The Boko Haram crisis is readily used by the PDP to rationalize the Jonathan Government’s abdication of its constitutional responsibilities, including visits and assistance to areas affected, effective response to kidnappings and abductions (e.g. the GEJ government was silent over the Chibok girls kidnaps for over 15 days).
The declaration of emergency rule, massive increases in spending on security without correspondent impact, has become a political gimmick by the PDP now being counted as the GEJ achievement in promoting peace and security.
The PDP is actively politicizing the declaration of emergency rule. For instance, the PDP government is ever quick to propose and declare emergency rule in areas controlled by opposition political parties, but not in PDP-controlled states even where the scale of violence, killings and destruction are similar. For example, despite incessant violence, killings, displacement and destruction in Taraba, Benue and Plateau (PDP controlled states), the PDP has been quick to discount the possibility of a full scale emergency rule in the above mentioned states, however it is quick to impose emergency rule in non-PDP states at the slightest episode of violence.
Finally, the status quo favours the PDP and President Goodluck Jonathan. Why? Boko Haram affected areas and indeed the Northern region are APC strongholds, hence Boko Haram crises, the declaration of emergency rule and general atmosphere of insecurity in the North are likely to affect voting (low turnout due to displacement). There is already talk of cancelling elections in some areas in the Northeast, all plots designed to minimize President Jonathan-PDP electoral losses in the North and enhance the likelihood of a PDP victory.
C. The Boko Haram Crisis and GEJ security Spending Spree
One salient, yet under-reported and under-discussed issue is the incredible amount of Nigeria’s national income being expended, by the President Jonathan administration purportedly on combating Boko Haram in the last 5 years (since 2010). I will share the mind-boggling figures with you.
APC’s research on total security sector spending (covering Defence, Police, Office of National Security Adviser, Road Safety Corps, and security-related service-wide votes (e.g. on Amnesty Programme, internal security operations, etc.) is based on information contained in successive budget documents.
Year Amount (Naira) Dollar Value
(@N165 = $1)
2014 1,174,897,477,334.00 7.12 billion
2013 1,178,832,576,309.00 7.14 billion
2012 1,154,857,159,110.00 6.99 billion
2011 1,080,894,801,178.00 6.55 billion
2010 836,016,773,836.00 5.07 billion
Total 5,425,498,787,767.00 32.88 billion
Why and what is important about these statistics?
a. On the average the Boko Haram Insurgency has fuelled increases in security spending to around 25% of annual federal government budget.
b. In light of the rebasing of Nigeria’s GDP (put at N80.3 trillion or $509.9 billion), the yearly average 2010-14 is $6.58 billion, is equal to 1.3% of GDP.
c. The total for the 5 budget years amounts to 6.5% of Nigeria GDP.
d. Most importantly, there appears to be nothing to show (commensurately) for the huge monies purportedly expended. There are recurring reports and stories in the media about how frontline troops and soldiers have inferior weapons and firepower compared to Boko Haram’s and how Nigerian soldiers have been fleeing battlefields (into Cameroon), and communities and military barracks being easily overrun by Boko Haram fighters. This begs the questions about where and how is the money being spent? Is it truly spent on security? Is corruption taking place in security spending? What and where are the military hardware acquired? Who is supplying security equipment – manufacturers or third party agents?
D. Unanswered Questions and Puzzles about Boko Haram Insurgency
APC’s research and analysis of the Boko Haram insurgency has unearthed some intriguing puzzles that warrant serious attention. Since 2011, President Goodluck Jonathan-PDP led government has increased security spending; declared and renewed emergency rule, issued propaganda claiming the capture and killing of Boko Haram members (including the leader Abubakar Shekau), destruction of Boko Haram camps, and countless assurances of improving security and winning the battle against Boko Haram.
Over the same period however, the empirical realities are that Boko Haram has become more daring and audacious in its attacks through:
Increase in the scale, number and spread of attacks, even against supposedly fortified military bases.
More Boko Haram killings and casualty levels among civilians and security personnel.
Rapid growing number of Nigerian Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and Refugees, now estimated by the UNHCR at over 600,000!
Increasing reports of mutinies and soldiers absconding (desertion) from battlefields.
Boko Haram declaration of a Caliphate.
The key issue in all of this is this – are all these mere empirical coincidence or statistical correlation OR are there genuine organic and logical connections (some form of action and reaction)? Certainly it is my and APC belief that there is a pull and effect logic at work. Put simply, President Jonathan’s handling of the Boko Haram insurgency has been a spectacular failure, and this is deliberate for political reasons. Where and even if the President Jonathan-PDP Admnistration may claim to know nothing about the origin of Boko Haram, it has actively sustained the crisis, profiteering from it.
E. The Way Forward: APC’s Stand
The APC has consistently argued for New Thinking and alternative approaches to the Boko Haram crisis. The five pillars of APC’s approach are:
i. Urgent formulation of a holistic Counter-Terrorism strategy that emphasizes the synergistic use of military, political and economic elements, and roles for civil society and other critical stakeholders.
ii. Political negotiation with Boko Haram. All recent cases of internal security challenges (militias. etc.), including the OPC, MEND, etc. across Nigeria have all been resolved through political negotiations of some sort. Boko Haram cannot be an exception.
iii. Planning and Investing for Peace through a Human Development Approach to address the socio-economic, governance and environmental conditions that gave rise to Boko Haram. Key here are youth development, employment and means of livelihoods, education, access to markets, revival of agriculture, etc. What is advocated is a serious and genuine consideration of socio-economic revival of the Northeast and other affected Northern areas, not the tokenistic (£7million) gesture proposed by the Jonathan Administration
iv. Bring in the United Nations (and its specialised agencies), and mobilise local and international peace building organisations to work with communities and groups affected by Boko Haram.
v. Security Sector Reform through a thorough National Security Review, New National Security Policy, and tailored institutional, legal and operational reforms and re-organisation of Nigeria’s security agencies. The Boko Haram crisis has exposed systemic failures in Nigeria’s national security system, and there is a rare opportunity to use this as the basis to transform Nigeria’s National Security architecture.
Conclusion
Unfortunately but truly, the Nigerian government had bungled the fight against Boko Haram. The government’s attempt to make political capital out of the insurgency has backfired.
The Boko Haram crisis and the Jonathan Administration’s response to it must be seen in the context of the 2015 general elections in Nigeria. The status quo favours the PDP and President Jonathan. Why? Because Boko Haram-affected areas and indeed the Northern region are opposition strongholds, hence the Administration is hoping – and perhaps secretly wishing- that the Boko Haram crisis, the declaration of emergency rule and general atmosphere of insecurity in the North will lead to the cancellation of voting in some areas and limit voters’ turnout in general, a development which the PDP believes will minimize its electoral losses in the North and enhance the likelihood of a PDP victory.
Beyond that, reports from the grapevine are that the government is even trying to cash in on the worsening crisis to explore the possibility of delaying the elections and extending its tenure. It does not occur to them that the country must first survive for anyone to rule it.
Our worst fears were confirmed recently when the Australian hired by President Jonathan to help negotiate the release of the over 200 school girls named the President’s allies and members of the ruling PDP as the sponsors of Boko Haram. He said the Boko Haram commanders identified the men: Former Army Chief Azubuike Ihejirika and a former governor of Borno State Ali Modu Sheriff – among the sponsors of the sect.
Now that the cat has been let out of the bag and the real sponsors of Boko Haram have been exposed , we hope President Jonathan will summon the courage to do the right thing: Hand over the identified Boko Haram sponsors to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for investigation and prosecution.
There is no doubt that Boko Haram has committed crimes against humanity in its scorched-earth campaign against unarmed citizens, and the most appropriate body to investigate and try the sect’s sponsors is the ICC.
According to Article 17 of the Rome Statute that set up the ICC, and to which Nigeria is a signatory, the ICC is a court of last resort, expected to exercise its jurisdiction only if states themselves are unwilling or unable to genuinely investigate and prosecute international crimes.
In view of the fact that the alleged Boko Haram sponsors are either members of the ruling party or friends of the President, it is clear that the PDP- led Federal government is unwilling and unable to try them.
As we all know if the funding of Boko Haram is not cut off, it will be difficult to defeat the sect.
I thank you most sincerely for your attention.
