 |
INTERNATIoNAL BY Bola A. Akinterinwa
Boko Haramism is currently the most critical challenge with which the government of President Muhammadu Buhari (PMB) is faced. Boko Haramism is manifested in various forms: insurgency to oust a secular Nigeria and impose a new Sharia order; armed banditry to terrorise; kidnapping to raise funds for Boko Haram’s political agenda; Fulani herdsmen and farmers conflict to displace local farmers from their ancestral land; forceful acquisition of titled land by government for Fulani herdsmen to ensure a home for more Fulani coming from West and Central Africa; and conscious PMB policies that openly sustain all the foregoing.
These manifestations should be differentiated from the segregation-induced activities of the MASSOB (Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra) and the IPOB (Indigenous People of Biafra). While the MASSOB and the IPOB complain about marginalisation, unfairness and injustice meted out against them (Igbo ethnic stock) in the governance of Nigeria for seeking disengagement from Nigeria, the Yoruba South West are also basically complaining about Fulanisation agenda, and therefore launching a peaceful protest against Nigeria as it is.
The Yoruba people are seeking separation from Nigeria because of boko haramism and rightly or wrongly perception of a Fulanisation agenda. Again, while the IPOB is using force to make its case, the Yoruba South west have opted to seek a United Nations plebiscite on their right to self-determination to define their future. This is why they have joined the membership of the Unrepresented Nations Peoples Organisation (UNPO) with the ultimate objective of seeking international assistance in their struggle for an Oduduwa Republic.
It is against this background that insecurity in Nigeria has become very recidivist in character and also very problematic in also containing it. And true enough, containing insecurity in Nigeria is not simply about the using heavy weapons, but particularly about how to also neutralise the instruments of insecurity that are hardly reckoned with in the deepening of insecurity. The case of commercial motorcycles, popularly known as Okada in Nigeria, is currently a major issue of concern in Nigeria as at today.
In this regard, the Federal Government is reported to be considering the banning of the activities of Okada riders across the whole of Nigeria in order to reduce, if not outrightly, nip in the bud the main logistic backbone of insecurity in Northern Nigeria, in particular, and Nigeria, in general. The proposal raises some fundamental questions: is the PMB’s Government of Nigeria really serious about squarely dealing with the Boko Haram? The terrorists have threatened to kill PMB. How does he want to fight the Boko Haramists with this threat? More disturbingly, a six-week ultimatum has been issued by the group of minority Senators in the Senate to PMB to contain insecurity or face impeachment process. Quo Vadis?
Banning Policy: Good but a Non-Solution
There is no disputing the fact that the use of commercial motorcycles is a potent tool of the armed bandits and terrorists. It is what they use to quickly escape from the scenes of their crimes against humanity. The consideration of the PMB administration is that insecurity may be drastically reduced if the means of escape, as well as the sources of their funding, which include illegal mining, are also stopped.
In this case, does banning the use of Okada and stopping all activities of the Okada riders imply a new readiness of Government to tackle insecurity more seriously in Nigeria? If it is truly a new determination to address the problem of insecurity from a more holistic approach, then the policy cannot but be a very welcome development. However, that does not mean it is adequate as deterrent? Is it an enduring solution? Available empirical data do not lend any credence to any suggestion of seriousness of purpose on the part of the Government of Nigeria. What is tenable as an argument is Government’s policy of remissness that create doubts in the minds of the Nigerian people about any sincerity to address the problem. In the eyes of observing elite, Government is only publicly purporting to be fighting insecurity.
First, a former British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, told the United Nations General Assembly at a plenary of Heads of State in November 2008 that there was a terrorist training camp very close to Abuja municipality. This statement was made more than a decade ago. We drew attention to this statement by then (See “Gordon Brown and the School of Terrorism in Nigeria,” ThisDay on Sunday, November 30, 2008, p.22). Did the Government of Nigeria not know about this terrorism school before it was made public at the UN General Assembly? Must Nigeria be reported to the international community before action would be taken against terrorist activities in Nigeria? If the Government was not aware of the training camp, what was the response of the Government of Nigeria, if any, to the Gordon Brown’s statement? The open statement on terrorism training school within the Federal Capital Territory can either be considered an indictment or a call to draw attention to the need to act against it. The problem here is that no one is in the position to ascertain what response the then government of Nigeria was. Expectedly, there have been terrorists operating around Abuja since then.
Secondly, on 29 August 2018, the United Kingdom and Nigeria signed an agreement to end boko Haramism. The agreement was on better training and anti-terrorist propaganda techniques that were developed in the United Kingdom. In the words of the British Prime Minister, Theresa May, ‘we are determined to work side-by-side with Nigeria to help them fight terrorism, reduce conflict and lay the foundations for the future stability and prosperity that will benefit us all.’ What is it that have been done that has increased the anti-terrorism capacity of the Nigerian army to overcome the Boko Haram on the battle fields? How do we explain that the already technically defeated Boko Haram is still seriously threatening the existential life of Nigeria? Can it not be rightly argued that there is government’s acquiescence of the situation of insecurity in Nigeria?
Thirdly, and without any whiff of doubt, Former President Goodluck Jonathan made it clear that there were Boko Haram agents in his government. The statement was only publicly and jokingly taken. But why would such a statement be made and the Boko Haram agents would not have been identified and squarely dealt with? Under PMB, the Nigerian soldiers have, on different strategic missions, always been ambushed and killed, undoubtedly because of leaked strategic information about their missions and routes.
General Theophilus Danjuma once accused the Nigerian military of aiding and abetting the Boko Haramists. There were other testimonies to this allegation of the Nigerian military aiding the enemy. In fact, there were the reports of the former Governor of Borno State, Shettima, who has not only been unveiled as the APC running mate to Senator Ahmed Tinubu, but also being considered by the public as unsuitable, based on Muslim-Muslim ticket. The former Governor is also being accused for having played host to wanted terrorists when he was governor. No one is talking about this in the open, especially, in the context of a pro-terrorist candidate who is seeking election as a would-be Vice President of Nigeria. Can it be rightly argued that a terrorist sympathiser can have any good intention to fight terrorism? Can terrorism be contained when their agents or supporters are in the government?
Fourthly, how do we explain the fact that captured insurrectionists were incarcerated and, after purported rehabilitation, were released under the pretext of their having been rehabilitated and have suddenly turned new leaves? The truth in this regard is that many of those rehabilitated were reported to have also escaped and have again engaged in anti-Nigeria activities. Why should this be so? Why should Nigerians be expected to believe in whatever the PMB Government says in matters of national security? Several times, when suspected criminals were accosted by the public and were taken to the police, the suspects have always and generally been released on the basis of orders from above?
Fifthly, specifically on the issue of banning Okadas, many constitutive States of Nigeria have either partially or totally banned the use of commercial motorcycles, meaning that the proposal by the Federal Government to ban Okada possibly in the whole country is not really a big deal. It is not new. What is new and quite challenging is determining why terrorism has not ended in States where Okada has been banned. In States where there has been stiff opposition to Federal Government’s perceived Fulanisation and Islamisation agenda, terrorists have been hitting them hard. One recent critical illustration is the attack on Saint Francis Catholic Church in Owo, Ondo State. In an expected rhetorical rationale, the Minister of the Interior, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, attributed the attack to the ISWAP (Islamic State’s West Africa Province), a militant group and an administrative division of the Islamic State, which is actively engaged in the Chad Basin and particularly carrying out insurgency against Nigeria, Cameroon, and Chad. Most unfortunately, using falsehood to enhance political governance cannot exalt a nation, especially Nigeria which is generally seen as a country of three different nations.
Sixthly, there is the issue of linkage between the sponsors of illegal mining and cattle rustling in mining communities. It has been argued that ‘those sponsoring illegal mining also fund banditry and cattle rustling in mining communities, but many people have blamed the conflict in the region on rural banditry, without addressing its links to illegal mining.’ In this regard, it is also observed that there is a critical problem of unemployment which illegal mining partly addresses. By seeking to severely punish illegal mining, the unemployed people are pushed into the hands of the terrorists who even pay them better. True enough, Government is much aware about this development. Thus, because the youth have limited income-generating opportunities, illegal mining necessarily provides the labour force for funders of terrorism (See Hope Newspapers).
Seventhly, and perhaps most disappointingly, there is the issue of jail breaks in various parts of the country. The most recent and critical case is that of the Kuje prison, which is ranked as one of the prisons with maximum security. Intelligence was reported to have been given on the impending attack by the terrorists. There is nothing to suggest that the intelligence was adhered to. Besides, the military guards that were also responsible for security in the area were also reportedly withdrawn. Why? One Yoruba proverb has it that ‘the witches cried yesterday and the child died today. Who would not know that the witches that cried yesterday are responsible for the death of the child?’ The withdrawal of military security guards on the eve of the attack on Kuje prison cannot but be likened to this Yoruba adage. But how can insecurity still be contained if we admit that the ban on Okada motorcycles is an expression of true determination to fight terrorism in Nigeria?
Insecurity and Encirclement Strategy
nsecurity became endemic in Nigeria for various reasons of neglect and the solutions variously given have also not been good enough to nip insecurity in the bud. A school of thought has it that there is the need to first frontally address the source of funding of the terrorists, in the strong belief that the aspect of sustainability of terrorism will be removed the moment there is no room for its upkeep. True, this logic is tenable but raises the issue of when terrorism can be neutralised. If the Federal Government has a greater fire power and the terrorists are successfully denied financial capacity to acquire new weapons, terrorism has the potential to be quickly weakened. But before then, much havoc could still be done before peace could reign.
Another school of thought believes that banning commercial Okada cycles is a good solution to the problem of insecurity. The logic is that Okada is always the first and immediate means of escape for the terrorists. If the means of terrorism is removed, the likelihood of the criminals being promptly accosted is high, especially when there is the political will to do so. Anglican Bishop of Kubwa Diocese, Right Reverend Duke Akamisoko specially appealed to the Federal Government to out rightly ban the use of commercial motorcycles. This appeal should be understood against the background of governmental politics of insecurity in Nigeria.
For example, the minority parties in the Senate, not only staged a walk out at the Senate Plenary, but their leader, Phillip Aduda, also told the newsmen that the Senate President, Ahmad Lawan, had failed to tell the public what the Senators agreed upon during the executive session held before the plenary. Because of this, he gave PMB six weeks within which to address the current insecurity in the country or face an impeachment process. In fact, they refused to go back to the plenary for further discussion in protest of the attitude of the Senate President. This is how insecurity is unnecessarily politicised. Put differently, what is the Senate President hiding from other senators about decisions reached on how to deal with the challenges of insecurity? Apart from this, is impeachment of PMB a solution to the many challenges of insecurity in Nigeria? Will non-participation in the Senate plenary quicken the adoption of anti-terrorism policies?
As there are proponents of banning, so are there the opponents. The President of the ACOMORAN (Amalgamated Commercial Tricycle and Motorcycle Owners, Repairs and Riders Association of Nigeria), Alhaji Adebayo Samsudeen, said, the ban will compound the existing security challenges in the country because commuters see motorcycles as a relief to their transportation problems while motorcycle riders see the adventure as a source of livelihood. And without any shadow of doubt, the use of motorcycles enhances ‘mobility for the middle low income earners which, by extension, has contributed to an increase in production through an increase in self-empowerment’ (See Shakirat Alabi’s report, Radio Nigeria, July 25, 2022).
Alhaji Samsudeen also said, ‘furthermore, ACOMORAN, as a body, foresaw this kind of plan or proposal by the Government which led us to evolve innovative ideas to develop an application named ACORIDE, a larger database that serves a regulatory purpose between the Union, riders and commuters’ for reasons of insecurity. As good as the ACORIDE may be, the problem of insecurity, and particularly the use of Okada by armed bandits and terrorists to escape, has not in any way been abated.
In the same vein, the AAN, a national non-governmental, non-partisan, non-religious, civil society organisation, and an affiliate of the Action Aid International Federation, with presence in 45 countries, believes that the ban on commercial motorcycles has the potential to aggravate poverty, food inflation, rising unemployment, rising cost of living, etc. This potentiality cannot be in doubt because of the many socio-political challenges already existing in the country.
In fact, armed banditry and terrorist activities have continued to thrive in some States that have out rightly or partially banned Okada motorcycles. Even though the advantages of Okada are well known – transportation of people and goods, easy manoeuvrability of the cycles, ability of the cycles to travel in bad roads and quick responsiveness to public demands -, Borno, Kebbi, Sokoto, Yobe and Zamfara States have placed a total ban on the activities of Okada in their respective States, but they still continue to play host to various criminal activities.
Another suggestion put forward is exchanging the motorcycles with loans, that is, the motorcycle riders should be given loans to acquire tricycles. The loans should be interest free while Government should collect the motorcycles from their riders or owners in exchange for loans. Additionally, the tri-cyclists are not only to have helmets but are also to be given identity cards and vests, all with the objective to prevent the use of motorcycles by terrorists.
Without doubt, however, the environmental conditionings of Nigeria as at today cannot but be affected negatively or positively by any proposed ban on Okada activities. As at June 2022, the inflation rate stood at 18.62%. The World Bank also has it that the number of poor people will rise from 89 million people in 2020 to 95.1 million in 2022. Consequently, proposing to ban commercial tricycles from operating in order to eke out a living, cannot but be very challenging. It is against this background that the option of banning Okada across Nigeria should be further investigated. In other words, should there be a ban across the whole country? Is national insecurity less or more important than the survivalist efforts of the motorcycle riders who are less than 20% of the total population of about 200 million in Nigeria? In light of this situation, there is the need for re-strategy.
There are different military strategies commonly adopted in a war situation and ranging from defensive-offensive to offensive-defensive. There are guerrilla tactics and the blitzkrieg. There is the tactic of the 1866 battle of Sadowa and the 1870-1871 Franco-Prussian war tactics. In fighting terrorism in Nigeria, it must first be borne in mind that there are two main operational theatres: place of attack and place of hiding, pressure and planning. The technique of war in this case is like that of a guerrilla warfare, in which case terrorists leave their hiding places to where they are to launch their attacks, after which they quickly return to their hiding place. It is precisely this hiding place that is the focus of the encirclement strategy that we are proposing as a possible and enduring solution to the terrorism saga.
In this regard, since attacks and kidnappings mostly take place during daytime and the hiding and negotiations take place in the hiding bushes, the encirclement strategy must, after identifying the precise location of the hoodlums by air surveillance, be the attack and arrest of the hoodlums. Stricto sensu, the bombardment of the location, in which case the lives of those under terrorist detention can be compromised must not be the strategy. The Nigerian military can encircle the whole area in about a stretch of one kilometre square. The logic is to advance towards the hiding place in such a way that there is never an escape route for the terrorists. If hundreds of soldiers are lined on each side of the square and moving gradually and simultaneously towards the target enemy, a strong message cannot but be sent to the terrorists that their time has come into expiry.
Without doubt, the terrorists can release those kidnapped or killed, and then surrender. They can launch a counter attack, and still kill their victims. If they kill their victims, they too will not exist. Loss of lives of the kidnapped, there may be. Situations in which those kidnapped are flogged and some killed already exist. This situation is most unacceptable. Thus an encirclement strategy is deterrence by mounting pressure and containment. When this is done in various forests and simultaneously, the hiding tool of kidnapping can be quickly thrown into the garbage of history. The banning of Okada cycle will become unnecessary. The problem again is whether there can be the required political will to do so.
