|
Home
Of Boko Haram and Nigeria's unity (1)
By Olugu Orji
Someone who had read a piece I wrote some weeks back titled, How I became a Nigerian confronted me with this question; Do you believed in Biafra? I guess the query arose because I'd indicated that Biafra was the first country I came to know as a child. I actually did have to become Nigerian.
Before I address the question, let me state something by way of definition to eliminate all ambiguity about what Biafra is.
The Biafra in question is certainly not a personality nor is it a political unit with cadastral limits. That Biafra expired in the wee hours of 1970. That leaves us with the issue of Biafra as an idea. That, I think is the one I'll be dealing with.
To get a grip on the concept of Biafra, we must revisit the unfortunate events of the ill-fated first republic.
After being granted that dubious independence in 1960 and becoming a republic two years later, the ship of the Nigerian state careened from one crisis to another in its elusive search for stability and legitimacy. And you can trust politicians on this count: their characteristic hubris and unbridled corruption will always nudge the polity to the edge of the precipice. In 1966, a group of ambitious, middle-level army officers took one look at the emerging scenario and elected to intervene; violently. Through a quirk of fate, the putsch was successful around the federation save in the south-east. Incidentally, the ring leaders of the initiative were mostly of south-eastern extraction or more specifically, Igbo. On the whole, that audacious initiative failed; as I believe it was destined to. The first republic effectively expired ushering in military rule headed by the inimitable General John Thomas Umunnakwe Aguiyi-Ironsi: an Igbo man.
Predictably, there were reprisals against the Igbo and their interests especially in Northern Nigeria. Thousands of Igbo were horrendously slaughtered in a pogrom that was a precursor to the genocidal war. Aguiyi-Ironsi himself was to pay the supreme price in a well articulated military ambush in Ibadan. He was felled alongside his host, Lt. Col. Adekunle Fajuyi; then military governor of the Western Region.
The Igbo, no longer assured of safety outside their homeland, were compelled to make the unpalatable and precarious journey home; abandoning all their properties and investment. The cerebral Lt. Col. Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, then military governor of Southern Nigeria, was under intense pressure to extract some form of guarantee for the safety of the Igbo across the federation. There were numerous summits and conferences convened in a bid to hammer out a compromise. In spite of the celebrated meeting of all stakeholders in Aburi, Ghana, then Nigerian head of state, Gen. Yakubu Gowon could offer no such guarantee as the killing and persecution of the Igbo continued unabated. It was this dire situation that forced the hand of the south-eastern leadership towards secession thereby declaring the sovereign state of Biafra in 1967. The horrors of the 30-month long civil war are properly documented for the benefit of all who're not afraid to confront the crude truth.
•Olugu Orji, Plot 542 Durumi District, Abuja
08051130539, 08032648369
oluguorji@yahoo.com
Skype: olugu.orji3
Source: Sun, 28th June 2011.
...May split Nigeria like Darfur –Gambari
From YINKA FABOWALE, Ibadan
Nigeria can not afford to ignore the festering terrorist attacks by Boko Haram sect and other internal security threats, but had better tackle it headlong to prevent the nation going the way of war-torn Sudan and Darfur.
Former Nigeria permanent representative to the United Nations, Prof. Ibrahim Gambari, gave the advice yesterday as the guest speaker at a lecture organised by the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (CEPACS), University of Ibadan (UI) to commemorate the World Refugee Day.
Gambari noted that recent events in the country such as the Boko Haram attacks, the bloody violence being perpetrated by members of the National Union of Road Transport Workers and militancy in the Niger-Delta region, among others were threats to national cohesion and economic development.
In his words: "They are pointers to the fact that Xthe nation is still far from being there."
Prof. Gambari, the current Special Representative of the Joint African Union (AU) and United Nations (UN) Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) especially observed that Nigeria shared so many affinities with Sudan, particularly in terms of plurality of religion and ethnicity, which made it susceptible to possible disintegration as the Central African country.
To this end, he said the situations must be critically studied for the country to learn how to prevent similar crisis.
The diplomat, who spoke on: The Challenges of Refugee and Internally Displaced Persons in Peace Processes and in Rapidly Changing Times: The Case of Darfur, said in as much as the nation's intervention was needed in the war torn- Darfur, the Federal Government must put its house in order to prevent the country from suffering a similar fate.
His words: "There are seven million Sudanese of Nigeria origin in Sudan, the only country separating us is Chad, so Nigeria cannot ignore the conflicts in this area, we must study it and learn from it.
He tasked the Nigerian government to rise to the task and ensure that the human rights of the people and its democratic process were put in order.
He stressed the need for Nigerian leaders to prevent the normalisation of the seeming domestic abnormal situation as well as the abnormal situation in the crisis torn Darfur whereby huge numbers of internationally huge persons continue to live in camps and refugees reside abroad.
"Let us also remember that peace and security are prerequisites in the path to prosperity, therefore, Nigeria has a responsibility to contribute to the maintenance of peace and security in our region and continent. This country must work harder to establish internal cohesion, political stability and socio-economic development. This will enhance the credibility of its foreign policy.
He also lamented the increased number of refugees and internally displaced persons across the world, saying about 1.7 million people are currently displaced in Darfur while there were over 300 refugees in Chad.
Gambari said Nigeria had an obligatory leadership role in the region and must rise up to the challenge and prevent disintegration in the war Ztorn area.
He said, XNigeria, with its immense human and natural resources has an obligatory leadership role in the region and the world. It is the strength of the Nigerian people and the strength of the institutions in the country that can translate this leadership into a force for good by strengthening our role in conflict prevention, peace keeping and peace building. I would like to reiterate that the nature of conflict has changed, Africa has changed and the Nigerian leadership is wanted, desired and needed. Today, Africa and the rest of the world expect us to lead our region in making the 21st century the African century.î
Earlier in his opening remarks, the Vice Chancellor of the University of Ibadan, Prof. Isaac Folorunso Adewole, appealed to Nigerian leaders to steer the country away from degenerating into arefugee situation by promoting good governance.
* The current situation in Darfur, Rwanda, Libya, Syria and Afghanistan is not far from us, unless we retrace our steps and embrace dialogue, with our current population of over 150million we are capable of displacing the entire West African sub region and African continent and causing huge political, social and economic dislocations.
Source: Sun, 21st June 2011.
Back
Lesson in Terror 101
Engagements By Chidi Amuta. Email & Tel: chidiamuta@thisdayonline.com, 08056504733
Two days before the bomb attack on police headquarters, a title for my next column continued to play repeatedly in my head. It was simply this: "I Am Afraid". The inspiration, the palpable fear of clear and present dangers, came from a quiet analysis of what I consider the looming dangers ahead of us: massive youth unemployment, angry demonstrations against thieving legislators, endless labour unrest for minimum wage, fuel price hikes, imminent bankruptcy of 65 per cent of state governments, depreciating naira value, flood in susceptible but most unlikely places because of climate change etc. When I ran this list by a friend, he laughed and quoted the Biblical advice to St. Paul: "Thy much learning maketh thee mad."
A great deal of discourse on last week's Boko Haram attack at Louis Edet House may be missing the point. People are not contextualising the incident in the recent political history of the country. In the post military period since 1999, violence or threats of it has become, as it were, a legitimate tool for extracting political and economic concessions from the central authority. I am afraid that the emergence of Boko Haram and its recent activities, including the Louis Edet House bombing incident last week, forms a new chapter in the post-1999 politics of violent blackmail and choreographed intimidation.
In the aftermath of the June 12, 1993 election cancellation, the South-west, first with National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) and later with Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC) and Afenifere, made the business of national governance more difficult. It was not so much actual acts of violence as threats of it and of course the inevitable deafening noise that compelled the nation to settle for some of restitution for the region in order to assuage the feelings that had pent up over the June 12 matter.
In the end, the 1999 elections were between two candidates from the South-west - Olu Falae and Olusegun Obasanjo. The standard war cry of that campaign was the need for "true and genuine democracy", which was a short hand for the imperative of a Yoruba president. The Federal Government had to engage the OPC and its allies in a series of dialogues. The inevitable consequence was that Obasanjo "won" the 1999 and 2003 elections and ruled Nigeria for eight years. While that lasted, the shout for "true democracy" was somewhat drowned. The man even dignified the struggle that brought him to power by decreeing May 29th, the date he was sworn in as national democracy day.
While that lasted, the Niger Delta was allowed to fester into a zone of embarrassing instability and national security nightmare. Subsequently, no set of political calculations about the future of Nigeria could be complete without factoring in the Niger Delta in the contest for national leadership. Again the war cry was the need for "resource control" and justice and equity in the disposition of oil revenue. A chain of kidnappings of oil operatives, disruptions of oil and gas supplies, a feast of oil bunkering and countless pipeline sabotaging as well as orchestrated campaigns internationally and locally followed. Bombs were exploded in Warri, Port Harcourt, Asaba, Atlas Cove, Lagos and the precincts of Eagle Square to drive the message home.
At the height of it, the Federal Government of President Obasanjo had to negotiate with an assortment of militant leaders. On one such despicable moment, the presidency sent a presidential jet to fetch one of the militants, red carpet and all. The late Umaru Musa Yar'Adua followed in the same vein until he lost his patience and stormed Camp 5 in Delta State. That is the effective background to the political concessions to the Niger Delta and the Goodluck Jonathan presidency.
The political wing of the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) staged a series of political skirmishes to drive home the claims of the North on political leadership of the nation in the 2011 elections. The collapse of the Atiku Abubakar bid and the entire consensus candidate project was not going to be the end of that interest. Boko Haram may not be a logical consequence of the political sequestration of the North.
Boko Haram has not stated any political or economic claims per se. But they are claiming responsibility for nearly every act of instability in the Northern half of the country. Their war cry is an insistence on the introduction of sharia law in as many Northern states as possible. But that may be politics by other means. We have heard that before. Rewind to the Obasanjo regime: from nowhere a movement to enthrone sharia rule in most states of the North arose and acquired a life of its own. Some governors who ended up being branded common thieves spearheaded the movement, which ordinarily should have dictated that they lose their limbs severed in accordance with the cause they were championing. Obasanjo called it "political sharia". No one knows whether the sharia of the Obasanjo governors of the North and that of Boko Haram are the same.
For now though, the perpetrators of the series of bombings in the Northern half are not to be dismissed as a bunch of misguided or naive fanatics. There is a deep strategic pattern to these attacks. The targets are carefully selected: police barracks, police armouries in Maiduguri, army camps in and around Abuja, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) logistics centres in Niger State right in the middle of the country and now the police headquarters in the heart of the federal capital. A building that looks more like a hurriedly built general high-rise elite high school or general hospital than the headquarters of a serious police force. The fact that the Boko Haram should graduate into an itinerant bomb throwing squad at a time that the Northern half of the Nigerian federation is smarting under the loss of political control of the country is an untidy coincidence.
The geography of the Boko Haram thing must concern all those who are security perceptive. It took roots in the Northern fringe of the country, a vast and bewildering stretch of territory that, unmanned, can stretch to Chad, Niger, Sudan etc. It offers access to influences and forces that are dangerous to both Nigeria and international security in matters of Islamic religious fundamentalism and its attendant terrorism
It is also true that they are not taking hostages and asking for money. Anyone who has studied the pattern of use of violence to attain political ends in the Islamic world would know that the foot soldiers of these movements do not care about material gains. A suicide bomber cares little about living to the next moment. He has his rewards set somewhere higher. Hostage taking for money is not for these guys. And they have a staying power too. Above, the system with its deprivations and pervasive poverty has a way of reproducing foot soldiers for jihadist movements. Go to Yemen and see the relationship between pervasive poverty and hopelessness on hand and fundamentalist violence on the other.
And with Boko Haram, the Nigerian security system enters a fresh zone, war with an invisible adversary; with no address and no borders. With the Niger Delta, the security forces knew the camps of the militants. Once Yar'Adua decided to take out Camp 5 in Delta State, all militant formations in the region knew the game was up. Their followers scampered in all directions. The offer of amnesty was easy to put forward for all those that did not want to be wiped out. Pax Nigeriana however came in exchange for the key to the presidential mansion to a son of the Niger Delta.
What to do now? We dialogued with OPC and Afenifere. We even waived party registration criteria to get Alliance for Democracy (AD) on the ballot. We dialogued with all the formations of the Niger Delta militancy movement. Our presidents had photo opportunities with all manner of miscreants and opportunists, most of who cannot stand for or win elections in their wards. So, discussions with Boko Haram must now resume for the sake of innocent people who stand to lose life and limbs in this frenzy of bomb throwing that may continue. The possibility that last week's attack may have been suicide bombing (I suspect device mistiming, though!) increases the urgency of this dialogue.
If anybody or group of persons feel so strongly about any issue that they are ready to ride in a bomb laden car or strap themselves with suicide belts and pull the detonator, then minimally we should hear them out. When suicide begins to hold an appeal to youth, it is either that their lives have become so meaningless that there is no difference between living and dying. It may even be that the causes for which they are ready to die have become more important than the ones worth living for. It could also mean that they have crossed that point where they know that those responsible for their woes would kill them all the same either instantly or slowly if they make their grievances known. In every way, we are in that realm where economics, politics and violence meet in tragic tangle.
When a people famed for their love of life begin to show signs of opting for instant death because the good life they love is no longer attainable or worth waiting for, then we must stop and listen to the echoes of our own errors.
But dialoguing with terrorists has its problems. It emboldens others and elevates common criminals into celebrities. Once a legitimate government begins to hold talks with illegitimate vendors of terror, the monopoly of authorised violence, which belongs to the state alone, is compromised. New groups emerge. New factions crawl out of the woodwork. Soon the matter gets out of control and the management of terror becomes a full time national undertaking with the attendant diversion of much needed resources to a war against terror. Add to this the fledgling financial terrorism of the legislators and the nation may be headed for an apocalyptic precipice.
On the general matter of the weakness of our national security apparatus and its dated operational code, we must remain insistent. No number of advertorials by the national security chiefs will replace the intelligence that is not being gathered about too many simple things. National security is not just a matter of helping politicians identify their opponents or swamping VIP convoys with myriad guards brandishing big guns.
Beyond all these, we come back to the ultimate responsibility of the state. When a state weakens itself to the point where it has to dialogue with revolving factions of its own citizens simply because they are competing with the state on the use of violence, we have a problem. When a state becomes incapacitated by bands of miscreants and needs to bribe them in order to carry on the business of governance or national economic activity, then we are in trouble.
In every situation, threatening the state with violence must remain criminal and treasonable. Love of peace and democracy cannot absolve the state from the imperative of stamping its authority on every inch of the Nigerian space. Once the state makes terrorism and armed insurgency unattractive, we will have peace and quiet. If it does otherwise (as is the case now), we will live in fear. But for now, each new chapter of dialogue with terrorists is an invitation for greater terror.
Back
Boko Haram: The Unconsidered Variables
The Verdict According To Olusegun Adeniyi. Email, olusegun.adeniyi@thisdaylive.com
When the BBC published the photograph which showed that Mohammed Yusuf was alive when captured by the army, I knew we could no longer keep quiet and that the point had to be made that extra-judicial execution had no place under the rule of law. As, I however, waited to see the president who was in a meeting with the VP, I made the mistake of openly voicing out my concern about what I considered extra-judicial execution. This did not go down well with a PDP Governor from the North East who was also waiting to see the president. "Segun, I sometimes wonder on whose side you really are. This is someone who killed several policemen and innocent people and all that concerns you is what some human rights noisemakers would say?"
The Governor and I had a hot exchange on the matter and since he saw the president ahead of me, I was not surprised when my principal bluntly refused to discuss the matter. While I worried about the image of the government, I could also understand the anger of the police whose men were brutally killed. Photographs of the murdered officers were so gruesome that it was difficult not to comprehend the raw emotion that could have led some people into taking the law into their own hands. Some of these photographs were handed to the president. While I appreciated his feelings, I also believed that jungle justice, no matter the provocation, cannot be justified by agents of state. To compound the situation, someone posted on YouTube a video stream of the interrogation of Yusuf by the police after he was captured and shortly before he died...
The Boko Haram menace was one of the issues the late President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua had to confront in his last year in office as can be glimpsed from the above excerpt from my coming book, a recap of something that happened in 2009. While the jury may be out now on whether his approach was the correct one, there was no doubt about his determination to root out different forms of extremism from our body polity using carrot or by stick. In the light of last week's attack on the Police Headquarters by a suspected Boko Haram 'suicide bomber', however, I believe the security agencies should adopt a more open mind in their current investigation. Except they do that, they are likely to continue to grope in the dark with dire consequences for the nation.
It is for instance baffling how someone could jump to the conclusion that it was suicide bombing a few minutes after the explosion just because the suspect also died in the attack. What about the more plausible theory that another person (standing at a safe distance) might have held the detonator to the bomb and decided to trigger the explosion on seeing that their man would be apprehended? If it was suicide bombing, why drive to the general car park when there were several policemen at the gate or the IGP's car pack where there would have been more impact? And if it is not suicide bombing as claimed, has the entire investigation not been compromised?
These are some of the several questions begging for answers but there are far more fundamental issues to deal with if we must get to the root of the Boko Haram problem. The guiding philosophy behind this sect, as we have been told over the years, is opposition to all forms of Western education but the pattern of their attacks since formation in 2002 reveals something else. For a group supposedly opposed to secular education, not one single school or an institution of learning has been attacked. Rather, what the adherents have been attacking are police barracks and supposed supporters of the former governor of Borno State, Alhaji Modu Ali Sherrif.
While there have been several collateral damages--as it is common in instances like this where innocent bystanders get caught in the crossfire--the spokesmen of the sect have never minced words about the fact that they are after Sherrif and the police. Instructively, the newly elected governor of Borno state has proposed granting amnesty to Boko Haram faithfuls as a way of ending the problem. Whatever the merits of this proposition, it also conveys a profound message because amnesty (which cannot be a cure-all for every security challenge) is only given and accepted in a political dispute between two parties known to each other.
What that means in effect is that the Boko Haram leadership, like the Niger Delta militants, are known to the Borno authorities and their grievances are such that can be addressed. This is also fine except that it then brings us to one inescapable conclusion: this is not a religious crisis as being presented by the media and the authorities; Boko Haram, when stripped of all its pretensions, is a political crisis which could be resolved once the adherents find common grounds with the police authorities and the Borno state government.
That the late Boko Haram leader was given the Osama Bin Laden treatment by the police is now almost beyond dispute but they were not clever and for that reason nearly ruined the career of a brilliant military officer who commanded the 2009 Boko Haram operation which captured Yusuf alive. But for the timely intervention of one official, Col Ben Ahanoto would have been dismissed from service based on spurious reports from people who were looking for scapegoats to cover up for their own failings.
Even at that, I do not buy the argument that it is because of the killing of Yusuf that Boko Haram men are attacking the police. That cannot be the case given that policemen have been their targets since they came into public reckoning. To find a solution to this problem therefore, government must be able to ascertain what their real grievances are. This is important because the sect comes under the guise of religion which we all know is an easy recruitment tool in a nation with millions of idle youths and where doing God's business is now the biggest business.
While Boko Haram, however, poses a serious challenge, I do not subscribe to the hysteria that Nigeria has become an unsafe place on account of their audacity of last week. I just believe what happened merely exposed the inadequacy many Nigerians have always suspected in our police. That security would be so casually breached at their headquarters is a profound message that shames the Inspector General of Police, Mr Hafiz Ringim, who must now know (assuming he did not know before) that he has a lot of work to do.
What is particularly worrisome for me is the reportage in a section of the media which tends to glorify the violence. Quoting imaginary sources within the sect who promise to unleash all manner of mayhem and giving such reports sensational treatment is very unhelpful under the current circumstance. It can only fuel the problem and even encourage political lone wolves who may hide under Boko Haram to perpetrate havocs just to destabilize the system perhaps to prove some sinister point against the current administration. That would not be in the interest of the nation we all call our own.
The security agencies definitely need to do more to engage senior people in the media. Slanting the Boko Haram narrative into the politics of North and South and the emergence of a Southern Christian president is just the kind of journalism we do not need right now. I don't think that the heightened spate of attacks by Boko Haram has anything to do with the election of President Goodluck Jonathan though if care is not taken it could well be exploited by unconscionable politicians.
The point being made here is that there does not appear to be any religious underpinning behind the 'suicide bombing' of last week at the Louis Edet House. It looked more like a failed attempt on the Inspector General of Police, if only to send a message to his men and officers that they are not beyond reach. That explains why I am confident that a solution will be found to the Boko Haram problem the moment the authorities addressed the political element while dealing with the security challenge posed by the porous border between Nigeria and some of its neighbours, particularly Chad and Niger.
Error of Fact
Following the conclusion of my two-part column, 'The Days of the Cabal', last week, a senior professional colleague, Mr Tony Iyare, drew my attention to a factual error committed in the piece. I had written about the charge against the late President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua that the three spokespersons appointed by President Olusegun Obasanjo were Yoruba and Christians. But while the three were indeed all Yoruba, only Dr. Doyin Okupe and Mrs Oluremi Oyo were Christians. Mr. Tunji Oseni, of blessed memory, was a Muslim. I stand corrected.
The True Essence of FoI Act
Right from the time I started writing this column more than a decade ago, I always made it a point of duty to personally reply all mails from readers, including the critical ones, because I believe I am also accountable to them. But given the huge number of mails I have received in recent days, it is very difficult for me to reply all individually. I therefore use this forum to express my appreciation to all who have written in. In the deluge of mails, however, I take note of a particular one. The writer said pointedly that I no longer have any credibility to comment on public issues because at a critical time in the life of the nation when he and several people looked up to me, I colluded with the 'cabal' and am only now talking because I got a soft landing. He added that whatever I wrote in a book would not change his opinion of me. I appreciate his mail as I do hundreds of others which were very supportive.
The writer is entitled to his opinion and preference, but I want to correct the impression that my coming book on the Yar'Adua years is an attempt at self-justification-- far from it. The idea behind the book was to proffer a better understanding of governance in Nigeria with all its promises, foibles and failings using my experience as a case study. Fortunately, the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs provided me the platform for such introspection. With a nice office and a lot of time to myself, a brilliant undergraduate as a research assistant and the enormous intellectual resources of Harvard University at my disposal, I spent the better part of the last one year in the United States reflecting on our challenge as a nation.
While conceding that I might have committed some errors of judgement in office, I can live with the consequences of the choices I made for which I have no regrets. I am writing out of a conviction that people who go to public office must enrich public discourse with their experience and now with the Freedom of Information (FoI) already signed by President Jonathan, there is no longer any excuse for not doing so. What is baffling to me, however, is that our public officials are actually very meticulous when it comes to keeping record for themselves. General Ibrahim Babangida duplicated all the State House files and went home with them. They are in his private library in Minna. 18 Years after he left office, he has not provided an insight into a single issue on what was actually a momentous period in our socio-political history. President Olusegun Obasanjo even did better: he went back to Otta with all the original State House files leaving his successor to start running Nigeria on a clean slate!
Interestingly, what I have been getting since last week is this subtle 'advice' from people within and outside government that 'it is too early to write a book about government'. When I counter that elsewhere, as people leave government, they settle down to the immediate task of documenting their experience and insight, the retort has been: 'But this is Nigeria'. What is so different about Nigeria? Nothing except that we enjoy deluding ourselves that we are different. We are not. In fact, this culture of secrecy associated with public office was not in our character until perhaps about three decades ago. As young as some of us were then, we read varying accounts of the civil war from the memoirs of principal characters like Olusegun Obasanjo, Ben Gbulie, Ademola Ademoyega, Theophilus Yakubu Danjuma, David Jemibewon et al. So if public officials wrote memoirs in recent past, why has that culture not been sustained? Where exactly did we lose it?
I believe that the real essence of the FoI Act is to demystify government by dispensing with the culture of secrecy associated with it in our country. Increasing public scrutiny on how critical decisions were made can only help to promote a structured engagement in which public officials are held accountable by the people whose interest they seek to serve. I believe that those who go to government must begin to see writing a memoir as part of their civic responsibility central to nation-building, democratisation and development. Perhaps, the knowledge that they would have to render such account after office might even be a sort of check on reckless behaviour.
Source: This Day, 23rd June 2011.
Back
|
