Two days ago, I postulated that the events flowing from the speech of the President of Nigeria regarding the measures against the Boko Haram militancy would inevitably become war, and ought to have the understanding of a declaration of war. In taking that position, I have been fully aware of certain factors on the ground. First, it was necessary to stop Boko Haram by all means reasonable. No country would fold its arms and allow itself to be overrun by any group whatsoever. So, let's not squabble over that obvious premise. The big question, which was raised in my commentary, had to do with the best and most efficient ways to go about any necessary and reasonable efforts to stop Boko Haram. A second issue that I also raised was whether the government has been well informed and prepared for the consequences of the measures it has gotten itself into. I doubted that the government was ready. Also, I argued that the government has not addressed with the people certain obvious issues that ought to be addressed.
One recurrent issue flowing from my theory and analysis has been the question of the nature of the violence and hostility that now exist, in the present escalation. Why do I call it war, when the President did not declare war in the formal manner of it?
My angle is not difficult to understand. It is clear that the Nigerian Army has been for the past two years in battles with the militants. It is clear that the Nigerian Army used every weapon it was capable of in order to get rid of the sect. The Nigerian Army and other security forces did not need any speech from the President for them to destroy any Boko Haram bases. The fact that they waited until a speech was given three days ago underlies the problems that frighten the most. It is clear that the Nigerian Army has not been successful. The question was: what is there in the present speech of the President that could bring about a different outcome? Nothing! I think the President always wanted to defeat Boko Haram. I think that when he deployed soldiers against the sect in 2011, he meant to crush the sect. I think that whichever way we look at it, the President's measures so far failed.
While Boko Haram should be tackled and defeated for Nigeria to survive as a nation, the fact is that the President may have to be more open and forthright with himself and definitely with the people on how the nation goes about this affair. A protracted war and the destabilization that goes with it is better appreciated by the people if the government were more upfront and forthright about the situation.
There is no way this war would end on the touch and go basis. What must be fully appreciated is the history and nature of the global jihadist movements. If Boko Haram is perceived by the global Jihadism to be a part of its world agenda, what is going to happen is that Jihadists from all over the world would align with Boko Haram and wage war against Nigeria. We can fairly anticipate a a situation where Jihadist fighters are assembling from all over the world - Pakistan, Malaysia, Afghanistan, Syria, Lebanon, Oman, Iraq, Libya, Mali, Chad, etc to support Boko Haram against Nigeria. Some of these international jihadist militants are battle tested, especially those from Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Libya. They are sophisticated and dangerously experienced in this sort of warfare. Nigeria may be facing a situation that it might not have fully anticipated. Also, it is clear that with wars recently on in some of the home countries of the jihadists, weapons are already amply available for them to make an impact.
I fear that the President's speech, which did not really change anything on the ground, might have had the unintended consequence of elevating Boko Haram to a status where it could emerge as the gathering point for the global jihadists. It may even replace Al Qaida as the primary rallying point for jihadists and Mujahadeens.
Consider the real danger Nigeria faces if those Iraqi militants who peppered the mighty American forces with (improvised explosive devices (IEDs), Alias road-side bombs, were to transfer their IED know-how to local Boko Haram operatives. Also, consider the lethal effect of suicide bombers wearing explosive belts inside Nigerian cities. This is the menace the government of Nigeria does not seem to have fully realized.
Should the government not have confronted Boko Haram? Obviously, there was no way not to fight and seek to defeat that group. However, the government must approach it from a different mindset than what is had had over the last 3 years. The main error in the government's approach in the past is the failure to fully understand the nature of this militancy. The greatest mistake in the future is still the failure to understand the dynamics of the global Jihadism. It is that failure that most of us are worried about today. And where there is war, why pretend there is none?
No comments:
Post a Comment