Repeating mistakes of the past
One of the characteristic of the Nigerian state is its resort to brute force and deadly violence to suppress legitimate expression of frustration and dissent. Remember Ken Saro Wiwa and his Movement for the Survival of Ogoni People (MOSOP)? They tried to press for “political autonomy to participate in the affairs of the Republic as a distinct and separate unit” and the “right to the control and use of a fair proportion of economic resources for Ogoni development” in the 1990s and what was the result? The Nigerian government responded to MOSOP’s demand with a brutal crackdown and, ultimately, decapitated the leadership of the group. Many towns in the region do not even have as much as a police posts, but security forces – the army, police and navy – are constantly deployed to protect oil installations that dot the region. These security forces constantly engage in torture and extra judicial killings of people in the communities and are rightly viewed as henchmen of a distant government concerned primarily with securing the oil and gas facilities and installations scattered across the regions on which the Nigerian economy, and more particular, the Nigerian federation, depends.
Even with the return to democratic governance in 1999 with the attendant freedom of expression it guarantees, the Nigerian state was still unwilling to listen to any legitimate agitation and was determined to employ maximum force to crush any form of dissent and protect. Gradually and with time, non state actors have come to understand that the only language the Nigerian government understands is that of force.
Thus, by 2005, violence became the chief means by which power and resources were negotiated in the Niger Delta region. Consequently, the loci of power shifted from community elders – a group the government and particularly the multinational oil companies found expedient to negotiate with and settle to quieten agitations – to militant youth groups who have been using violent means to successfully challenge the legitimacy of the Nigerian state. The only snag is that when these youth groups took up arms, the military that is quick to crush peaceful dissent and protests, proved incapable of suppressing them when armed. They consequently used the instrumentality of violence to successfully threaten the economic survival of the Nigerian state and consequently negotiate an amnesty programme, in 2009, with the Nigerian state, worth billions of dollars and set the precedence for violent confrontation as the only viable means of resolving disputes with the state.
Almost at the same time the government was negotiating peace terms with the dreaded Niger Delta militants, it unleashed the army on another extremist but largely peaceful group – Boko Haram – actively proselytising in Borno state. The army and police pursued a brutal, deadly and illegal crackdown on the group that peaceful elements within the group were either wiped out or lost their voices and the apostle of extreme violence and terror – Shiek Ibrahim Shekau – and his like took over. As usual, the moment Boko Haram took up arms the Nigerian army became scarred and could no longer confront them as it did when they weren’t armed. The Nigerian government has sought and got various international support, formed a multilateral force, and used mercenaries but is still unable to comprehensively defeat the insurgency.
But alas, the Nigerian state has learnt nothing from such bitter experiences and has continued to use crude violence and force to respond to peaceful agitations. For instance, in December 2015, the Nigerian Army mercilessly mowed down close to 500 members of the Shiite sect in Zaria and destroyed their leader’s house and shrines just for blocking the convoy of the Army Chief. The Human Rights Watch (HRW) was later to declare that the Nigerian army unjustifiably killed more than 300 members of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN) and secretly buried them. That assertion was later corroborated by the Kaduna state government, which even put the figure of those killed higher than the HRW. The violence against the largely peaceful sect has continued unabated and the leader of the sect – Sheikh Ibraheem El-Zakzaky, his wife and other members has been in government detention unlawfully since their arrest in 2015.
Feeling lucky, the Army has now extended its murderous crackdown to the largely peaceful but extremist Indigenous people of Biafra (IPOD) group. The unlawful killings started since last year but have now intensified with the army’s operation Python Dance 2. By declaring a largely peaceful group a terrorist organisation, proscribing an entire people’s right to free speech and association, and deliberately provoking them to violence, the Nigerian government is steadily and quickly pushing the group to embrace violence. The unspoken message to these groups that are continually being massacred and mowed down by the army is that peaceful demonstrations or protests never pay. The only chance they have of being taken seriously is by engaging in armed and violent confrontation with the state. The only problem is that when these groups do take up arms, the army often doesn’t have the capability to stop them. We have good examples in the Niger Delta militants and Boko Haram.
But the government may be lucky again. Unlike the Niger Delta militants who had Nigeria by the balls and the Boko Haram militants motivated by extremist ideology, the motivation for the current Biafran secessionist movement appears to be largely economic and is unlikely to survive a brutal crackdown. However, the crackdown will be at the expense of Nigeria’s unity!
Finally, I think Nigerians need to be worried about their armed forces that, recently, only specialises in winning battles involving unarmed civilians and groups. When they have faced armed groups, the outcome hasn’t been flattering.
Christopher Akor