Onyekakeyah: Why the Boko Haram war is persistent THE unending bloodbath in Nigeria’s northeast region occasioned by the relentless assault by the dreaded Boko Haram guerrillas has left deep scares on Nigeria. The country is bleeding profusely from the deep gashes inflicted by the fighters. The federal and state government authorities as well as Nigerians, particularly, citizens of the areas, are wearied from the endless attacks on innocent civilians. Property worth billions of naira have been destroyed while uncountable number of people have been killed. The tempo of the attacks has steadily increased, raising much apprehension not only in Nigeria but outside. Borno State is the epicenter of the conflict. Virtually, no other day passes without a deadly onslaught by the group. Mortal attacks visited on ordinary people have made even the most stoic in the areas to despair. There are no exceptions in Boko Haram targets. While the attacks initially targeted churches, they have now expanded to mosques, schools, markets, police stations, military barracks, drinking joints, parking lots, among others. Two weeks ago, the convoy of the Adamawa State Governor, Murtala Nyako, was attacked in Michika, where Boko Haram had earlier launched vicious attacks along with neighboring, Madagali. There was fury after the group attacked the Federal Government College, Buni Yadi, which left about 30 students dead. That heightened concern that the conflict is most extraordinary and brutal in character. Conventional warfare targets the military and not civilians. Consequently, thousands of inhabitants have fled their homes into neighboring Cameroon, Chad and Niger Republic. The United Nations refugee agency says some 57,000 Nigerians are now refugees. Reports of malnutrition ravaging the refugees, particularly, children, are reminiscent of the grim situation faced by millions on the Biafran side during the Nigerian civil war. The series of deadly attacks across many states in the North have made the Boko Haram rebellion the most widespread in Nigeria’s post-independence history. Apparently, not even the Nigerian civil war or any other uprising ever since, stretched the Federal Government to the extent that Boko Haram has. Whereas, the Biafran war lasted for three excruciating years, the Boko Haram onslaught, which began in 2009, has entered the sixth year, with no end in sight. Millions of Nigerians from across the federation have borne the brunt of the crisis by either losing their loved ones or having their means of livelihood and hope shattered. The question is why the Boko Haram conflict has defied all strategies applied so far to contain it. And, why is Boko Haram appearing to have the upper hand despite the huge financial and material resources committed to the crisis? I would like to state at this juncture that the President has done much to contain this problem. The solution to the conflict does not lie with the President alone; the North has the ultimate solution. The unreserved cooperation of the North is crucial to the final resolution of the crisis. President Goodluck Jonathan alone cannot prosecute the Boko Haram war. Jonathan has turned out to be the most besieged President in post-independence Nigeria. No other President has ever been made a scapegoat for a problem he didn’t cause. Not even, the war-time military leader, Gen. Yakubu Gowon, was besieged like Jonathan. The job of the President is to steer the ship by way of strategic planning with his lieutenants. The actual execution of the strategies is in the hands of his military generals, who have men in the battle field. Their success depends on how committed the entire government structure is to the cause. Is the North working with the President or are they only interested in making political gain out of the crisis? If the people in whose areas the conflict is raging are not cooperative, no amount of strategic planning will do the magic. I have avoided writing on Boko Haram crisis because of the wrong designation given to it for political reasons. While some call it insurgency; others call it terrorism while some call it war when bitten hard. For those of us who grew up seeing blood on the Biafran side during the civil war, the crisis in the northeast is nothing but war. It may have started as a rebellion but has burgeoned into open guerrilla warfare having all the manifestations of warfare. Lives and property are being destroyed on a massive scale. Thousands of refugees have fled their homes into neighbouring countries. The economy of the North is virtually ruined. These are beyond the manifestations of terrorism. Those still calling the crisis insurgency or terrorism are not honest. A properly positioning of the conflict will help in addressing it. The Boko Haram crisis is not the first Nigeria has witnessed. There was the Biafran war and the Maitasine uprising and some other pockets of disturbances. How did the Federal Government handle those conflicts? When the Biafran war broke out in 1967, the entire country joined forces in countering the rebellion. There was no dissension from any quarters on the Nigerian side. After about 30 months, Biafra was overrun by the federal troops. In 1983, the Maitasine uprising broke out in Maiduguri, Borno State, during the regime of President Shehu Shagari. Again, the entire country was united in addressing the problem. Within weeks, the Maitasine insurgents were rooted out. I was in Maiduguri as a Youth Corps member, when Bulumkutu, the stronghold of Maitasine, was leveled by both aerial and ground bombardment. There were no dissenting voices in Borno State or elsewhere in the North. The militancy that erupted in the Niger Delta towards the end of the Obasanjo regime in 2007 was tactically handled by President Umaru Yar’Adua using amnesty. Whereas, the militants started with a genuine cause over environmental degradation and abject poverty in the oil-producing region, when the crisis forced many oil companies to shut down and oil production dropped to about 1.5 million barrels from 2.5 million, leading to a drastic revenue shortfall, everybody was united in confronting the militants. Niger Delta leaders were challenged to find solution to the problem. It was their unalloyed loyalty, commitment and cooperation with Yar’Adua that helped to broker the deal that assuaged the militants. The militants surrendered their guns to embrace peace. Against the backdrop of the foregoing, it is baffling that the Boko Haram uprising has held Nigeria hostage for six years running and the country is still unable to contain it. Reason: there is no unity; no commitment and no cooperation from several quarters, especially from the ravaged areas of the North. Instead, all the blames are placed on President Jonathan, as if he has done nothing humanly possible to address the problem. President Jonathan has taken some commendable positive steps to address the problem without success because either he is being sabotaged, or some people want to make political or pecuniary gain out of a conflict that has ruined the northern economy. Those making huge financial turn over don’t want it to end. These are the obstacles and not military incapability per se. President Jonathan, though, hesitant at the beginning, yielded to pressure to empanel the Presidential Amnesty Committee to negotiate with Boko Haram fighters with a view to granting them amnesty. But the committee failed due to lack of cooperation from both the Boko Haram and other key players in the North. The President is still asking for dialogue. The state of emergency declared by Jonathan in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa states, which the people opposed, has also failed to curb the attacks because of sabotage and lack of cooperation. A situation where the state governors in the areas would be making demoralizing statements and attacking the President is unbecoming of leaders faced with war. You don’t demoralize your soldiers. The recent comment by the Borno State Governor, Kashim Shettima, that Boko Haram is better armed and motivated is uncalled for. My people say when your co-hunter starts telling you that you look like an antelope, be rest assured he wants to shoot you. How did Shettima know that Boko Haram is better armed and motivated? Why are the authorities in the North not doing enough to end the crisis? Asking the President to visit all the villages ravaged by Boko Haram is political and not strategic. The state governors, who know the nooks and crannies of their states, should visit the areas on behalf of the President. Also, asking the Chief of Army Staff to relocate to Maiduguri is mundane at a time when warfare has gone electronic – you could attack your enemy from any distance using radar guided missiles. It doesn’t matter whether or not the President or the army chief relocates to Maiduguri, there will be no success so long as there is sabotage. Some people see the JTF as an occupying force! If they’re not happy with the military arrangements, how can they cooperate? The northern leadership should do what the Niger Delta leaders did if they’re sincerely committed and working with the President.
Posted on: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 19:42:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015