IN THE ARENA
Beyond kinetic military action against insurgency in Nigeria, resolutely cutting off their vital funding sources, which serve as their oxygen, would facilitate quicker conclusion of the long-drawn war against terrorism, Louis Achi writes
Kinetic military action is a euphemism for military intervention involving active warfare. The phrase is used to contrast between conventional military force and “soft” force, including diplomacy, sanctions, cyber warfare and denying funding oxygen to the foe. Credit for this coinage goes to former United States Defence Secretary, Mr. Donald Rumsfeld, in his 2002 book – Bush at War.
While Rumsfeld’s insight indisputably advanced and helped hone strategies for fighting terrorism, his Nigerian counterpart Maj. Gen. Bashir Magashi (rtd), Minister of Defence, who also brought a novel insight to the threat, had argued that Nigerians should show they are not cowards by defending themselves.
His words: “It is the responsibility of everybody to keep alert and to find safety when necessary. But we shouldn’t be cowards. At times, the bandits will only come with about three rounds of ammunition; when they fire shots everybody runs. In our younger days, we stand to fight any aggression coming for us.”
He reportedly added that: “Our own duty is to ensure that no Nigerian is hurt, and we are capable of protecting the integrity of this nation and we’ll continue to do it even though we are so stretched.”
Today in Nigeria, the distinction between banditry, rogue herders’ bloody rampage and terrorism is strangely blurred.
Currently, the lion share of efforts by the Nigerian military forces to rout terrorism is in the realm of kinetics. Successes being recorded in decimating the ranks of terrorists are mirrored in the heavy bombardments, fatalities inflicted on the enemy and rising number of Boko Haram terrorists that surrendered to the state.
But current strategies of effective engagement of terrorism show that identification and efficient blockage of their funding, which is its critical oxygen lead to quicker conclusion of anti-terror war. This core fact has guided the new design of counter terrorism templates in many countries today. It is paying off handsomely.
The Terrorism (Prevention) Act 2011 (as amended) expressly prohibits the funding of terrorism. This Act tacitly recognises that funding is the oxygen that powers terrorism. In many countries, very strict surveillance and Boko Haram insurgency has killed over around 40,000 people with two million displaced, according to an AFP report. Current developments by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and US governments which have taken specific actions and offered a helping hand to Nigeria, indicate in clear terms the path Nigeria ought to thread in battling its long-drawn terrorism story.
Last week, authorities in the UAE named six Nigerians with ties to insurgent group, Boko Haram, as terrorist financiers. The UAE Cabinet issued Resolution No 83 of 2021, designating a total of 38 individuals and 15 entities on its approved list of persons and organisations supporting Boko Haram and other terrorist cause.
The resolution demands that regulatory authorities monitor and identify any individuals or entities affiliated with or associated with any financial, commercial or technical relationship and take the necessary measures according to the laws in force in the country in less than 24 hours.
Nigerians on the UAE’s terrorism list were Abdurrahaman Ado Musa, Salihu Yusuf Adamu, Bashir Ali Yusuf, Muhammed Ibrahim Isa, Ibrahim Ali Alhassan and Surajo Abubakar Muhammad. These six Nigerians had been previously tried and sentenced in UAE. The UAE news agencies reported that the resolution underscored the country’s commitment to target and dismantle networks that finance terrorism and its related activities.
It could be recalled that in April 2019, the Abu Dhabi Federal Court of Appeal sentenced both Surajo Abubakar Muhammad and Saliuh Yusuf Adamu to life imprisonment followed by deportation. Ibrahim Ali Alhassan, AbdurRahman Ado Musa, Bashir Ali Yusuf and Muhammad Ibrahim Isa, were each sentenced to 10 years in prison, and also followed by deportation.
The court found them guilty of setting up a Boko Haram cell in the UAE to raise funds and material assistance for the insurgents in Nigeria. In December 2019, a UAE federal supreme court also turned down an appeal by the six Nigerians, upholding the ruling of the Appeal Court. The Nigerians were said to have transferred up to $800,000 in favour of Boko Haram between 2015 and 2016.
In an important development last week, the US Ambassador to Nigeria, Mary Leonard stated that America was ready to partner the nation by releasing the list of those sponsoring the terror attacks on Africa’s most populous country. Many stakeholders believe the country should unhesitatingly accept the offer. This is because if the terrorism sponsors’ identities become public knowledge, they will certainly have no hiding place again.
Besides its key arrowheads like Mohammed Yusuf, who was eliminated by security agents in the early days of the insurgency, and Abubakar Shekau, killed by its rival, ISWAP, in June, the identities of Boko Haram sponsors remain a mystery.
The hesitant optimism around America’s offer pivots around whether President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration would accept it from the US. According to Ambassador Leonard, “I have had at least three conversations in the last two months on this subject.” The big question is – will Nigeria grab this opportunity with both hands?
This is debatable because since UAE authorities convicted six Nigerian bureaux de change operators for sponsoring Boko Haram terror operations, Nigeria curiously failed to exploit the advantage by scaling up intelligence, investigation, and identification of terror sponsors.
Rather, the federal government maintained its informal policy of non-prosecution of terror-related crimes. In the beginning of the year, the current administration announced it had made many arrests, subsequently proclaiming that 400 suspect financiers of Boko Haram would be prosecuted. The Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation stated that 800 Boko Haram suspects would face prosecution. But nobody has been prosecuted after over four months.
A former Assistant Director of the Department of State Services, Nigeria’s secret police, Dennis Amachree, asserted that the US had been positively disposed to supporting Nigeria, especially in the fight against terrorism, posing the question – would the federal government would embrace the current gesture?
Amachree further asked: “Are we ready to arrest and prosecute these sponsors when exposed? Are we simply going to lock them away as has been done in the past? These are the concerns and the Americans may lose interest if we don’t take it seriously?”
It could also be recalled that former Nigerian Navy Commodore Kunle Olawunmi said the government knows the sponsors of Boko Haram. The retired Navy Commodore stated that the Nigerian government was not ready to fight insurgency because it had failed to prosecute the arrested 400 persons suspected to be sponsors of Boko Haram. The Nigerian Government should prosecute the sponsors of terrorism and block their sources of funding unless it has something to hide from the rest of the world.
