•President Jonathan’s new approach to terror indicates philosophical confusion
With just one month left of the six-month emergency-rule extension in Adamawa, Borno and Yobe states, the hotbed of terrorist activities by the inflexible Islamist militia known as Boko Haram, and uncertainty about further elongation, it is predictable that the President Goodluck Jonathan administration must be exploring a range of counter-terror possibilities to achieve a resolution of the destructive five-year-old rebellion which has so far proved elusive.
Nevertheless, the latest, and perhaps unexpected, angle to the government’s campaign unveiled by an unlikely source, Col. (rtd) Sambo Dasuki, National Security Adviser (NSA), is a mystifying non-military approach to what is essentially a martial challenge, thereby suggesting that the administration may have reached a disappointing conclusion that this is a situation in which it cannot prevail militarily. If, indeed, the move constitutes an admission of insurmountable handicap, then not only would it mean that the country’s armed forces have been defeated by a mere internal militia; it would also indicate the country’s vulnerability and reinforce social insecurity.
Dasuki’s startling “Roll out of Nigeria’s Soft Approach to Counter Terrorism”, whatever its theoretical merits, represents an ill-defined all-inclusive method. According to him, “The soft approach provides us with a frame-work that identifies the roles and responsibilities of every segment of our society: the governors, local council chairmen, national and state assembly members, political parties, trade unions, the private sector, traditional institutions, ministers and other government officials, academics, in fact, a ‘whole-of-society’ approach that involves everyone vertically and horizontally to confront violent extremism.” This exaggerated perspective, however, glosses over the fundamental point, which is that, ultimately, confronting and crushing terrorism is basically a military affair. Playing down the martial dimension as evident from Dasuki’s definition can be interpreted as an abdication of responsibility.
Furthermore, the new thinking displayed a shaky attribution of the rebellion to economic causes while ignoring the group’s declared religious motive and, perhaps, more potent driving force. It is no secret after all that the rebels advocate an Islamic theocracy. The NSA said, “Based on our understanding of the economic root causes of terrorism and global best practices in addressing them, we are working with the governors of the six north eastern states to design an economic revitalisation programme targeted toward the states most impacted by terrorism. Working with various stakeholders, we are currently designing a regional economic revitalisation plan.”
Although the idea of regional economic renaissance sounds agreeable, it sadly mirrors an inexcusable failure of governance in the states under focus. What is more, it is highly unrealistic to present the planned revitalisation as a kind of magic bullet that will arrest the rebellion, without fail. In other words, even if the proposed ambitious programme actually resolves the economic issues, what about the religious undercurrent? So, in the end, there can be no short cut to addressing the questionable faith position that fuels the group’s dissidence. By its latest move, the administration is merely beating about the bush whereas the main point is achieving a decisive victory against the insurgents.
More to the point, for instance, is the country’s security-related cooperation with France, Cameroun, Republic of Benin, Chad and Niger toward tackling the insurgency in the North-east, particularly the agreement to raise the scale of coordination and exchange of intelligence. It is noteworthy that a Joint Multinational Task Force was among the recommendations by the directors-general of external intelligence services of the six countries, following a meeting in Abuja.
If the so-called “Soft Approach” is a new phase or face of the government’s campaign, it is deficient in thoroughness, and Dasuki’s presentation appeared to call into question the specification of his role as national security adviser. He seemed to have abandoned his turf.
