The network is bad

“You can’t always get what you want

But if you try sometimes

You just might find

You get what you need”

Mick Jagger and Keith Richards

 

While opening an international conference on “Islam and the fundamentals of peaceful coexistence in Nigeria,” organized by the Sokoto State government and the Muslim World League in Sokoto, President Goodluck Jonathan assured Nigerians of his administration’s commitment to protecting their rights and ensuring a harmonious living. He told the conference that Nigerians have “no alternative to peaceful coexistence” and “must therefore do everything in our power to ensure religion is neither misused nor abused to justify violence.” He advised that dialogue and tolerance, rather than confrontation should be the principles that should inform collective and corporate existence of Nigerians. The Sultan also used the occasion to lament serious deviations from the true paths by Muslims and Christians as the cause of the nations problems.

 

The conference on peaceful coexistence between faiths coincided with the Easter period, ironically of late, a time of great tension and stress. Christian Association of Nigerian (CAN) and the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA) all made passionate appeals for peace between faithfuls. The NSCIA’s statement said in this “trying period of unnecessary strife, tension, mutual suspicious and wanton destruction of innocent lives… Muslims in Nigeria shall strive to strengthen the cooperation and collaboration between our two bodies – NSCIA and CAN – for our mutual benefits and to the glory of God and Nigeria.” The Kaduna State Chapter of CAN said Nigerians “must unite ourselves as one irrespective of religions, tribe and political affiliation”.

 

In spite of the assurances from the President and umbrella religious organizations, many Christians chose not to go to church in some cities in the North on Good Friday. There were reports of massive deployment of military and police personnel to ensure that the Easter period does not register unusual assaults. Patrols and checkpoints have been increased in some sensitive towns and cities, underlying the worry that exhortations and appeals by religious and political leaders are unlikely to get everyone to sheath swords, even for Easter. In villages in Barikin-Ladi LGA of Plateau State, blood continued to flow as it did in the last few days, in a conflict with almost pure ethno-religious undercurrents.

 

The disconnect between the political and religious leadership in the nation and reality is very worrying. At the Sokoto conference where the President’s message on the abuse of religion and the values of dialogue, understanding and tolerance was conveyed by the Vice President, the Sultan of Sokoto’s recent call for amnesty to insurgents who have shown an interest will sit rather uncomfortably. The same President’s spokesmen have recently gone to town on why calls for amnesty are misplaced or even outrightly mischievous. They demand those who make the calls to prevail on insurgents to show  faces first, and indicate a willingness to dialogue. Others have hinted that the insurgency is virtually finished militarily, and the mop-up operation is being disturbed by noise being made for amnesty.

 

The Sultan’s call for amnesty has been echoed many times, even as attacks by the insurgency escalate. Some of the calls appear to be informed by the thinking that escalation of attacks is informed by refusal of government to consider the amnesty option. Some of it is also informed by the belief that the granting of amnesty will weaken the insurgency, and strengthen the moral hand of government in dealing with it. There is also the belief that the refusal to act on the advise of leaders and elders diminishes their standing and capacity in their communities, and reduces them to a group which has neither the respect of government nor the insurgents.

 

So when the President sends a message to a forum with a heavy dose of foreign participation which is completely at variance with the established position of the administration, you have to wonder whether it is one of those speeches that are written and okayed by minions who have no regard for policy consistency or image of leaders. When the President says Nigerians have no alternative to peaceful coexistence, most participants will sit up in anticipation that he will say what he is doing to preserve the foundations of that coexistence. The World Muslim league is no stranger to the insurgency, and it knows that it represents in various forms, a repudiation of religious coexistence in Nigeria. The Sultan had taken a major gamble in joining the chorus for amnesty. Its rejection by the government means they are now on opposite sides as far as solutions to the problem are concerned. He is likely to hear Mr President’s words sounding rather hallow, particularly the parts that celebrate religious understanding and tolerance.

 

Participants at the conference will go through the motion of exposing the fundamentals of religious coexistence, but they will do this against a raging controversy and high tempters regarding killings by people who claim to be Muslims in the names of their faith. In spite of local Igbo leaders’ strenuous efforts to deny that the recent park bomb in Kano was targeted at Igbo people, there are still many whose anger cannot be assuaged. Many elements among the Christian Association of Nigeria are finding it very hard holding back the tide of anger that Christians are being killed by the insurgents just for being Christians; never mind the fact that Muslims die daily at the hands of the insurgents as well. Muslim leaders and clerics are losing ground because they can neither influence the insurgency, nor protect other Muslims from its bombs and bullets.

 

There are deep murmurings that there is more to these attacks than the pursuance of the goals of the Jamaatu Ahlil Sunnah Lid dawati Wal Jihad (JASLIWAJ) or even the newer group, Ansaru. The failure of the Nigerian state to defeat this insurgency, or, as some cynics now insist, its reluctance to do so makes the position of the federal government highly suspect, particularly when it is steadfast in rejecting the option seen as a foot in the door. Its lack of an alternative strategy to the one it is deploying makes the rejection all the more puzzling to those who are charitable; and outrightly suspicious to those who see sinister motives.

 

President Jonathan is being put on the defensive in terms of policies towards violent insurgencies. This is the worst possible position he needs to be in. He is not communicating very well with the communities which are the first line victims of this insurgency. He is also not communicating with those who support what appear to be his positions, but would like to see an end to this conflict. There are others who presume to speak for him but make his case worse. These appear to have the loudest voices, and they remind northern elders that they fished out militants from creeks who had grievances and guns and faces, and leaders from the north should do the same. They want the insurgency crushed if it will not remove its veil and discuss, and they want this done at all cost. They see a political solution as capitulation and reward for killing of particularly Christians and southerners. They speak for a sentiment that says the North deserves what it gets, between the insurgency and a rampaging JTF. There are many voices around this insurgency, and most of them make little sense. Government’s communication network on this issue is bad, and it can only make the problem worse.