Abiodun Komolafe
By Abiodun Komolafe
The roots of the current crisis stretch deep into the past. To truly discern these origins, one must look all the way back to the Justice Alexander Ovie Aniagolu Report on the Maitatsine Riots in Kano (1981), whose findings clearly harbingered the events that were to come. Four decades later, we are facing the fatal consequences of unheeded warnings.
Between 1980 and 1985, the Maitatsine Riots encompassed a series of violent religious uprisings in Northern Nigeria. It was initiated and led by Muhammad Marwa (Maitatsine), whose followers belonged to the militant Islamic sect, Yan Tatsine. The conflict began in Kano and spread to other cities, resulting in thousands of deaths before it was suppressed by the Nigerian military.
The crisis Nigeria currently faces was foretold in the Maitatsine and other Reports. The deepening poverty and woes in the North and parts of Nigeria were largely caused by the destruction of the agricultural value chain. This destruction was exacerbated by the termination of the 1963 Republican Constitution in 1966, and the irresponsible fixation on a misplaced depiction of an oil boom. The inability to reverse the destruction of the rural economy in Northern Nigeria, alongside the failure to make education free and compulsory from the age of 16, starting around 1977, ultimately led us to where we are today.
Terror attack at Federal College of Education Kano
13 students died and scores of others were injured as insurgents bombed and shot into lecture halls at the Federal College of Education, Kano in September 2014
Former Military President Ibrahim Babangida’s misconceived and now-discredited Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) also added salt to the North’s festering injury. And, as if the gods were angry, SAP deconstructed its nascent industrial base, wiping out fundamental industries such as textiles. Nobody should be surprised, in view of this that we landed in the era of Boko Haram. Indeed, it would have been absurd had we not landed in that era. Having landed in that era, the political will to tackle the root cause was lacking. Instead, what became depicted as an insurgency opened a vast new avenue for making money by members of the connected political and military establishment.
The military industrial complex arose out of the war against terror. Without parliamentary oversight worth the name, a never-ending war found a stool and sat comfortably in the country. Sadly, the Return on Investment (ROI) for those profiting from this war might be as high as an investment in Oil and Gas. Even a primary school student can do a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) of the profiteering and conclude, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Nigeria has been badly defrauded in the pursuit of what is now a phantom war against terror.
The National Assembly must now, as a way out of terror, do a forensic audit into spending on the war against terror, stretching back fifteen years. This will reveal everything and show conclusively that even if we quadruple expenditure on Defence spending, the war will go on ad infinitum. This is simple common sense, for no turkey votes for an early Christmas. We have an entrenched business encompassing the high and the mighty, and dismantling it would be a determined Herculean task. If we do not dismantle the business framework, we will be fighting the war against terror until the Year 2050, and beyond.
Worryingly, Nigeria does not have the much needed Unexplained Sources of Wealth Act, even though, commendably, Senator Ali Ndume from Borno South is proposing one. It is only by asking people to account for their wealth that we can really get to the root of the profiteering and racketeering industry that has arisen from the war against terror over the past fifteen years.
In addition to the forensic audit, the country must now have the intellectual humility to admit that it’s been fighting the war in a wrong way. Faced with guerilla warfare, we need to develop a framework centered on Special Forces as well as an increase in specially-trained ground troops to destroy the terrorists. For example, it is clearly absurd to pursue fleeing terrorists on motorbikes with heavy armour. We should have developed our own Special Forces with their own specially-configured motorbikes, perhaps even using electricity, to pursue, overtake and dismantle them.
It is clear that the development of Special Forces is not in sync with the profiteering and racketeering in Defence expenditure. We must now quickly develop Special Forces as well as strengthen the intelligence framework at the local level and use technology to monitor the movements of the terrorists. Satellite sensors could have monitored the movement of scores of motorcycles moving symmetrically. We must also investigate the failure of intelligence.
Nigeria is in a very terrible situation and the entire sector of the war must now be configured in order to defeat terrorism. The top echelon of the Nigerian Defence system must study unconventional warfare, dating back about eighty years, to see how modern armies had to configure their methods to fight insurgents.
A key example is Dien Bien Phu in Vietnam. Seventy-one years ago, on the paddy fields of Vietnam, a lightly-armed, barefooted guerrilla army, led by a lawyer named Võ Nguyên Giáp, not only defeated but also destroyed the French Army, which had air power, armoured tanks, and the most modern weaponry at its disposal.
The Battle of Dien Bien Phu (March-May 1954) was the decisive engagement of the First Indochina War. Apart from changing the conception of warfare forever, it also showed that a revolutionary ragtag army can defeat one of the best armies in the world. Most importantly, it showed that guerrilla warfare is fundamentally different from state-on-state wars like Nigeria versus Ghana or Togo versus Niger Republic.
The French surrender ended its colonial rule in Vietnam and led to the country's temporary partition. We must therefore study this as well as other examples of asymmetric warfare to resolve the ugly situation we now face. To put it succinctly, there must be a complete overhaul, for it is now clear that the constant changing of personnel is not the issue. The issue is that the strategy must change! It means that we must have a different force structure within the army!
It must also be noted that an insurgency movement mutates. When insurgents quarrel, which is not unlikely, divisions set in and the groups mutate, moving into different sectors. This means that, instead of fighting three groups, a country may eventually face ten or eleven. So, a country worth its vision and mission on security must anticipate this and nurture its strategic plans.
Eni tó kàn ló mò! (Only the wearer knows where the shoe pinches!). For yours sincerely, the argument that heightened insecurity is merely a pre‑election narrative for 2027 is too lazy to sound as an excuse. Do we think the parents whose children were kidnapped care a hoot about any election? Have we counted how many of the Chibok girls’ parents are still alive? What of the parents whose children were abducted from St. Mary’s Catholic School in Kebbi: do we know how many have ended up in the hospital? For God’s sake, when will this madness come to an end?
Again, consider the ancient wisdom: “Àgbàrà òjò kò l’óun ò n’ílé wó. Onílé ni kò níí gbà fun.” (The intent of a heavy storm and flood is to wreak havoc, and that of those to be affected is to prevent it.) This dynamic defines all conflict. It stands to reason that nobody has ever waged unconventional, or even conventional, warfare without successfully infiltrating the security apparatus of the opposition. Unfortunately, this tactic takes a sinister turn in a religious war. Here, there are people who view it as a divine calling, making infiltration a sacred duty.
● To be concluded.
Komolafe (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk / +234 (0)80 3361 4419 SMS only)