in the false and illegal capacity of Speaker was a desecration of the country’s highest office and raises serious questions as regards Jonathan’s democratic credentials.

    If the President had restricted his association with renegades within the country, the damage would have been limited even if in today’s global village, domestic occurrences immediately reverberate internationally. However, last Sunday, Nigeria gained international notoriety when the Jonathan presidency rolled out the red carpet and received, with a full guard of honour in Abuja, the President of Sudan, Omar al-Bashir. Here is man who has two international arrest warrants against him issued by the International Criminal Court in 2009 and 2010 for genocide and crimes against humanity in Darfur, where millions of blacks have been killed. Al-Bashir was in Nigeria to attend the African Union Heads of Government Special Summit on Tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other related diseases. It is, of course, a grand irony that President al-Bashir’s human rights atrocities in Darfur are creating the condition for these very diseases to thrive in the region!

    As a state party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which she ratified in 2001, Nigeria had a responsibility to enforce the international arrest warrants issued against al-Bashir by arresting and handing him over to the court to face justice. Apart from this international obligation, any self-respecting country conscious of its image and reputation in the comity of nations would be wary of identifying with disreputable individuals who commit crimes against humanity. Explaining why Nigeria would not hand over al-Bashir to the ICC, the Special Adviser on media to President Jonathan, Dr. Reuben Abati, said “It is not Nigeria that invited him. He’s not here on a bilateral visit. He’s here to participate in an AU summit, and Nigeria is not in a position to determine who attends an AU Summit and who does not attend…Nigeria is just providing the platform for the meeting”.

    True, the AU has passed a resolution against the ICC arrest warrants on al-Bashir and in 2010 called on the United Nations Security Council to delay war crimes proceedings against the Sudanese President. But then, does an AU resolution supersede an international treaty obligation? Since Nigeria is a member of the AU and at the same time a signatory to the ICC treaty, she should simply have quietly discouraged al-Bashir from attending the summit. This would have saved both parties needless embarrassment. At the end of the day, al-Bashir’s visit turned out to be completely fruitless. Frightened by the vehement calls for his arrest both locally and internationally, he could not attend any of the summit’s sessions and had to leave the country hurriedly on Monday.

    Beyond this, Nigeria should have the clout to influence the AU to reconsider its stance on the matter, which is informed by the perception that the ICC is targeting Africans because all the court’s current investigations are in Africa. In response to the arrest warrants, the AU had issued a statement saying that “The AU has always emphasised its commitment to justice and its total rejection of impunity. At the same time, the AU reiterates that the search for justice should be pursued in a manner not detrimental to the search for peace”. This is baffling. How can there be peace without justice? What the AU should do is to respect decisions of the ICC while joining the rest of the world in putting pressure on such powerful governments as the US, China, Russia and Israel, among others, to join the court so that their citizens who commit crimes against humanity can also be brought to justice. Nigeria’s hosting of al-Bashir is an international relations disaster for the country.

  • Al-Mustapha’s release

    Al-Mustapha’s release

    • It reflects the inadequacy of our justice system to protect the just and vulnerable

    The Nigerian criminal justice system was again ridiculed with the acquittal of Major Hamza al-Mustapha and Lateef Sofolahan, over the murder of Alhaja Kudirat Abiola, wife of the acclaimed winner of the June 12, 1993 presidential election, after a 14-year trial. The mockery of the judicial system is even more pronounced as the late Kudirat was clearly murdered in cold blood; yet, with al-Mustapha’s acquittal, it is as if that fact is a farce. Again, before this acquittal, some prominent Nigerians were openly campaigning for al-Mustapha’s release, and attempting to define crime in parochial terms; even as al-Mustapha’s lawyers filibustered throughout the trial.

    It is perhaps even more cynical, that the court of appeal discharged and acquitted al-Mustapha because the prosecution could not prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as required by law. Yet, the same prosecution made a deal with the self-confessed murderer of Kudirat, Sergeant Rogers, in order to get at al-Mustapha who he claimed gave the instructions and the ammunition for the murder. Now, with a deal in the bag for Rogers, and the prosecution of his alleged master declared insufficient by the court, the result is that nobody would suffer for the culpable murder of Alhaja Abiola.

    Such an outcome is a mockery of our common humanity. To show that our system is thoroughly challenged, Sergeant Rogers, despite his confession of championing several atrocities as a soldier, is still in the employ of the Nigerian Army, just as al-Mustapha is now out, and is already laying claim to be due for the rank of General in the same army. The insanity is completed with the wild celebration over al-Mustapha’s release, and the disgraceful reception accorded him by the Kano State government and sundry groups, as if his mendacious audacity during the ignoble Abacha regime is not enough reason to keep that critical participant at an arm’s length.

    As even al-Mustapha’s fans would accept, their hero was the chief security officer to General Sani Abacha who presided over the state murder of several Nigerians, for their political beliefs. Indeed, it was common knowledge that he was a very powerful and loyal security chief to his master, and under their care, Pa Alfred Rewane, Chief Abraham Adesanya, Gen. Shehu Musa Yar’Adua, Mr. Alex Ibru, Bagauda Kaltho, Mrs Esther A. Tejuoso, Dr. Sola Omatsola and several others were either shot at or killed by undoubtedly agents of the state. It is also common knowledge that several witnesses at the Oputa panel gave evidence of unquestionable cruelty perpetrated, if not by al-Mustapha, certainly by those under his control.

    So, al-Mustapha’s acquittal over the murder of Kudirat, in our view, merely confirms the vulnerability of our criminal justice system. For, no one would doubt that Kudirat was killed by the agents of the state, following her campaign that her husband be released and that he be handed over the presidential mandate freely given to him by Nigerians at the 1993 election. It is also certain that al-Mustapha was chief security officer to that murderous general, who granted him unprecedented powers, well above his superiors in the army, and under their watch several murders, including that of Kudirat, were committed by agents of the state.

    Therefore, the fact that al-Mustapha and his co-accused, Sofolahan could not be convicted at the appeal court, after their condemnation to death at the trial court is nothing to celebrate; more so as the prosecution can further appeal to the Supreme Court. In our view, there is the urgent need to strengthen our criminal justice system, to avoid a similar unwinding trial of an accused person for 14 years, after which his innocence is pronounced.

  • Budding tyranny

    Budding tyranny

    •Fascism creeps when a mob masses against a governor and his governor guests, as happened in Port Harcourt on July 16

    When a gubernatorial convoy is no longer safe in a state where the governor is de jure chief security officer, fascism creeps. That was the dangerous situation at the Port Harcourt International Airport, Omagwa, on July 16.

    A mob, first carrying placards against the visiting northern gubernatorial quad of Kano’s Rabiu Kwakwanso, Niger’s Mu’azu Babangida Aliyu, Jigawa’s Sule Lamido and Adamawa’s Murtala Nyako, all guests of Governor Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, turned into a stone-pelting rabble, which attacked their convoy, as it snaked into town from the airport, smashing the side-windscreen of at least one jeep.

    The rabble, about 5,000-strong and reportedly armed with substances suspected to be acid, allegedly belonged to the Grassroots Development Initiative (GDI), a group linked to Nyesom Wike, Minister of State for Education; and one of the principal anti-Amaechi elements in the Rivers Peoples Democratic Party crisis. But the Wike camp countered that the mob hallmarked a cross-section of Rivers people, angry with Governor Amaechi’s actions and inactions.

    Given how the Rivers crisis has degenerated, perhaps such violent crowd was not unexpected. But it was no less shocking that they would mass against visiting governors, guests of the state governor, the state’s supposed chief security officer. Though security operatives somewhat prevented any untoward tragedy, the security breach was clear.

    Fascism is creeping in because state officials, pandering to tragic exigencies, are no longer guided by state laws. Mbu Joseph Mbu, the Rivers State police commissioner, has since abandoned his security duties for crass partisan ones. Even his Inspector-General appears powerless to touch him. Yet, his actions have grave security consequences.

    Mr. Wike too is minister of the Federal Republic. But there is nothing in his ministerial brief that makes him a viceroy in the Presidency-inspired insurrection against a Rivers State government legally constituted, even if, in a democracy, he could have partisan differences with the state government personnel. Even the Presidency, with all its mythical powers, does not have legal powers to destabilise any state it disagrees with, as the Jonathan Presidency is doing in Rivers.

    But thanks to the mob, the visiting northern governors suddenly realised you could not run a federal state without federalising security – and the most basic realisation of that is state police. Exposed to naked abuse of central police, they have, from the communiqué they released after their meeting with Governor Amaechi, have all but endorsed the imperative for state police.

    But as justified as state police is, there must be a consensus against the disturbing mindset to tolerate impunity, at every governmental level. If Jonathan now abuses federal police, despite his aides’ impassioned denial, governors too can abuse state police.

    From the threat by governors to withdraw their funding support for the Nigeria Police should the spate of abuse continue comes a spectre of massive insecurity. For all the Federal Government’s derring-do, and a near-fatalistic fixation with preserving the present central police, it is clear that the Federal Government is either unable or incapable – or both – of adequately funding the police. So, without states’ contributions, the security of millions of innocent and law-abiding citizens is in clear jeopardy.

    What is President Jonathan’s denial of culpability in the Rivers crisis worth? It is clearly Mbu’s gross unprofessional conduct – where did the commissioner of police get his operation manual from? And from rogue “Speaker”, Evans Bipi, at another Jonathan party, claiming he was Rivers Speaker! his president, it appears, has a special talent for embracing renegades!

    Whatever legacy Jonathan wants to give his presidency is his choice. But we will not fold our arms and allow officials of state desecrate the same laws that created them. That is why every right-thinking Nigerian must resist the creeping fascism by President Jonathan and his side-kicks.

  • Powering Africa

    Powering Africa

    President Obama’s “Power Africa” initiative, unveiled during his recent trip there, has the potential to make a major impact on a continent where millions of people — including more than two-thirds of those in the sub-Saharan region — live every day without reliable access to affordable electricity. But the outcome depends heavily on how the plan is designed and carried out and whether it is sustained.

    In raw numbers, Mr. Obama’s pledge to invest $7 billion over the next five years in eight countries is modest. The International Energy Agency estimates it would cost $300 billion to achieve universal electricity access in the sub-Saharan region by 2030.

    Still, the initiative holds promise because it provides a vehicle for leveraging private sector investment and, significantly, anchors the United States firmly in the kind of trade and investment relationship that increasingly will help determine Africa’s future. The White House says that companies have already committed to more than $9 billion in projects. In Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria and Tanzania, the focus will be on electricity; in Uganda and Mozambique, it will be on gas and oil development.

    For too long, the international response to poverty, war, famine and dictatorial leaders in Africa has consisted largely of humanitarian aid. Today, there are still many problems, but they are increasingly offset by positive trends; six of the world’s 10 fastest-growing economies are in Africa. In recent years, China has spent so much on African infrastructure projects and natural resources that it has surpassed the United States as the continent’s main trading partner. America has a lot of catching up to do and ignores these markets, with their growing middle classes, at its peril.

    The initiative has been enthusiastically endorsed by Tony Elumelu, a Nigerian whose Heirs Holdings has pledged $2.5 billion to expand a power plant in Nigeria and develop other projects. In an essay, he called power the “single biggest obstacle” to Africa’s development.

    Before his trip, Mr. Obama was faulted for not showing enough interest in the continent where his father, a Kenyan, was born. But his administration was central to the independence of South Sudan and has invested heavily in improving Africa’s agriculture production through the program.

    Still, he has been overshadowed by two predecessors who left a lasting imprint with signature programs, George W. Bush on H.I.V. and Bill Clinton on health care and reduced trade barriers. Having now raised expectations that he intends to make a difference with “Power Africa,” it is vital for Mr. Obama to follow through.

    – New York Times

  • War again?

    War again?

    Governor Uduaghan and others’ approach to the attack on Itsekiris calmed the creeks

    Recently, tension crackled in the creeks of Delta State, and reignited the old feud between the Itsekiris and the Ijaws of the region. The trouble first blared when a group of hoodlums identified as Ijaw youths stormed some Itsekiri villages and opened fire on vulnerable residents. They killed whole families as well as children and women.

    The reports had it that so furious were some of the families that a reprisal attack from the Itsekiris loomed. With the intervention of the state governor, Dr. Emmanuel Uduaghan and other stakeholders, the attack never materialised, and the state escaped the bloodletting and other tragedies that could have resulted from an open sesame of mutual hate.

    But the matter was more complicated that it has been defined. Some media houses have painted it in purely ethnic terms, but it was a camouflage. Subsequent investigations revealed that attack was unleashed by a group of brigands who were eyeing plum rewards of oil bunkering. They did not get their wish. So they decided to use the familiar blackmail ploy of the age and region: violence.

    They decided to ethnicise the conflict so as to detract for the narrative of their greed. By that, it would appear they wanted to defend their ethnic groups. Another group, the Egbema Radical Group (ERG), had also carried out a campaign, calling for representation of Warri North Local Government. Their demand was political. But the ERG and the violent youths fed off each other and turned the tragedy of the Itsekiris into a platform for blackmail.

    Governor Uduaghan has openly expressed disdain for any such blackmail and warned that he would not negotiate with anyone under duress. He said becoming the chairman of a local government is not the responsibility of the governor. It is an elective position and only elections are vehicle to place anyone on that chair.

    The reluctance of the ERG to condemn and dissociate itself from the perpetrators of the killings in strong terms portrays them as opportunistic and cynical.

    We all know the conflagration of the same ethnic rage less than a decade ago. It was a daily show of macabre violence. Many families lost loved ones. Villages became prostrate and businesses paralysed. The atmosphere of cordiality and mutual respect that informed the relations between the ethnic groups for over a century turned into ashes.

    Up till today, the societies are still trying to come to terms with deep scars, both physical and psychic, of the killings, maiming, arson, vandalism that crippled governance. We also recall that the violence resulted from disputes over local government issues.

    We therefore commend the Itsekiri leaders who urged restraint as well as the governor. They must be aware of the pangs from the previous conflicts and the challenges of recovery.

    The fundamental issue in the Niger Delta remains underdevelopment and it will continue to fuel restless and idle young men into the laziness that believes that violence and brigandage can bring prosperity rather than the higher virtues of hard work, integrity and honour.

    In spite of the amnesty programme apparently designed to stave off such incidents as the killing of Itsekiris, we are not safe. This demonstrates that the Federal Government has only scratched the surface, and the challenge of angry young men who want change for themselves and not all shall continue to haunt us.

  • 146 farcical goals

    146 farcical goals

    • A tale of four football teams, officials and players unveiling a metaphor of corruption

    The suspension of four clubs involved in appalling score-lines during promotion play-offs into the nation’s Nationwide League Division 3 by Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) should be an appetiser. The teams involved in the show of infamy include Plateau United Feeders FC that beat Akurba FC 79-0 and Police Machine FC that curiously walloped Babayaro FC 67-0. These despicable score-lines are alien to the country’s football.

    Whilst the video tapes of the matches were not available because of low investments in the game, the reportorial depictions of what transpired were damning. The score-sheet of the winning teams at half-time was 13 goals: Plateau United- 7-0 while Police Machine FC was leading by 6-0, trailing the United team by just a goal difference. In the bid to slyly outfox one another, resumption of the second stanza witnessed corruption of goals through magical haul of 120 of them scored between the winners. United notoriously notched-up additional 72 goals while Police Machine scored 61 more times: All these latter goals incredibly came within 45 minutes of the second half!

    We do know that the games’ score lines expectedly have attracted the negative attention of FIFA, world’s football governing body and also spawned global outrage for the nation’s football. Respected global media platforms have put the country’s soccer on the spotlight for the wrong reasons. The infamy occurred simply because winners from these matches will ultimately qualify to play in the country’s Division 3 Nationwide League. They sadly threw demureness to the winds.

    The NFF, stupefied by such paranormal results swiftly suspended, indefinitely, the four teams involved in the villainous acts. Its organising committee, through Chief Mike Umeh, 1st vice-president fumed: “It is unacceptable. This is a scandal of huge proportions…We will investigate this matter thoroughly and get to the bottom of it.” It is good that the federation has reportedly invited the police to help dig to the roots of the matter but it should not stop at that.

    In matters of such important investigation, the police fell short of public expectations in the past and this time it would be naïve of NFF to wholly leave the matter in police’ care. The owners of the teams have reportedly disbanded them but they are vicariously liable, which means they can only run but cannot escape severe sanctions. They must answer for their misdeeds.

    If at the amateur soccer level, the battle to play in the Nigerian Nationwide League Division 3 could degenerate to such macabre exhibition of do-or-die affairs, then the hope of drastically reducing corruption in the country is abysmally dim. What has just happened at the lower rung of the society, in the form of soccer sleaze, is a reflection of the degree of proclivity for vices at the higher level of the society. Nigeria regrettably has now created a shameful African record, second only to AS Adema FC of Madagascar that ridiculously scored 149-0 goals in 2002 against Stade Olympique l’Emyrne. The team that year reportedly scored numerous own goals in protest against a particular inimical decision of the game’s centre referee.

    In our view, the teams involved in these vile displays should compellingly appear before a properly constituted panel to explain how it can be possible to have that kind of mysterious football score-lines experienced in the second stanza of those games. We know that such is bewildering and the four teams’ players, their officials and match officials, for acting with flagrant impunity, and other persons that are circuitously or tenuously connected, should be barred for life from interfacing with football affairs in the country, to serve as deterrent to those contemplating such detrimental soccer act in future.

  • Will the West stand up for a free election in Zimbabwe?

    Will the West stand up for a free election in Zimbabwe?

    WESTERN GOVERNMENTS took a strong stand against Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe in 2008 when he employed massive violence and fraud to perpetuate himself in power through a presidential election. Five years later, the 89-year-old strongman is at it again. Flouting agreements with the opposition and pledges to foreign mediators, he has scheduled an election for this month without allowing the reforms necessary to make it free and fair. Opposition leaders once again are being hunted and persecuted.

    This time, however, the United States and European Union seem to be giving Mr. Mugabe the benefit of the doubt. Many of the sanctions imposed on the country were lifted after a referendum on a new constitution in March. E.U. officials have promised the rest will be removed if the election, which began with early voting this week and concludes July 31, is judged free and fair by African observers. During his recent tour of Africa, President Obama declared that “there is an opportunity to move forward” in Zimbabwe “if there is an election that is free and fair and peaceful.”

    As was already clear when Mr. Obama made that statement on June 30, Zimbabwe’s vote will meet none of those tests. Amnesty International reported that military and police forces have carried out an “alarming clampdown” on the opposition, including “systematic raids and arbitrary arrests” of activists. In a similar report, Human Rights Watch said that soldiers had deployed around the country to beat and harass supporters of opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai. “The chances of having free, fair and credible elections,” it said, “are slim.”

    As part of accords brokered by the South African Development Community (SADC), Zimbabwe was to have implemented reforms of the security forces and media and cleaned up its electoral register before any election. Mr. Mugabe called the vote before any of this was done. The heads of the army and police are longtime regime loyalists who refused even to meet with Mr. Tsvangirai. State television has been broadcasting Mr. Mugabe’s campaign events while demanding that his opponent pay $165,000 for coverage of his opening rally. A study of the voter rolls by Zimbabwean groups showed massive distortions: An unrealistic 99.97 percent of the rural population was reported to have registered, compared with only 68 percent in the cities, where the opposition is stronger. A million younger voters who became eligible since 2008 have been left off the rolls.

    None of this should surprise any observer of Zimbabwe, where Mr. Mugabe, in office since 1980, has never hesitated to use force, ballot-rigging or appeals to racism and xenophobia to remain in power. Though his health is reportedly weakening, leaders of his ruling party are preparing to perpetuate the regime after his death, including through changes to the just-approved constitution. The question is whether their maneuvering will be tolerated by the SADC, which is led by South Africa, and by Western governments. With their own monitors banned by Mr. Mugabe, E.U. officials say they will depend on the regional group’s judgment of whether the elections are fair. That won’t be a hard call to make; the question is whether Zimbabwe’s neighbors and the West will have the fortitude to tell the truth about the election, and to act accordingly.

    – Washington Post

  • Soldiers everywhere

    Soldiers everywhere

    •Dasuki revelation of soldiers’ presence in 28 states shows the militarisation of our democracy

    National Security Adviser Mr. Mohammed Sambo Dasuki made a startling revelation when he said that soldiers’ presence is actively felt in 28 states of the federation. The deployment of troops is the government’s answer to the increasing security challenges posed by terrorists, armed robbers, kidnappers and other anti-social elements making life unbearable for law-abiding citizens. But is this the right solution to the problem? We are afraid ‘no’. Yes, Nigerians know that soldiers are on the streets in many parts of the country, but not in their wildest imagination could they have thought the soldiers’ presence was anything near what Mr Dasuki revealed.

    Speaking at a session on National Civil-Military Dialogue in Ajuji Hotel, Abuja, the national security adviser noted that: “The past decade has witnessed multiple forms of unrest —from armed robbery, kidnapping, electoral, communal to ethno-religious violence …Currently, we are battling with insurgency and terrorism. This has raised the flag of security demands to levels higher than we have witnessed since the civil war. It has meant that the military are seeing more deployments in aid of civil authority than anticipated”.

    No doubt soldiers can be called to assist civilian authority to check civil disobedience; that should be only when the police can no longer cope. In other words, they should be the last resort. But what we are witnessing in the country, 14 years after our return to democratic rule, has been an increasing reliance on the military for internal security and to quell insurgencies in parts of the country. It is as if the government has passed a vote of no confidence on the Nigeria Police.

    Mr. Dasuki captured the scenario concisely: “… Policing the domestic arena is not the duty of the military, whose training is directed against external enemies of the state. However, our recent history has seen the military in joint activities with other para-military outfits currently in about 28 states”. That military presence in a democratic setting should be a routine as it is in the country now is enough cause for concern. A situation where soldiers are visible on the streets in 28 of our 36 states is unacceptable.

    We ought to have learnt our lessons from soldiers’ expeditions in Odi, Bayelsa State, Gbaramutu, also in the Niger Delta region, and other places where they left in their trail tales of tears and sorrow. As a matter of fact, some of the country’s leaders in power at the various times when these atrocities were committed by soldiers in the process of quelling civil disobedience should be answering charges at the International Court of Justice if what happened had taken place in some other climes. But soldiers cannot be blamed entirely for the actions because they are not trained to handle such crises.

    Aside the huge price we have had to pay during such expeditions, the fact is that, as the national security adviser said at the occasion, deployment of troops for such internal crises has robbed the military of its professionalism and has led to avoidable frictions between the soldiers and the civilian populace. How, for instance, is professionalism enhanced if soldiers are sent to ensure free and fair elections? Chances are such assignments will put them in direct contact with people with all kinds of intentions; thus, they (soldiers) could easily be compromised in the process.

    What we are saying in essence is that the government must face the reality by giving the police the desired attention. Whatever gains we think we are making by using soldiers for duties they are not trained to handle will pale into insignificance if only we are able to quantify in monetary terms what we are losing to their involvement in civil duties. We reject Dasuki’s plea that Nigerians should accept the military presence as a necessity. On the contrary, it is the government that should do what is required to make the police force more efficient.

     

  • Nigerian Army at 150

    Nigerian Army at 150

    •Professionalism remains a major challenge

    At one hundred and fifty years, the Nigerian Army is expected to have come of age. Backed by a large population of about 160 million people and an economy fuelled largely by petro-dollars, it is expected that Nigeria, a country that loves and covets the appellation, ‘Giant of Africa’, would have become the super power of the African continent. But, this is hardly so with the strong showing of South Africa and Egypt.

    In its 150 years of existence, the Nigerian Army that started as the Royal West African Frontier Force (RWAFF), a colonial military formation, has failed to rise to expectations following Nigeria’s attainment of independent country status in 1960. It has failed to really blend with the people and be seen as a force established and funded for the patriotic duty of warding off external aggression and occasionally brought in to quell internal insurrection.

    It demonstrates the disconnect in government-people relations as, on many occasions, the military, with the Army as the main component, has been drawn into extra-constitutional role of preserving unpopular governments. During elections, the Army is drawn into ostensibly keeping the peace, but, in reality, like the Colonial Army, it is seen as coming in on the side of the ruling political party. This is an issue to consider at this point.

    In celebrating this year’s Army Week, the organisers chose the theme, ‘Enhancing the Nigerian Army Capacity-Building Efforts Towards Improved National Security’. The discussion was apt at a time that the country is confronted with a myriad challenges and the Army is a major participant. It is involved in action in combating terrorism in areas of the North where insurgents have made life very unsafe and is deployed in 28 of the 36 states of the country in containing activities of criminals.

    In the process, the weaknesses of the Army have been well advertised and its capacity undermined.

    The years of military rule exposed the Army to corrupt influences. Rather than such rule strengthening the Army, it suffered from the attendant distractions. Military rule led to subversion of the rule, principles and standard practices. During the period too, the Army remained poorly equipped and divisions were starved of equipment that could have made the Army fully prepared to play its constitutionally-assigned duties and responsibilities.

    Inadequate funding, political influence on postings, deployments, disengagements and promotions have been major limiting factors. The famous statement by a former Chief of Army Staff, General Salisu Ibrahim, that he was handing over to his successor an Army of ‘anything goes’ is quite instructive.

    There is no evidence that much has changed in this. Even when personnel have been deployed to conflict areas, their conducts have largely fallen short of established rules of engagement. This led to an outcry after the Baga conflict that claimed the lives of many civilians in an operation that some local and international news channels as well as the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) dubbed a massacre.

    The way forward is for the Army to step up efforts at professional training and reorientation. One hundred and fifty years is a long enough time to shed the colonial toga and have a real Peoples Army- one that the people believe in and will willingly share intelligence with, an Army that would no longer be available for the government of the day to engage in dirty, partisan roles.

    If Nigeria is to be a true ‘Giant of Africa’, it must step up the quality of its military, especially the Army. In peace time, as is the case in Egypt, it would help to cement the bond between it and the people, if Army personnel could be involved in development activities.

    Above all, in the years ahead, the message of military subordination to civil authorities should be emphasised. It is no longer fashionable that the military would disobey, disregard or overthrow civil authorities. This is the way forward and it is in the interest of the Army and other military bodies, as well as the country at large.