Tuesday 29 January 2013

Boko Haram: Light at the end of the tunnel?


Abubakar Shekau
Abubakar Shekau
Since the end of the civil war, no calamity of enormous proportion has befallen the fledgling nation-state more than the horror unleashed by the dreadful sec-Boko Haram. Many lives have been lost. Property worth billions of naira have been destroyed. Nobody is insulated from the attack. Government officials and buildings, traditional rulers, police and military formations and church worshippers are targets. On daily basis, there is panic. The fear of the invincible agitators has become the beginning of wisdom.
The invincible agitators’ projected demands are inexplicable. They are offensive to civilisation. It is a paradox that a sect that has proposed an end to Western education in the North is addicted to bombings, which is an invention and legacy of the Western world. Retired military officers have warned that, if this trend of violence is not halted, urban warfare may be imminent.
Observers contends that the political undertone of the curious war by the bombers may have been inadvertently ignored. It is also confounding that the sponsors of these destructive acts cannot be traced by intelligence agents. Indeed, the failed attempts at curbing the activities of the sect have created a hollow in the record of President Goodluck Jonathan in the critical area of national security. At a time, there was confusion in the government as the Commander-in-Chief cried out that Boko Haram had invaded his cabinet.
It was therefore, a cheery news that a faction of the sect led by Abubakar Shekau announced a ceasefire yesterday. Reports indicated that members of the faction laid down their weapons and embraced dialogue. Their mood however, suggested that they have only temporarily suspended hostilities. The ceasefire is not final. Analysts warn that it may pale into a camouflage surrender, if their conditions are not met. Poignantly, the fighters have demanded for the release of their members who are in detention.
If this ‘offer’ by Boko Haram is effectively managed, there may be light at the end of the tunnel for the trembling polity. Other factions within the sect may toe the same line, based on the olive branch waxed at their colleagues quitting the war. Some stakeholders have canvassed a semblance of amnesty, but those who object to this idea have come up with the explanation that what Boko Haram is fighting for is unknown. Yet, if those laying down arms are made to regret their actions and retrace their steps, they would wreak more havoc.
But there are some questions also begging for answers: what fraction of the whole sect is laying down arms? Can government dialogue with the faction, to the exclusion of the entire Boko Haram family? What is the reaction of the sect’s other members, who are waxing stronger on the battle front and not ready to explore the dialogue option? Is Boko Haram now factionalised? Are members developing cold feet because the government is about to gain upper hand, judging by the military bombardment of their base in Mali, which is believed to be lending support for the violence in Northern Nigeria? Can suspects be released as demanded by the sect without facing the wrath of the law for blood-letting? What is the implication of dialogue with the bombers?
Stakeholders who have objected to dialogue with Boko Haram sect pointed out that the approach is defeatist. They also submitted that dialogue with similar organisations in many African and Asian countries never yielded dividends of peace. Others canvassed the option of daring the arsonists by tracking them down and bringing them to justice. Their argument is that the nation is in agony and thirsty for justice.
The government has exercised caution in its response to this emergency. Like sensitive war-time leaders, President Jonathan has not done anything to aggravate the tense situation. He has rejected the pressure to label the members of the sect as terrorists. That approach, fundamentally, is conciliatory. But the broader objective of dialogue may also be explored, as it is being argued, for the purpose of unveiling the power brokers sustaining the onslaught against the country. Indisputably, security agents have failed to nip the activities of the sect in the bud. Therefore, dialogue on a wider scale may also reveal the strength of the sect, the identity of its financiers, arms suppliers, links with terrorist organisations and real motivation for the affront.
However, dialogue has limitation. Though, as a veritable tool for crisis resolution and peace making, dialogue with Boko Haram sect will require more political and professional skills.
NaijaCenter

No comments:

Post a Comment