NIGERIA: ARMED AND DANGEROUS

          Another American is once again getting Nigerians all worked up over an opinion on the state of  our nation and its future. Another American, John Campbell, last year caused quite a stir when he predicted that the 2011 elections were going to be conducted in an atmosphere of chaos and violence owing to the loss of control of the political process by the Nigerian political elite. This time, a professor of history and a lady very well known in the corridors of influence over United States policy on Nigeria, Jean Herskovits, published an article in an influential US newspaper in which she said basically that Boko Haram is not the problem in Nigeria. In the context of deep concerns that the Boko Haram insurgency is raising a new and dangerous threat which is both largely unknown and unprecedented in its nature and dimensions, the American professor’s position naturally raised the level of discourse around the issue. It has also exposed some interesting positions and reactions regarding the Boko Haram phenomenon, some of which were only being whispered a few weeks ago. The Nigerian government has condemned the article as ill-informed and misleading, which is not surprising. Nigerian informed opinion is however still confused over what to make of professor Herskovits’ thesis, although it is safe to assume that it is targeted more at the US State Department and Defence strategists than the Nigerian government and population.  Sadly, one view about our situation from the distant is providing more substance for debate and more heat than all the combined analyses and studies about matters that really matter to us in Nigeria.

Professor Herskovits’ main thesis is that the US government is being pushed to adopt a formalized position which will list Boko Haram as a terrorist organization, and this will be dangerous both for the US and Nigeria. She warns that the adoption of a policy which classifies and treats Boko Haram as a terrorist organization by the US government will suck the US into a war against a group which is more political than terrorist, in a country where many Muslims already believe the US government is biased in favour of a Christian President from the south. She draws attention to the history and mutation of Boko Haram from a small band around a religious leader who was murdered by the police, into a movement which now fights the Nigerian state. Significantly, she says the group’s name and tactic is now a franchise used by criminal gangs and sundry interests who ape its penchance for attacking Christian churches. The response of the Nigerian state to the scandalous levels of poverty in the catchment area of the Boko Haram insurgency, and the multiplier effect of the high-handedness of security forces on the fortunes of the group, the professor says, have not been addressed by government of Nigeria. Indeed, she say, 25 percent of Nigerian budget for 2012 is being allocated for security, and that many Nigerians fear the army more than they fear Boko Haram. She concludes by advising the US government not to be misled into a situation that will make it an enemy of the Nigerian people. You could say that professor Herskovits says that Boko Haram is not the problem in Nigeria. The problem is the Nigerian government; and the US government should be wary of misunderstanding this, and taking the wrong steps in responding to pressures.

The immediate reactions of Nigerians to Herskovits article were revealing in terms of the current disposition of the elite and the leadership in a complex nation. The government and many leaders in the Christian community were shocked by a position which basically says Boko Haram is not a real problem; that it is now the cover for huge spending on security; for many criminal activities totally unrelated to its goals; and that the Nigerian government is to blame for its growth and expansion, if indeed it does exist. This perspective sees Herskovits’ essay as apologetic, dangerous and misleading, a virtual legitimization of a dangerous insurgency by an American who should know better. Saner comments asked how anyone with a deep knowledge about Nigeria as Herskovits does could dismiss the threat of Boko Haram as the manifestation of endemic poverty and injustice when there is evidence all over the place that an insurgency does exist around it with very clear goals and spectacular successes in their pursuit. The Nigerian government which obviously would want the group formally classified as terrorist because this will open up a whole range of new relationships and access to assistance by the US has been the most disappointed by Herskovits comments.

Another popular reaction came mostly from many northerners who had suspected for a while that powerful and more sinister forces have hijacked the Boko Haram brand and are now waging their own battles. According to this perspective, prime suspects in this category include subversives fighting the administration of President Jonathan who are not Boko Haram; heavily armed criminals copying its tactics; trained Christians who bomb state security agents and Christians to give Muslims a bad name; and even western powers – read the US – which want to dismember Nigeria, isolate and “deal” with its large (and potentially threatening) Muslim population. Then there is also the lingering suspicion that much of the violence being credited to the insurgency is being sustained by the agents of the Nigerian state and security agents because the fight against Boko Haram is just too lucrative to give up.

Both perspectives are worrying, and only compound the problem. Those who see only an armed insurrection which can be brought down by billions and bullets, to the exclusion of all other strategies are wrong. The manner Boko Haram is understood and responded to is very important in this respect. If Boko Haram is understood as a terrorist organization, its most effective antidote will be force, and not tinkering with socio-economic policies which may reduce poverty and re-integrate vast portions of the population into the democratic process. So far, force alone has not affected its effectiveness, and concentration on huge mobilization of security personnel on highways and massive expenditure around technology and arms have tied up Nigeria’s almost entire security asset around Boko Haram. On the other hand, those who are relieved that they have found vindication in their suspicion that Boko Haram is a cover for all sorts anti-Islam activities are dangerously off the mark as well. Even where a case could be made for the suspicion that the original grievances of the followers of the late Yusuf Muhammad have been hijacked by all and sundry forces, it will be foolish to dismiss Boko Haram as non-existent. Certainly, the group has gone through some transformation; and it is quite possible that it has received support and training from organizations with a longer track record in terror. Muslims particularly who are in deep denial over the existence or goals of Boko Haram give themselves false comfort and overlook how much damage is being claimed in the name of their faith. The distance many Nigerian Muslims try to put between their faith and Boko Haram does not relieve them of the burden of finding a solution to a problem which affects them   in its impact as much as it affects non-muslims. Worse, denying the existence of Boko Haram, or foisting a conspiracy theory around it does little to address the worry that either Boko Haram or someone acting in its name is targeting the break-up of the Nigeria state exploiting Muslim-Christian differences and pitting them against each other. Some sections of Nigerian public opinion may give greater credence to Herskovits position because it is raised by a foreigner. But we do have to ask her motives as well. Could it be as dispassionate as some would believe or is part of a wider debate around US core interests in the gulf of Guinea and Africa?

So Jean Herskovits article really should not be seen by Nigerians as a tool towards finding solutions to a problem which is ours. The US government for which it is meant will of course give it its own interpretation. Here, it is likely to do much damage unless it is seen purely as one opinion of an American – no matter how informed – over our problem. The lady is wrong to say Boko Haram is not the problem. Even if, as she says, it is a symptom of a deeper problem, it is today the single biggest threat to our collective security. So it is both the symptom and the problem. She is right when she advises the US government to be wary of being sucked into an essentially Nigerian problem. But we could overate her contribution in this direction. Many Nigerians and a few foreigners have drawn attention to the unacceptable levels of poverty and political alienation which has become even more pronounced in the last one year in many parts of the north. The failure or refusal of the Jonathan administration to recognise the need for some decisive intervention in terms of real investment in economic and social infrastructure in this region is feeding the problem. Similarly, the spectacular failure to seek for hard political and security intelligence in and around the communities for the source, dimensions and roots of Boko Haram has left the administration with little choice than to send in more soldiers, mount security checkpoints and C.C.T.Vs and spend hundreds of billions on high-tech equipment with dubious value.

These are what make Boko Haram the problem. It is a problem because every citizen in Nigeria today lives in fear of the bombs and bullets of Boko Haram insurgents or groups who hide behind their grievances and their tactics to wreck havoc on our lives. It is a problem because violence is threatening us even more. Government is arming itself for a war with an enemy it cannot see who lives in our midst. The enemy is arming itself to fight government and citizens alike. Criminals are arming themselves with dynamites, bombs and bullets to rob and maim and kill. Ordinary citizens are arming themselves just in case they have occasions to defend themselves. Communities are arming themselves against other communities. Our nation is armed and dangerous, but we aim our weapons against each other. This is the greatest danger Nigeria is facing since the end of since our civil war. We do not need an American professor of history to tell us: Boko Haram is the problem; but then so is the Nigerian government.