The call by the Sultan of Sokoto and National leader of the Muslim
faith, Alhaji Sa’ad Abubakar III, to grant total amnesty to the dreaded
Boko Haram members was rather outrageous and unfortunate. In what has
become a public show of genuflection, prominent Nigerians from the north
has since echoed the sentiments of the sultan to grant amnesty to a
terrorist sect that has received funds and training from global terror
groups, such as al-Qaeda and al-Shabaab. The insurgents have almost
collapsed the economy of North-East, leaving more than 4,000 people dead
and thousands injured. The sultan has emboldened others in the drum
beat of amnesty that has eclipsed public discourse in the weeks that
ensued, and surely for a long time to come. One would have expected to
hear a better argument than the reframe that suggests; If the Niger
Delta militants were pardoned to bring about peace and security in the
country, why would same not be extended to Boko Haram? I will revert to
this shortly.
My first thought on President Jonathan’s disapproval of the sultan’s
amnesty call was commendation. I reasoned he struck the right note for
once but on a closer look at his remark, I was crestfallen. President
Jonathan said: “For you to declare amnesty, you have to be communicating
with people. You cannot declare amnesty for people that are
communicating under a veil…” This can be rephrased to insinuate, as soon
as they identify themselves and declare their intention, the government
will consider granting them amnesty. And with the pardon gate flung
open by him for Alamieyeseigha and others, this might prove to be a
tricky one for the president, particularly as there are cheap political
points to pick up from the north ahead of the 2015 general elections.
The amnesty that was granted to the Niger Delta militants should not
in any way translate or equate to same for the Islamist fundamentalist.
The agitations of the militants then, to some extent, was germane save
for the violence. They were been ripped off by multi-nationals leaving
them and their environment marginalized and underdeveloped even though
their zone produced the oil that provides for the entire country. They
agitated for resource control. They wanted their lives to be touched by
the oil that was been explored daily from their neighbourhood. We all
agreed, at some point in the their struggle, that the Niger Delta region
has been neglected for too long. Regardless of the sympathy their
plight elicited, their resort to armed banditry was condemned in strong
terms.
Juxtapose with the Boko Haram uprising and its attempt to forcefully
impose a religious ideology on a secular Nigerian society. The terror,
senseless and wanton destruction of lives and property they have
unleashed on Nigerians in a gutsy bid to oppose not only Western
education, but western culture and modernisation is despicable. Their
acts of terror have gone from the horrendous to the tragic as reflected
in the ghastly suicide attack on five luxury buses in Kano that left
about 25 people dead and over 50 others injured. These attacks are based
on a warped and shallow religious ideology; the islamisation of
Nigeria. They ignorantly disdain anything western, but wittingly get by
daily with the help of simple machines, the very symbol of western
influence in our lives. The blood of Nigerians should not atone for such
a cause that does not only trivialize what amnesty stands for, but it
seems to suggest that the activities of the sect are legitimate and
tolerable. Niger Delta militants focused their attacks on oil
installations and multi-national oil expatriates hostage, but Boko Haram
is engaged in indiscriminate killing and maiming.
There is a thin line between amnesty and negotiation (dialogue) in
the light of the controversy raised by the sultan’s comments. To canvass
for amnesty is to promote the culture of crass impunity that desecrate
the sanctity of human life. The government can sit with the leaders of
the sect, if they wish to reveal themselves, for dialogue. Whatever be
their demands, excluding amnesty, can be met by the government. As Bill
Clinton rightly pointed out recently while in Nigeria, deprivation,
illiteracy and poverty are root causes of Boko Haram. The government can
dialogue with the sect for a cease fire and then develop the region, by
creating employment and putting infrastructure in place. At this
juncture, we must all come to the realisation that sometimes battles are
not won with brute use of military force but on the table of dialogue.
The United States and other developed countries posit that they don’t
negotiate with terrorists because they have the capacity and intel to
crush – in the case of al-Qaeda, the killing of Osama Bin Laden – the
terrorists. Same cannot be said of Nigeria where there has been nothing
to show for billions voted for security in the last few years. Security
issues should be holistically approached because it takes more than JTF
boots on the ground, armed to the teeth in troubled states to restore
peace and stability.
There is a bigger picture to the diversionary and ill conceived
amnesty being canvassed for the Islamic extremists. The government will
be sending a wrong signal to the teeming population of unemployed
Nigerian youths and yet another dangerous precedent after the amnesty to
Niger Delta militants. It is akin to presidential pardon to felons, or a
national honour which is a reward for criminality. It will only buck up
splincter sects like, Ansaru, and new rebellion from other parts of the
country.
And if the government were to give unconditional pardon to the Boko
Haram, will the government use the same methods of rehabilitation and
reintegration for the Niger Delta militants? Skill acquisition centres,
training and re-training methods at home and abroad? How will the
government change their mentality to prepare them for their return to
mainstream Nigeria? Whichever approach the government intend to employ,
it will be a clear negation of the sects’ ideology of abhorrence for
anything western. It is not rocket science that their angst with the
government has nothing to do with money. All they seek is that sharia be
entrenched across the country.
Amnesty should not be a leeway for the Nigerian government to wriggle
itself out of security challenges. Only a weak government, with its
security and anti-corruption agencies bereft of ideas reward criminals,
militants, extremists, rapists and ex-convicts with pardon. Granting
amnesty to Boko Haram is a latent approval to other forms of social
vices and a continuum of the vicious cycle of legalised lawlessness.
Finally, there is a need to understand the Boko Haram agenda before
contemplating amnesty for the sect. They are part of a global network of
terror. Their Jihad is not motivated by money but a relentless drive in
their fanatical religious ideology of eradicating all forms of western
influence on the African continent using Nigeria and Mali as
springboards. The promise of material wealth that an amnesty holds for
the sect is a disincentive. The counter-terrorism war has never been won
anywhere in the world with amnesty.
DailyPost
