By Tonnie Iredia
The threat by US President Donald Trump of attacking Nigeria if its government allows a continuation of what he called the persecution of Christians has remained the matter of the moment since it was made last week.
Almost every segment of the Nigerian population has had its say on the subject and many more are still reacting through all forms of communication channels. Many commentators have however focused not on the substance of the message but on the definition of a few terms employed in conveying the said threat – the most prominent being the word, ‘genocide.’ Both the dictionary meaning, the common usage of the term and indeed the United Nations' legal definition were all canvassed. It was as if the real issue at stake was whose definition was more apt rather than killings in Nigeria.
Other commentators have dwelt extensively on the term, ‘sovereignty’ suggesting that Trump was either unaware or had forgotten that Nigeria was or is still a sovereign nation. While the noisy reactions were on, our people themselves established clearly that ‘definition calls for counterdefinition.’ So, those who argued that Trump could not attack a sovereign nation were countered by those who alleged that a nation whose parts are occupied by alien insurgents couldn’t lay claims to sovereignty. Thus, the summary of our reactions to Trump’s threat is that the danger was rightly or inadvertently invited by many of our citizens. Indeed, while the noise was on, a faction of the opposition Peoples Democratic Party PDP staged a protest in front of the US Embassy in Abuja calling on foreign powers to stop Nigeria from becoming a one-party state.
What exactly can Nigerians do for themselves? Truly, there is hardly any event in Nigeria especially those concerning politics in which certain politicians do not call for international intervention. Even those in government today did same when they were in the opposition against the then ruling party that was not following due process. Against this backdrop, is it not comical that people are now feeling so bad about a possible intervention of the US into the killing of Christians that many of the latter have been vigorously canvassing in the last decade? Anyone in doubt should visit the web and find an avalanche of reports by the clergy and mourning communities calling for help in what represents the rather forbidden term ‘genocide’ against their faith.
Are those crying for help fabricating or exaggerating their claims? If not, why is it that many of our citizens have little or no faith in their government? Is it that our successive governments have been ineffective? An objective answer to these questions will point to an exceedingly poor governance outing especially between 2015 and 2023. Consequently, it can be said without fear that the dilemma of the government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is the nature of its political inheritance.
It was before Tinubu that we had cases of herdsmen taking precedence over other citizens. It was a period in which citizens were cautioned to choose between remaining alive or clamouring to be in possession of their lands. That was when we had visa on arrival not for credible investors but for persons with no identity or mission. Most importantly, it was the era when the military reportedly colluded with one group in killing the other.
People were displaced from their homes into official displacement camps and no one bothered to find out who authorized the dislodgments or who became the new occupants of such locations. One day, a foremost military general and respected officer, General T. Y. Danjuma, one-time Chief of Army Staff went public on the trend. He announced at a public function that Nigerians who were expecting the military to defend them would die one after the other because the military was aiding the killings. Nothing was done about the bizarre indictment. There were even reports that when arrested, those involved in killings were released on orders from above. The situation slightly changed when Tinubu became President but the change has remained insufficient.
The ruling APC did all it can to create the impression that the old APC and the new one are the same thereby empowering security operatives in crisis-torn areas in the country to continue with business as usual. Those behind the crisis are politicians who believe that they can only win elections if crisis situations are allowed to subsist for easy exploitation.
Other political elites are busy distracting Tinubu from governance to politics. Everything in Nigeria today is political, yet we are fully in the era of the execution of development projects to improve the living conditions of the people. How can a government that has rolled out several reform packages and huge development projects be seen spending more time on political defections? When will those projects be effectively executed to give the same government some political leverage over opponents?
President Bola Tinubu has been smartly quiet from the noise and anger against Trump by stating clearly his mission to win the war against terror. If that war ends, no one – Christian, Muslim, Northerner or Southerner would be persecuted. Again, if the war against terror ends the untidy policy of playing a game of divide and rule between attackers and their victims would also stop. It is indeed quite disheartening for citizens to see their attackers being patronized by the government while the former are languishing in IDP camps. Recruitment into the military should follow its old standards instead of integrating aggressors into the armed forces. To end the impunity of seizure of community lands by invaders, government should appropriately settle all citizens.
It is therefore commendable to perceive President Tinubu’s recognition of Trump’s threat as essentially conditional. In honest, it is simplistic to regard Trump’s statement as just a threat. The true position is that the American President is not only aware of the real capacity of Nigeria to stop all killings in her clime, he is also fully conversant with the exact support given by the US to Nigeria over the years to have ended the madness of indiscriminate killings in the country well before now. This is why the US expects the giant of Africa to speedily do the needful. It is only if that is toyed with that possible US intervention can be contemplated. Accordingly, Nigerians should patriotically stand behind their government to act wisely instead of wailing emotionally.
If that is done there would be no basis for the contemplated attack. This is therefore a time for action. To start with, those mandated to end the war on terror must be targeted. We are occasionally informed that security heads had been summoned and briefed by the president himself. What exactly is the thrust of the brief? What targets do they have? Are the armed forces adequately equipped? So much is usually publicised about the military budget but surprisingly, the military has never been able to periodically tell the public how much of its budget is usually released. Last week, General Abdulrahman Dambazau, former Minister of Interior and one-time Chief of Army Staff who should know told a public conference that the budgets are never fully released. The nation is entitled to knowing who holds-on to a budget to prosecute a war that we are all anxious should end.
Nigeria must institute good governance in all its ramifications. We should stop the trend of our armed forces personnel littering our streets when it is the Police that is mandated to maintain internal peace. We expect for example that each community rescued from insurgents should be protected by the Police. But anytime the inability of the Police to meet its mandate is raised, it is quickly explained that the nation does not have enough personnel in our Police Force. These days many analysts discountenance the argument because the same Police that claims to have inadequate manpower is always able to police legislators and other political chieftains. Are those the people in need of policing?
If Nigeria is a secular state as its constitution provides, those propagating policies that are harmful to other faiths are pushing such minorities into bitterness as well as the search for foreign intervention. The same is true of governors who change the mandate of the people by defecting to a party the people did not originally vote for. Such defectors are responsible for voter apathy because some voters are now convinced that voting is fruitless. As INEC has not authorized political campaigns, the strong parties that are diverting the period of governance to politics are distracting the President from intensifying project execution for the public good – one of such projects is the fight against terrorism. Nigeria should grow up.
*Dr. Iredia is a commentator on public issues
No comments:
Post a Comment