The Nation Newspaper

Tag: boko haram

State foreclosure in Nigeria

Foreclosure stares the Nigerian state grimly in the face. It is a terrible irony that our endlessly squabbling politicians do not yet appreciate the dangers to the nation. Their attention is completely fixated on the elections coming next year and in 2015, even as the object of their fixation is slowly yielding to the forces of internal strangulation.

At no point in its history, either colonial or post-colonial, and certainly not even during the civil war, has the Nigerian state appeared more fragile and vulnerable. Trapped between two extreme and extremist cultures of political violence, the Boko Haram insurgency in the north and the MEND insurrection in the Southern creeks, strafed by a thousand armed gangs bent on bringing to heel its remaining emblems of power and authority, the state appears powerless and paralysed.

Like a solitary schoolboy ambushed by bigger bullies, the state offers its drink to one and its victuals to the other, hoping that they will go away and leave it in peace. But they are not about to. Inflation is the natural law and logic of bullies. When you appease, you must be ready to yield more appeasement. This is because the more you try to give, the more they demand. Appeasement without a demonstration of strength and resolve, and without compelling evidence of your own minatory deterrence, is a voluntary suicide mission usually dead on arrival.

This week even as the Boko Haram sect continues its routine devastation of the north despite the prospects of amnesty dangled before it, the MEND opened a new front by threatening and actually carrying out its threat despite the substantial economic and political pacification from the government. The decomposing bodies of 11 policemen must speak volumes for the dire straits in which the state has found itself..

The powerful Nigerian military has battled valiantly and heroically to confront and contain these nation-destroying demons, but it is also beginning to show signs of weariness and demoralisation. As this column has repeatedly cautioned, this kind of well-heeled insurgency fired and inspired by ideological zealotry and operating in an economically blighted region suffering from political disorientation, is not in the conventional military manual.

Without a conventional order of battle (ORBAT), the military will have to learn its lesson on the hoof, and as the war without defined fronts progresses. In addition, the military is hobbled by overriding political considerations and the inconsistency and feeble-minded opportunism of government policies. Saying one thing today and doing the very opposite the next day, Goodluck Jonathan himself comes across as a tragic comedian in a perplexing political tragicomedy.

But it is not a funny matter when the state becomes a big joke despite its awesome powers of enforcement and coercion and when the bully finally becomes the bullied and the tormentor the tormented The problem of the post-colonial state in Nigeria is compounded by its vanishing legitimacy and authority even in the areas where it holds unchallenged sway.

For many Nigerians, the state is seen as incapable of projecting itself as a true defender of national interests. It is so grotesquely corrupt and inefficient that its moral authority over its own citizens has evaporated. This is in addition to its military incapacitation in the face of armed critiques of its existence. Although this did not begin with Goodluck Jonathan, he seems bent and destined to drive the logic to its ultimate summit and summation.

When a state loses its power of moral and ethical suasion over its citizens and when the power of its apparatus of coercion has dramatically diminished in addition, that is state failure looming. It is now too late in the day to begin to suggest measures to shore up the authority and legitimacy of the government. This will involve a drastic self-purgation, and with its eyes fixed on the election of 2015, the Jonathan administration cannot even afford to toy with these measures.

Unfortunately, it is not a problem that can be wholly redressed or addressed by elections. As it has been demonstrated so many times in the history of post-colonial Africa and Nigeria, elections superimposed on seething national contradictions do not solve or resolve anything. In most cases, they worsen the contradictions and exacerbate the national fault lines.

It is the business of recreating the Nigerian state and nation which the political elite shy away from that is the hardest task. Yet without this fundamental shift in the paradigm of state-making and nation-building, there is nothing to stop this embattled nation from eventually dissolving into anarchic bloodletting the like of which has never been seen before.

The old African pre-colonial political elites seemed to have managed the contradictions of society-building and state-making very well. This was because the old African state was an organic outgrowth of pre-colonial African society and there was therefore a uniformity and homogeneity of political culture which allowed for faster consensus building, the odd tension and political dissonance notwithstanding.

This is quite unlike what obtains in colonial and post-colonial Africa where the state largely remains an alien and alienating contraption forcibly grafted on disparate and often mutually contradictory political, economic and religious cultures which makes national consensus very difficult except when it comes to stealing which wears a universal mask and does not require any mental rigour or highfalutin ethics.

Where the state-nation is lucky to have a visionary founding father who can skilfully weld and fuse the disparate ethnic strands together to achieve a homogeneous entity, it is easier to fashion and fabricate a national consensus. Unfortunately, most founding fathers in Africa left their nations writhing in the debris of political and economic chaos.

In its classical incarnation, the state was the most powerful embodiment of national aspirations surfeit with mystical notions as the ultimate guarantor and protector of the sacred destiny of the people and the society. This is true of any pre-colonial society. In royalties, monarchies, empires and fiefdoms, state actors are carefully groomed and nurtured through a rigorous and painstaking selection process.

When and where a mistake is made, it is left to other powerful countervailing institutions to correct the anomaly with speed and utmost discretion without destabilising the polity. This is unlike what obtains in post-colonial Africa where tyrannical and unjust rulers often manage to circumvent elections as the expression of the sovereign wish and will of the populace.

Africans must find some redemptive resources from the pre-colonial past. African elites, unlike the Chinese, the Indians, the Japanese and the Arabs, do not consider themselves modish and sophisticated until they have started casting aspersions on their pre-colonial culture. Yet as we demonstrated in this column last week, the continuing virility and potency of some of these institutions long after the subversion of their political and material base ought to serve as a cautionary reminder.

In a famous passage on Greek Art, Karl Marx, the grim materialist and patriarch of periodisation, wondered aloud why artistic products from ancient Greece have continued to please and intrigue us long after the superannuation of the material culture that supported them. “The difficulty is not that they pleased us but that they continue to do so”, Marx rued. It was surely an affront to materialist logic.

The same logic should now be extended to post-traditional societies. Why do certain institutions, rituals, emblems, sacred totems and tropes from the pre-colonial order have a lingering efficacy and potency long after the colonial amputation of the political and material basis of their existence? These are powerful ideological apparatuses of the old pre-colonial state and they will continue to be for a long time until they are overtaken by a combination of events. The death of material base does not automatically translate into the demise of superstructure.

However that may be, all of this must indicate to us why the Nigerian state faces grave problems. It is a state that has been unable to grow any authentic national institution with the possible exception of the military which has also had its misadventures. It is a stunted state suffering from pedological leprosy. Nothing will grow on nothing. The political elite are riven by primordial fissures. The national psyche is centrally fractured. The state preys and predates on the nation directly leading to armed objections to its existence. .

We have been careful to distinguish between state foreclosure and total state failure. Let no one at this point come up with the bogey, the blackmail and the buncombe that all this may lead to military intervention. In any case, military rule is preferable to the apocalyptic meltdown and the genocidal bloodletting looming. If the Boko Haram sect had succeeded in bringing down the Third Mainland Bridge, it would have taken some extra constitutional measure to restore parity to the nation. The mere threat, which is not over yet, brings the national tragedy to sharp relief.

Whereas state failure compels a drastic and radical re-composition of the state and reconfiguration of the nation, state foreclosure, like a foreclosed property, demands immediate change of ownership and perhaps ownership restructure. The revolutionary turmoil in the land ought to tell the PDP that it has nothing left to offer the nation. Despite payment rescheduling and mortgage modification, the ruling party has failed to meet its obligation to the nation. Urgent repossession is the only solution.

Since it has proved incapable of internally reforming itself, not to talk of coming up with the visionary policies to move the nation forward beyond the initial demilitarisation, all Nigerians, including patriotic members of the PDP driven by enlightened self interest, must rise up in one guise and under whatever national platform to see off this pernicious party before it sees off the nation.

When compared with other grave possibilities facing the nation at the moment, this is the equivalent of mild surgery and a compromise in favour liberal democracy. Otherwise, state failure will accelerate at full throttle. The hazy outlines of radical anarchy are already with us.

April 14, 2013
Between the devil and the deep blue sea

Until President Goodluck Jonathan buckled in spectacular fashion and surrendered to the amnesty lobby following a late night visit to Aso Rock by selected Northern elders, the growing impression was that the shadowy characters in Boko Haram-land were all falling over themselves to embrace peace and dialogue.

Apologists for the terrorists suggested that the hardline positions adopted by many in the leadership of the security agencies was down to the fact that certain powerful persons were profiting financially from the continued conflict. We certainly cannot discount the fact that where there’s war, people will make money prosecuting it. But that clearly is not the entire story.

Some reports even suggested intriguingly that when the Sultan of Sokoto came out strongly in support of the amnesty, Jonathan missed an opportunity to quicken the journey to peace and quiet by not inviting him for further discussions. Instead, he headed to Maiduguri to make his uncompromising speech about not doing business with ‘ghosts.’

Those who created the impression the Sultan had the Boko Haram hierarchy on speed dial, as well as a clear sense of their thinking and mindset must surely now be cringing in embarrassment. Would the traditional ruler have stuck out his neck if he really knew the sect’s high command will pull the sort of stunt they just did? I doubt not.

Now, the spine of the extremists for whom the amnesty is being sought has come out openly to throw the deal in the faces of their potential boosters.

But rather being a tragedy, I take the position that Shekau and his goons did everyone a favour by spurning a government amnesty that is yet to be formally made. Their action will reduce pressure on Jonathan and help him retrace his steps to the right course in tackling the North-Eastern insurgency.

I expect the government will continue with its wrong-headed amnesty process since it has committed itself in that direction. Ultimately, a declaration will be made that will draw in elements in the faction led by one Sheik Abu Mohammed Ibn Abdulazeez which has said they are fed up with the bloodletting and now want peace. What no one has told us is how many people this fellow has under his wings.

You also have to factor in the Ansaru faction which claimed responsibility for the execution of seven foreign hostages a few weeks ago, and still shows no indication of wanting peace. With Shekau and his team still at large, the amnesty rejection means a large number of anarchists will still be out there bent on perpetrating mayhem.

Again, we don’t know how dominant or large these forces are. But the government will have no option than to confront them because they will be outside the amnesty net – meaning a return to the military force option that many in the northern elite are increasingly leery of.

Unfortunately, in our confusion we begin to get things muddled up. For instance, the greatest obstacle to dialogue and negotiations has always been the intransigence and unrealistic positions taken by the Islamists, not the reluctance of the Jonathan administration to do a quick deal. And let no one deceive themselves; these outlandish demands are not negotiating gambits – but clear statements of belief by a band of people dancing to a different beat.

This is Shekau in his latest video spurning Jonathan’s hand of fellowship: “Surprisingly, the Nigerian government is talking about granting us amnesty. What wrong have we done? On the contrary, it is we that should grant you pardon.”

This is coming from the leader of a sect that has killed over three thousand people in the last three years. Some of their victims were unarmed combatants worshipping in churches; some were travelers like those blown to bits at the Kano bus park not too long ago. With so much blood of the innocents on his hands, this fellow has the gall to ask ‘what wrong have we done?’ That statement couldn’t have been made by someone with a grip on reality.

Negotiations and amnesties are not the sort of things you offer to the likes of Shekau. What will you give him in exchange for peace? A fistful of naira in order that he renounces his belief in jihad, or repudiates his demand for Sharia law in the land? Will Jonathan’s deal get sect members to disavow their belief that Western education is sinful? Will you get them to drop their visceral hatred of Christians because of the promise not to prosecute? Not likely! The demands of Boko Haram are non-negotiable.

I can understand the fear and frustration up north, and appreciate how desperate people are for a return to normalcy. However, we need to address our minds to the reality that there begin to will be no pain-free way to deal with this problem. That is why those passing off the amnesty as a sure-fire cure are guilty of selling their people a badly-packaged brand of false hope.

Ultimately, some form of talks will take place between the Islamists and the authorities, but that will only come after they have been significantly broken militarily. It will take time, and the traumatisation of local communities by the actions of both sides with continue, until the forces of law and order prevail.

It happened in Algeria. Some estimates say between 70,000 and 150,000 lives were lost as the government battled Islamists in war that lasted between 1991 and 2002. No one is wishing that sort of calamity on Nigeria.

What started with legitimate grievances following the annulment of elections which the Islamists looked set to win soon snowballed into something else. The terrorists launched a brutal campaign of bombings and indiscriminate slaughter not just against security forces, but against unarmed villagers in the countryside. Several presidents came and went while the war lasted. In the end, the commitment of the security forces led to the collapse of the insurgency, and the unilateral ceasefire by some of the more notorious bands of Islamist guerillas.

Some form of amnesty was introduced towards the tail of the conflict, and it is credited with hastening the end of the violence, as the holdouts could easily be isolated for the security forces to deal with.

And that is part of the problem with our so-called amnesty. In our indecent haste to buy peace at all costs we are offering deals to a group that still feels it is in a position to call the shots – a clear case of insult compounding our injuries.

April 14, 2013
‘Amnesty cannot stop Boko Haram’

Bishop Josef Bassey is President of Cross River State Christian Leaders’ Forum and Bishop of God’s Heritage Centre, Gloryland Calabar. He spoke with Sunday Oguntola on terrorism and other issues. Excerpts:

One has not heard from you lately. Are you hiding or something?

No, we are not hiding. We are doing our job. We are speaking but probably you have not been in places where we talk.

How is the church doing?

We are doing well, trying to look at our core values. We are trying to restore our core values of humanity.

Are you in support of the proposed amnesty programme for members of the Boko Haram sect?

Amnesty for Boko Haram? What is Boko Haram? What cause are they fighting? They burn churches and kill Christians yet we are talking about amnesty! Is it because of the utmost restraint that kept Christians from retaliating? So, if there is amnesty for Boko Haram, what becomes of their victims? The government that pledges to protect the existence of the nation should not be giving amnesty to a group that threatens the very existence of that nation.

But don’t you think since the sect has done its worst, isn’t it time to just forgive them and move on?

Yes, they have done their worst but we are missing something. While they were killing and burning churches, a lot of efforts were going on on the part of Christians to pacify and restrain them from avenging. It takes two to have a war situation. What they have been doing is a direct attack on Christianity; they were burning churches and bombing worshippers during services. All that was required was a response, which we did not do.

We are not cowards and it is not as if we are incapacitated. There is no religion that has monopoly of violence. There is enough provision in the scriptures for us to fight and protect our faith. That we pursue the path of peace at a great cost, trying to protect the nation and keep it as one, does not mean we are timid. So, when you turn around to grant amnesty without justice, then you are really provoking us.

Some people are saying since Christians preach forgiveness all the time, isn’t it time to demonstrate it?

Amnesty is not forgiveness. When government begins to grant amnesty without qualifying it, then there is a problem. There are prisoners who are repentant across the nation, they are the ones government should grant amnesty to, not unrepentant terrorists. Boko Haram members do not deserve amnesty because they are bloody terrorists.

I hear people saying the Niger Delta militants and Boko Haram members are similar. I beg to disagree. What the Niger Delta militants were fighting was well known. If you have a people who are being unfairly treated by the deprivations and degradations in their environment through explorations, they deserve to protest.

But I agree how they protested was wrong because there were killings and kidnapping. But we all knew what they were fighting for; we knew the cause. Then, the struggle did not begin one day. The likes of Isaac Boro and Ken Saro- Wiwa died during the struggle. So, let Boko Haram articulate its cause; let it be appreciable and genuine, then we can talk about amnesty, provided they are willing to dialogue.

But these people are fighting a religious cause. They are aggrieved because they want everyone to be Muslims. They believe non-Muslims are infidels and unfit to live.

But isn’t it time to give peace a chance having taken them on militarily?

No, they haven’t really taken them on militarily yet. You need to know what happened in the case of the Niger Delta. There was war in the entire region. There were shoot-outs for days. Many villages were run over by the Armed Forces. None of that has taken place in the north. There has been no meaningful military engagement in the north up till this point and then you turn around to say there should be amnesty? Please, the whole exercise is unfair and painful. In the Niger Delta case, it turned to guerrilla warfare. And there was wisdom because the soldiers were killing people of an entire region without much success. Ordinary people were also buying into the struggle. So, they needed to halt the offensive attacks. But we don’t see that in the north.

So, the situation is totally different with Boko Haram. These people are pursuing total Islamisation of the nation. We have been seeing this pattern before independence. Boko Haram is just an offshoot of that agenda.

I admit we have good Muslims who do not believe in their extreme agenda. Some of us believe there are many good Muslims, which is why we are engaging them. These Boko Haram guys are giving Islam a bad name and we believe Islamic leaders should call them to order. They should dissociate themselves from these blood-thirsty jihadists.

So, amnesty will not work?

It is a failure in progress. It cannot work. What these people want is impossible to achieve. They want Islamisation at all costs. And that will not work. There will always be Christians and Muslims in this country. Boko Haram members do not believe in amnesty. It is like asking Christians to deny their faith at the point of death. That will never happen, no matter what. It is the same with these Boko Haram members. You don’t dangle amnesty like a carrot before them. They don’t believe in it. They have an agenda and will not back down. No amount of inducement or appeasement will deter them. Amnesty is bound to fail.

What will work then?

I believe it is up to Islamic leaders to talk to these people. They are the ones that can dissuade them. They have to engage them and show them how what they are doing is denting the Islamic faith. That is the only way I see it. They are their subjects and should be able to debrief them from the radical views they have embraced.

April 14, 2013
Waging peace and forging wars

Let us not wage peace, just because Boko Haram is forging wars.

It is a truism indeed that if one stares at the earth long and hard enough, it will yield its stories. It will tell the stories of all the good feet that trod it going to and fro. It will even tell of the not so good feet that stamped it frothing to and fro like the devil’s nostrils. More importantly, it will recount the tales of the incredibly brave and stupendously stupid acts of men (and women) who marched on it with wanton gusto, shed blood and sweat, routed friends and enemies alike and generally carried on as if the world was their oyster. It will tell of feet that traipsed and skipped in the purity of joyous men (and women) made happy. These are the tales that the earth tells when one patiently stares long and hard at it.

The earth in Nigeria is right now recording for posterity unprintable tales of purposelessly and wilfully destroyed lives and properties. It is recording into its cracks now how people have been widowed and orphaned for reasons no one can comprehend, least of all the victims. Even though the nation is not at war, the earth is recording how a group has decided to wring one out nevertheless. It is silently recording how a war is being forged right before everyone’s eyes.

The situation resembles a story I read about a long time ago. It concerns a war general who was said to have been a very good bungler. Indeed, it was said of him that he could be relied upon to wring out a problem from the most peaceful situation. Once, while at a war front, he was said to have been so close to victory he could practically taste it if he aimed for a frontal attack. That was when he developed the brainwave to ask his men to aim for surprise attack instead by going around the enemy, thus ensuring their spectacular defeat. Another general was said to have commented wryly on the situation thus: ‘You can always rely on General X to wring a spectacular defeat from the tight jaws of victory!’

Nigerians are experiencing a situation where the clenched jaws of peace are being obviously and tearfully prised open to release a war which nobody wants, likes, or even understands. Oh yes, there is some peace in the land, the kind of peace which allows you to go out in the morning and come back in the evening and thank God that you were not hit by government drivers driving government vehicles at breakneck speed or youngsters barely out of diapers zooming crazily in and out of traffic. Yea, you also thank God that at least your salary can still buy a pot of soup that lasts a few days and the peace allows you to spend the remaining days of the month in a compulsory period of fasting and prayers. Yea, the peace also allows you to watch Abuja women and men glitter in diamonds and gold and dresses that you know can only have come from Alladin’s cave. Then you are allowed to go and dream about all that glitter in peace. Yes o!

Now, Boko Haram is rudely waking us from our blissful dreams of the Abuja glitter. Imagine that! Nobody is allowed to tamper with my dreams of women wearing diamonds so costly and heavy they practically droop through the ears of the wearer, causing it to threaten to fall (the eras, that is, not the earrings). Nobody, just nobody is allowed to wake me up when I am dreaming of people wearing gold wristwatches so costly they can ransom a state’s budget (nation I mean, not a Nigerian state). Don’t let us mention their shoes. Anyway, Boko Haram is forging a war that only it understands out of the tight jaws of our blissful dreams of what can or might be.

Now comes the tricky part. First, the government declares unequivocally that whoever has fallen victim to the antics of the war forgers should not look onto the government for compensation. Translation: should you be stupid enough to be bombed or gunned, you are on your own. Now, isn’t that just so unfair, you think, as you shrug, dust yourself, try to grin and try to bear it, thinking someday, you’ll be the one throwing the bomb too.

So, you hope someone will wake up and start making calls that the victims of these incomprehensible acts be taken care of by the country through compensation, if it’s not too much to ask, thank you. You just sort of hope that someone will understand the horrors of having a life uprooted in such a mercilessly violent way and cry ‘Foul! Foul! Alas!’, and that the government should not turn a cold shoulder to the plight of such a victim.

No, sir, the country instead is recording shrilly cries of amnesty to the ones who handle the guns that turn the innocent lives upside down and make wretches of orphans. It is so strange, don’t you think, that rather than find a better solution, all that our northern leaders can think of demanding is amnesty. Obviously, as I mentioned before, that must have been the grand plan all along. If the government can grant amnesty to the Niger Delta boys for picking up arms to ask for an end to the desecration of their land, why should the government not be able to grant amnesty to a group whose agenda have shifted as many times as their feet have shuffled. Oh please!

Leaders calling for amnesty should first realise what now goes for Boko Haram is not as coherent as when it started. There are now as many splinters of the group as there are ideologies to fit the yearnings of any group willing to be handed freely procured guns. What we are saying is that the guns are first given out, and then the reasons for killing follow. So, granting amnesty will probably not solve the problem because too many issues have been confused together in this phenomenon. These issues must first be taken apart and tackled one after the other or else it would amount to waging peace on the nation, a case of the more you see, the less you actually understand.

More importantly, the country still does not know who the members of boko haram are. Are they Nigerians or Nigeriens or Martians in human form? Well, if the last, it would explain a lot. It would explain their complete desensitisation to the feelings plaguing human beings. It would explain why they do not know the meaning of their actions. It would also explain why we cannot understand the meaning of their actions either.

I have a take on this. Let us not wage peace, just because Boko Haram is forging wars. Leaders calling for amnesty are only waging peace, not forging it. Let us all sit down and talk about this country so that we can stop stabbing around in the dark like the six blind men grabbing at the elephant and not knowing what they were touching. Should anyone be thinking of giving amnesty, however, they should also think about giving compensation for the victims of Boko Haram antics. What’s good for the goose is good for all, and posterity will have better things to record about us for the future to read.

April 14, 2013
Boko Haram: A people’s alternative to peace

Recently, tear-soaked Mrs Deborah Shetima from Borno state gave a gory account of how her husband was killed, her two children seized and her only remaining child shot dead barely one year after the anniversary of the murder of the leader of Boko Haram, Yusuf Mohammed. The military authority has recently announced the death of 20 insurgents after a failed attempt to seize a military outpost in Borno State. The 20 people have relations, they probably have children and wives and maybe some of them are innocent. Nigeria is drifting into a state of blood. The situation may get even worse as the Nigerian neighbors in the Maghreb region grapples with faith-driven armed uprising. Unfortunately, Nigeria may suddenly become hotbeds of deep ethnic divisions and religious upheavals. For months unending, Nigeria has been characterized by bombing and mass killings, leading to thousands of internally displaced persons, including women and children. In our very eyes, the Afghanistanisation of Nigeria is spreading like a wild fire in the dry season. Predictably, this carnage will spread into the Southern part of the country. The bombing of Kogi state, less than 10 minutes drive from some villages in Ekiti and Edo States, is a clear indication that the Islamic movement may soon hit major cities in Southern Nigeria. Few days ago, the Lagos authorities arrested some Boko Haram faithful, with guns and bombs. The South West is the most urbanized, consequences of terrorist insurgence in this area are unimaginable.

I have had the opportunity to travel across the North first as an active member of the National Association of Nigerian Students, (NANS) in the 1980s, member of the Technical Committee that organized the first modern-day ethnic summit in Northern Nigeria in 1999 at the instance of the late Dr Beko Ransome-Kuti and also as a researcher on self-determination in Nigeria. The ethnic summit held in Jos drew close to 1,500 people. The bitter truth, however is that the Boko Haram crisis will continue for certain reasons: one, the current Nigerian leadership lacks a deep historical understanding of the nature and form of the insurgence that is stealthily engulfing the country and, therefore, cannot provide an enduring solution. Two, contrary to the propaganda of state security operatives and the sometimes deceitful and ignorant categorization of the crisis as ad hoc, what we see is a well planned campaign of terror woven around primordial values. Unknowingly to many people in authority, the insurgents in the North appear to relish the support of a huge population of adherents who are happy that at last, a group is giving it back to a state that for decades has treated her citizens like cockroaches on the sidewalk. Millions of poor people in the North are frustrated by a corrupt, inept and almost moribund political leadership. There is the belief, even if illusory, that the introduction of Sharia, will curb the recklessness and spinelessness of the Northern political leadership. It means that with what clearly appears as the support of Boko Haram by a section of the local population, overall defeat of the Islamic movement is farfetched. Thirdly, President Goodluck Jonathan had admitted that security operatives are involved in the execution of Boko Haram campaigns. This only confirms how difficult it will be to banish the sect. By now, we should fear for the personal safety of Mr President and the violent ethnic backlash any harm on him foretells.

We must admit: This country is standing on the edge of a cesspool. It is important to note that the war of attrition being waged by Boko Haram is oiled by the most inflammable ingredients of human existentialism: ethnicity and religion. The most brutal and most malicious wars in human history have been fought along either ethnic or religious lines. Here lay the peril that faces Africa’s biggest and the most homogenous Black country. The most dangerous trend is that though the Federal Government appears to have scored “victories” through its superior armed confrontation with the sect, there are unforeseeable, daring consequences one of which is the fear that security operatives who are natives of communities under state sponsored siege, will naturally be displeased by the often innocent casualties that usually accompany military operations in their dominion. One thing is now certain, this bombing has become one of the major threats to stability in Nigeria and West Africa coupled with the persistent armed uprising which has become a dominant trend across the sub-region. The emerging scenario is not only a peril to Nigeria, but given the country’s huge population, there is a visible threat to global security.

What should be done? There cannot be a solution to the crisis without understanding its history, nature and form. For one thing, it is completely naïve to cite the Islamic insurgence as mainly the product of the temporary loss of power by the Hausa-Fulani North. This only explains an aspect of the problem. It appears a section in the Presidency thinks this way when it linked the uprising to the assumption that ‘some people just don’t like the president’s face’. This is simplistic and will definitely lead to wrong solutions to a persistent problem. In understanding the current trend, we should know the history of the people waging this campaign. Let us reflect a bit on where they are coming from: for over 300 centuries, the North East has been home to Islamic re-insurgence, partly due to the region’s unique political and cultural history. We cannot appreciate this without understanding the Borno Empire and its historic fangs and timeless struggle for self-determination which has been continuously stymied. The Borno dynasty had existed for over 1000 years, covering some parts of Ghana, Nguru, Kano and Adamawa States. Its collapse was only saved by Shaikh Muhammed al-Amin al-Kanemi who was born in 1772. Borno had over the years resisted any external culture, influence or the creation of ‘national cultural identity’ which the modern Nigerian nation continues to fan. The Hausa, Fulani and the Borno pedigree are not the same and sometimes view each other with suspicion. For instance, the Fulani first entered the Borno capital, Gazargumo, on Saturday 12 March, 1804 (the 13th Muharram, 1223 A.H). Old Borno Empire (now Yobe, parts of Adamawa, and Borno States-the hotbeds of the insurgency) had resented intruders and had meted harsh venom on such. When the Fulanis came, the fleeing Mai appealed to al-Kanemi who summoned his Kanumbu tribesmen and the Shuwa Arabs, who rallied because they considered the liberation of the Saefawa Dynasty a noble cause. They considered the Fulani as ere aggressors and usurpers. After routing the Fulani, al-Kanemi returned Mai Dunoma to his domain. The siege continued until after the death of Uthman Dan Fodio in 1817.

Adeoye, a human right activist, journalist and CNN African Journalist of the Year 2000, wrote in from Lagos.

April 14, 2013
Aborted Lagos bomb: Another good luck for Nigeria?

The country cannot afford any bombing in Lagos

The Guardian’s front-page story on April 9 about the escape of Lagos from massive bombing of its Third Mainland Bridge must be good news to many of the 18 million people living in the state, otherwise referred to as a megacity of many towns joined by highways and bridges. Apart from the spirit of ‘thank God it did not happen’ that is expected from the lips of millions of indigenes and residents of Lagos State, there must be millions that must have been losing sleep since The Guardian broke the news that the weapons of mass destruction unearthed in Ojora-Badia a few weeks ago were made to bomb and destroy Lagos. There are others who are already saying: ‘How lucky is Nigeria again!’

Of course, there must be questions on the lips of many patriots about the shroud that has been used to cover the story, especially the magnitude of the intention of Boko Haram terrorists that planned to hit the Third Mainland Bridge. Was the silence intended to keep troubling information from citizens and thus avoid panic? The fact that traffic has been unusually light on the bridge and in Lagos in general since Tuesday is an indication that people are already panicking. Would it have been better for the country’s security minders to have grades of alert about the danger posed by Boko Haram for citizens, the way it is done in other countries bedeviled by terrorism and suicide bombers?

Even if we succeed in appeasing the current initiates of Boko Haram with amnesty, it may be necessary for the presidency to find ways of warning citizens about the degree of danger facing them, as there is likely to be another group of BokoHaramists after the ongoing amnesty process, should the sect that has confessed to turning the North of Nigeria into an Islamic state agree to monetized amnesty. Has the country not known threats from Niger Delta militants after the first amnesty which has now become a model or precedent to borrow in fighting the greatest threat to the country’s unity since the pogrom in the North in 1966 and the civil war that the killing of Igbos in the North generated.

As scary as the news of plans to bomb Lagos is, security chiefs and the average citizen should not be surprised that Boko Haram finally came to Lagos to deploy bombs. It would have been surprising if it never got to this. The Yoruba have a saying: Aladugbotio n koasoara re siabatako le ma yaasoenielenisiwewe (A neighbour that puts his own clothes in the mud should have no qualms shredding other persons’ clothes). Apart from killing Christians in the North, Boko Haram terrorists also killed fellow northerners in bars. Many of them even killed themselves in the process of suicide bombing. Why would they not attempt to do the same in the nation’s commercial and cultural capital?

Still on why no one should expect the terrorist sect to stay away from Lagos, Lagos is the most graphic illustration of the impact of Western civilization or education in the country. Why should anyone be surprised that proponents of Education is Sin have planned to destroy the most convincing evidence that western education can also bring as driver of progress to parts of the country that appear to be addicted to western education? It is good for everyone that members of the Islamist terrorist group that came to Lagos to operate have been foiled and their plans aborted. But it is not yet Uhuru. Security and non-security workers in Lagos and other cities should not rest on their oars yet. Boko Haram is not dead yet. The Boko Haram imagination is not likely to die so readily, not even after Boko Haram in all its manifestations: religious, criminal, and political, to borrow the categorization of General Buhari, would have been appeased or assuaged with offers of amnesty.

Boko Haram illustrates some of the ironies in the Nigerian polity and society. It is an organization that hates western education but relies in its operations on products of western education. Boko Haram was birthed in the section of the country that believes that the unity of Nigeria is the only issue worth paying attention to, even if doing this is at the expense of the happiness of many sections of the country. In addition, the Islamist terrorist group is native to the section of the country that is mortally opposed to multilevel policing and law enforcement in the country. It is the same group that has hobbled the presidency and the country’s mono-level security architecture that is being appeased with offer of amnesty before any negotiation. It is the same sect that is driven by religious bigotry that is being cajoled by leaders of an admittedly secular or multi-religious country.

It would have been the mother of ironies if Boko Haram had succeeded in bombing the Third Mainland Bridge while the rest of the country was busy bending over backward to appease the terrorist sect with amnesty. There is no doubt that the people of Lagos must be expressing in their private spaces gratitude to the nation’s security group after the news that they were saved from mass murder by Intelligence workers that napped the suicide bombers waiting in Ijora-Badia to hatch their nefarious plans.

But gratitude to security staff may not be enough to save Lagos or any other city for that matter. What is needed is for every Lagosian to see himself and herself from this moment on as security intelligence staff. The country cannot afford any bombing in Lagos. This may be too dangerous for the unity of the country, as Lagosians and their relations elsewhere are likely to go berserk if any of the three bridges is destroyed with motorists on them.

This may be the best time to stop sectionalising the call for state and community police as the Constitution Technical Committee did when it reported that it is only the Southwest that is asking for state police. The same trivialisation occurred when leaders of major Nigerian nationalities dubbed NADECO’s struggle for restoration of democracy a Yoruba affair, but the rest about that is now history. Nigeria cannot afford to wait until everybody in the Southwest, Southeast, South-south, and even in the regions of birth of Boko Haram become his or her own police.The process of dialogue and offer of amnesty to Boko Haram must include calling other Nigerian nationalities to a conference to agree on the way to make the nation’s unity sustainable and pleasurable to citizens from all sections and religions in the country.

April 14, 2013
Ribadu in Ikenne, urges Boko Haram sect to accept Amnesty

Former Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) presidential candidate, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu has appealed to members of Boko Haram sect to yield grounds in the name Allah, and accept the amnesty offer being planned by the Federal Government.

The former Anti – corruption Czar also urged the Federal Government not be discouraged by the stance of the militant Boko Haram sect on Amnesty but to persevere in its peace moves towards making the group to lay down their arms.

Ribadu, who spoke in Ikenne home of late Chief Obafemi Awolowo on Saturday while fielding questions from reporters, noted that the Boko Haram insurgence in parts of the North in the last couple of years had cost the country fortunes in diverse areas.

The former EFCC boss was accompanied Ikenne by the former Aviation Minsiter, Chief Femi Fani-Kayode and former Minister of Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Alh. Aliyu Moddibo, to the matriarch of Awolowo family, Chief (Mrs) Hannah Idowu Dideolu(HID) to commiserate with her on the death of her son, Evangelist Oluwole Awolowo.

He said dialogue with members of the sect would bring much sought hope putting an end to the spate of killings and destruction from the sect.

Ribadu said: “it is very sad when I heard that the Boko Haram sect rejected the amnesty offer, but that does not mean that government should totally relent in the move. Personally, my view from the onset is we should pursue the direction of dialogue and not closing any door against peace.

“From now, the feelers and body language of the sect is not encouraging, but that does not mean that we should abandon or give up. We should pursue the direction of peace.

“I urged the Federal Government to continue in the line and direction of looking for a way of addressing and stopping this carnage and bloodbath. Even if means pursuing dialogue, even if there are stumbling blocks on the way, it is not to give up.”

According to him, the Islamist sect were not doing the nation any good by shedding blood of innocent people at will in a country where the act of terrorism is not acceptable and tolerable.

He urged the sect to take cognisance of the fact that no meaningful could be achieved in an atmosphere of violence and blood-letting.

” I am also making a direct appeal to those who are involved to know that they are destroying their own people. They must understand that it has not worked anywhere in the world and it will not work in Nigeria. What do they want to gain from this senseless killing. In the name of God let them stop,” Ribadu stated.

Ribadu in condoling with Mama HID all left behind by the late Oluwole, he described the deceased’s death as a painful loss and urged the family to accept it as an act of God.

April 13, 2013
Boko Haram: The problem with amnesty

Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown. At moments like this I do not envy President Goodluck Jonathan. Leadership demands tough decisions and choices. And the buck stops on his table particularly in our presidential system of government. There have been persistent calls in recent times across partisan and sectional divides that the Boko Haram insurgents that have killed thousands, maimed thousands more and spread blood, tears and sorrow across the North and beyond over the last two years be pardoned or granted amnesty. Many of those making the case for amnesty mean well. They contend that the military offensive against the terrorist group is not working. Rather, the Joint Task Force is alienating host communities by killing and molesting innocent civilians whenever soldiers are killed. Advocates of amnesty want peace and restoration of normalcy at all costs. It is difficult to blame them. The economy of the North has virtually been paralysed. Poverty has deepened. Fear reigns supreme. Furthermore, the precedence of the Niger Delta is cited. There, militant insurgents that waged war against oil installations and almost crippled the Nigerian economy were granted a general amnesty by the late President Umaru Yar’Adua. If peace could be bought in the Niger Delta, why not in the North?

Unfortunately, President Jonathan seems unable to make up his mind on how to handle the Boko Haram challenge. He angered many Nigerians, especially Christians, when he suggested last year that Boko Haram members are our fellow brothers and dialogue with the sect should not be ruled out. Many people felt they could do without such murderous brothers. During his last visit to Borno and Yobe states, the President talked tough by declaring that his government could not negotiate with ghosts. Yet, so shortly after, it has been reported that the same President has now set up a committee to consider the possibility and modality of granting a general amnesty to the Boko Haram sect. President Jonathan does not appear to be showing leadership on this matter. He is simply bowing to whatever is the latest conventional wisdom. The President ought to be aware that the primary constitutional responsibility of the state is to maintain the security and promote the welfare of its citizens. People must first be alive before they can work, worship, pursue leisure or do any other thing.

Those who predicate amnesty for Boko Haram on the Niger Delta precedent make a serious error. The so-called Niger Delta amnesty has not solved the fundamental problems of the region. It has only postponed the evil day. Yes, a few ex-militants have become emergency billionaires. Thousands of ex-militants are practically being bribed to maintain peace in the region so that the country can continue to exploit and export the crude oil without which she cannot survive. The Niger Delta amnesty has become a huge scam spawning the political economy of primitive accumulation – massive corruption. The arrangement is clearly unsustainable. Recurrent violent demonstrations by other militants left out of the deal make this so clear. The problems of environmental despoliation and desperate poverty remain as glaring as ever in the Niger Delta even if certain Ijaw elite that form part of Jonathan’s inner circle are enjoying the time of their lives.

In any case, as many analysts have rightly pointed out, the Niger Delta insurgency was qualitatively different from the ongoing Boko Haram carnage. The Niger Delta struggle was about the damage done to the environment due to oil exploration as well as the unacceptable level of poverty in the region. Oil facilities and workers in oil companies were the prime targets of attack. There were no generalized, indiscriminate massacres like that being perpetrated by Boko Haram. This then is the basic problem with any proposition of amnesty for Boko Haram. What exactly is the fundamental grievance of the group? To the best of my knowledge, their objective is the Islamisation of northern Nigeria. Now, Nigeria is a multi-religious society. The constitutionally guaranteed secularity of the state is a necessary condition for peaceful co-existence in any such society. Nigeria’s secularity is thus non-negotiable. How then do you even begin to negotiate with a group whose primary objective is the erosion of that very secularity?

Beyond this, members of Boko Haram have shown no remorse for the thousands of innocent lives they have wasted. A splinter group that hinted that it was prepared to negotiate some time ago gave no intimations of regret at the mindless killings perpetrated by the group. Is it thus any wonder that the leader of the group, AbubakarShekau, has been quoted in an audio recording as pointedly saying that “Surprisingly, the Nigerian government is talking about granting us amnesty? What wrong have we done? On the contrary, it is we that should grant you a pardon.” Really, can you fault his logic? Boko Haram has not conceded to doing any wrong. In fact its misguided members believe they are fighting a righteous cause. How then can you pardon a group that believes it is the wronged party?

There is no doubt that the Niger Delta amnesty emboldened Boko Haram to believe that it could forcefully wrest concessions from the Nigerian state through terror. Let us not forget that the defining essence of any state is its legitimate monopoly of the techniques and instruments of violence within a given jurisdiction. Once this monopoly can be successfully challenged by rival groups the “stateness” of the state is irreparably devalued. Many of those who make the case for amnesty contend that the military option is not working. This implies that the Nigerian state must negotiate with Boko Haram from a position of weakness because of a perceived imminent military defeat. What this will do is only to encourage other groups to adopt violent methods in dealing with a Nigerian state perceived as lacking in efficacy to secure its territory.

Of course, I agree that individual members of Boko Haram who overcome their delusions and voluntarily give up their ways of terror should be pardoned. This could encourage more members of the group to come out of the shadows and live decently among civilized communities. However, the entire Boko Haram tragedy only illustrates the urgency for more drastically addressing the fundamental problems of the Nigerian state. For instance, the need to convene a national conference has become imperative. If at such a conference, for instance, the majority of the people in any state or region opt for sharia law, they should be allowed to have their way. Those whose religious beliefs are incompatible with such a law should simply relocate to areas where they can practice their faiths without hindrance. Again, it is obvious that the present over centralized, unitary security structure is ill-suited to a federal society like ours. It is time to decentralize the Nigerian police force through the creation of state police. If states have their own police outfits comprising officers and men from the local communities, they will be in a better position to detect and prevent criminal activities including terrorism. For, contrary to President Jonathan’s claims, Boko Haram members are not ghosts. They live among human communities. Ghosts do not detonate bombs and crush innocent lives.

Ironically, it is the elite of the north, the region which is most negatively affected by the current malformed structure of Nigeria, that are most vehemently opposed to these necessary measures! Currently, a huge chunk of the country’s budgetary resources is being expended on security with little positive impact on effectively protecting lives and property. The prevalent insecurity across the country has obviously only become another ready source of corrupt capital accumulation by unscrupulous officials. With fundamental decentralization of powers, resources and responsibilities to the component parts of the country, there will be more money available at the grassroots to address the poverty and inequality that, in the final analysis, lies at the root of the Boko Haram menace.

April 13, 2013
Fear in Presidency as Boko Haram rejects amnesty

The Presidency has launched a desperate mission to salvage its shattered amnesty-for-Boko Haram programme.

The fundamentalist sect rejected yesterday the planned clemency for its members, saying it should be the one to pardon the government.

Some prominent Northern elders believed to be close to Boko Haram have been enlisted to prevail on the sect to embrace peace.

But a rights activist, Comrade Shehu Sani, who once facilitated talks with Boko Haram, said the rejection of amnesty by the sect should be expected because the Federal Government failed to do its homework well.

Also, a former military governor of Kaduna State, Col. Abubakar Dangiwa Umar, said dialogue with the sect ought to come first before amnesty.

To him, the rejection is not surprising.

After a parley with all service chiefs last week, President Goodluck Jonathan raised a committee to harness the various requests for amnesty for the sect.

The committee was given two weeks to come up with recommendations on the possibility of granting the militants pardon.

But Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau said the group has not committed any crime to deserve clemency.

In an audio statement, Shekau said his group had “not committed any wrong to deserve amnesty”.

“Surprisingly, the Nigerian government is talking about granting us amnesty. What wrong have we done? On the contrary, it is we that should grant you pardon,” Shekau was quoted as saying by AFP.

The rejection was made in an audio recording in Hausa language, which was distributed by email in a manner consistent with the previous messages released by Boko Haram.

The voice was said to be similar to that of previous Shekau statements.

The group says its members are fighting to create an Islamic state in the North where churches and many public places have been bombed. More than 1000 people have been killed.

According to the statement, Shekau said it was the government that was committing atrocities against muslims.

At the forefront of the clamour for pardon for the sect are the Sultan of Sokoto, Alhaji Sa’ad Abubakar, the Alhaji Maitama Sule-led Northern Elders’s Forum (NEF) and eminent Nigerians.

They include Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) National Learder Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, who backed the idea with a condition that those with blood on their hands should face justice and the candidate of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) in the 2011 presidential election, Gen. Muhammadu Buhari.

Gen. Buhari urged Nigerians to support amnesty if it will bring peace.

The violence continued yesterday; with unknown gunmen killing four policemen in Babangida, headquarters of Tarmuwa Local Government Area of Yobe State.

The killings, which took place near the slain officers’ station, was confirmed by the State Police Commissioner Sanusi Rufai.

He said the gang also lost five of their members in the gun duel that ensued.

Rufai told the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) that the policemen were attacked as they took guard behind the sand-bags which provided barriers at the entrance of the station.

The gunmen, who failed in their plan to raze the station, carted away some rifles, Rufai said.

He said: “The gunmen came around midnight, trying to enter the police station with intent to burn it down, but were resisted by the police.

“We lost four policemen and their rifles were carted away but the station was protected,” Rufai said.

According to sources, there has been anxiety in the Presidency and security circles since the position of the sect was made known.

It was gathered that the government got to know of Boko Haram stand on Wednesday night.

A source said: “No one is happy in the Presidency and in the security agencies because the decision of Boko Haram leaders is a setback.

“That is why everyone is wearing somber look because President Goodluck Jonathan and his security chiefs have been working round the clock to make the amnesty work.

“The government is already exploring options to salvage the situation, including liaison with Northern elders who could help persuade Boko Haram leaders to open up talks with the government.”

Asked why the Boko Haram leaders rejected amnesty, the source added: “I think they have reservations about the process. There was a lot of celebration in the media before the thing took off.”

In Sani’s view, the rejection should have been expected because the Federal Government failed to do its homework well.

He also accused the government of focusing on a monetised amnesty instead of a genuine type.

Sani said: “Well, I am not surprised. In fact, it should be expected that they (Boko Haram leaders) should reject it because the government has put the horse before the cart.

“First and foremost, the whole idea of amnesty is a charade. The concept brought by Northern elders is an amnesty modelled along the line of Niger Delta and it is attached to financial commitment from the side of the state. They wanted to buy peace at a heavy amount of money just the way it is being brought about in the Niger Delta

“The committee being set up by the government would naturally be rejected by Boko Haram because it was not constituted after a consultation with the leaders of the sect.

“The whole idea is about extracting billions of naira to be shared to insurgents and also giving out contracts, using the names of Boko Haram leaders.

“They simply rejected being used by some persons who want to profit from the amnesty deal.

“The way forward is for the government to go back to Dr. Ahmed Datti Ahmed peace talk which was facilitated by a journalist, Ahmad Salkida of which the group acknowledged and endorsed at that very time.

“The outcome of that talk should then be preceded by a committee, which will have the input of the sect and also be recognised by the government.

“The next stage will then be a six to eight or nine-month ceasefire, which will ensure justice for all the victims of Boko Haram.

“So, any thought of using tax payers’ money to back up a fraudulent amnesty is an exercise in futility.”

Col. Umar said dialogue ought to have come first before the Federal Government rushed into the amnesty offer.

He said through dialogue, the government ought to have allowed the people to identify themselves, present their demands, consider the demands and open talks with the victims of Boko Haram insurgency whether they are ready to forgive or not.

Col. Umar said: “Well, I have all been skeptical about this amnesty issue. I align myself with the fact that there should be dialogue between the government and Boko Haram so that we will know what the insurgents want before we jump into amnesty.

“Without dialogue, we will not know whether they are ready for ceasefire or not. So, we need to create room for them to identify themselves, what their demands are and discuss with the Federal Government whether the government can meet these demands or not.

“Also, in considering amnesty, the Federal Government must take into account that there are victims that have been killed, maimed and those that lost their property. We need to know whether the families of those killed and other victims are ready to forgive or not. President Goodluck Jonathan does not have the power to forgive, which is the whole essence of amnesty. There are victims who must be ready to forgive before we can talk of amnesty.

“To be honest, I am not surprised that they (Boko Haram leaders) have come out to reject amnesty. This is the first time the nation must come together or be united to address this insurgency.”

April 12, 2013
Jonathan cautioned on amnesty for Boko Haram

Youth Wing of the Christian Association of Nigeria (YOWICAN) on Thursday told President Goodluck Jonathan not to grant amnesty to the Boko Haram sect.

YOWICAN said Jonathan will find it difficult if he grants amnesty to the sect.

The body added that the move will be potentially dangerous to Nigeria and Nigerians, and that it will be a clarion call to more terrorism in Nigeria.

Addressing journalists in Abuja on the proposed amnesty offer, YOWICAN President, Dr. Simon Dolly, warned the Federal Government to be prepared to face more deadly and sophisticated response if the Boko Haram sects are granted amnesty.

The Christian youths further warned Jonathan to desist from granting the amnesty and advised him to arrest the likes of Senator Zanna, Bukar Abba Ibrahim and others whose utterances and actions YOWICAN said have implicated them.

Dolly advised Jonathan not to fuel the anger of Christian youths saying, “the fact that Christian youths have not reacted does not mean we are cowards.”

His words: “We are worried by the clarion call and the subsequent setting up of a committee by President Goodluck Jonathan to work out modalities for granting amnesty despite his earlier position on the amorphous nature of this terrorist group. We the entire Christian Youths in Nigeria say no to any form of amnesty to members of Boko Haram sect or any such group.

“In case Federal Government is contemplating granting amnesty to wilful murderers masquerading as political and religious insurgents who do not respect the basic tenets of humanity and the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Federal Government should be prepared to face perhaps more deadly and sophisticated response.

“We appeal to the President not to be cowed by politicians and few misfits and naturally rebellious persons in the north who are attempting to use the Boko Haram insurgency as a bait to correct what they have failed to do while they were in power. This planned amnesty for murderers is potentially dangerous to Nigeria and Nigerians because it is a clarion call to more terrorism in the country.”

April 11, 2013