FROM YOCHUKU OFOKA YOBOLISA, ENUGU
Air Chief Marshal Alex Sabunduh Badeh, Nigeria’s Chief of the Defence Staff, has come under severe attack lately and some Nigerians are calling for his head for his seeming inability to quell the Boko Haram insurgency sweeping the North East states. Such calls may not be borne out of disaffection for the defence chief but out of mere anxiety over the quantum terrorist violence which his critics believe is happening right at his doorsteps, under his nose. They argue that as the highest military commander Badeh lacks the knowhow to lead an onslaught against the Boko Haram terrorists, stressing that if he could not protect his hometown then the country at large is doomed in the hands of the masquerading Islamic invaders. The question is who is Badeh? What war is he fighting? How robust, extensive and free of bureaucracies is his counterterrorism machinery?
Of course, CDS Badeh and his military forces are only a small, infinitesimal component of the federal government’s machinery that should counter or respond to terrorist threats. Because Badeh is not fighting a conventional war where his competences or lack of them are measured by the level of penetration into the enemy territory, the amount of the enemy arsenal destroyed, and the number of the enemy troops either killed or taken prisoner condemning him over his seeming inability to stem terrorist incursion in the Northeast might be irrational and down-to-earth unfeeling. In civilized societies all over the world where terrorist violence rage jurisdiction over counterterrorism is not placed in the hands of the military commanders alone. And since terrorism, be it domestic, international, transitional or a permanent feature of society is faceless combating it oftentimes, involves a broad, multidimensional approach cutting across critical agencies of
state security, service departments and even product factories which may have terrorist plants in their employ. In addition to precision-guided firepower campaigns of our nuclear forces, the day-to-day activities of the civil service agencies should include purging the system of its enemies coupled with an outsourcing of vital pieces of information about the diehard enemies of state. This information gleaned from homeland factories and agencies plus counterintelligence services abroad are what make counterterrorism efforts effective and worthwhile. The question is, how is our national government organized to address the overarching issues of terrorism, vandalism, armed insurrections and all forms of insurgent moves emanating from within the country or from without?
I think all of us, and the government, are to blame for not being able to end or at least stem Boko Haram insurgencies in the Northeastern states. But before we crucify Badeh, who is even positively caught up in the red tape of officialdom, let us first of all, understand terrorism and the working substance of all terrorist eruptions. Terrorism, which involves a violent struggle, is a specific tool of persuasion in a wide variety of power relationship. It is almost as old as mankind. For purposes of this article I may wish to define it as an orchestrated state of fear for bringing about a desired change in society. I think this could be an acceptable definition so long as we properly understand the operational words there. By this definition I mean that terrorism, as we witness it today through the agency of Boko Haram, is an unobtrusively organized series of actions that evoke fear for purposes of obtaining a desired result. Hence, a disgruntled group
in any given society, oftentimes, resorts to it to challenge the authority of government. In some cases, such disgruntled groups may come from outside the target group. For instance, the Zealots, a Jewish, anti-Roman sect, used it in ancient Israel against Roman occupation. The Assassins, a secret order of Muslim faithfuls in ancient Iran who obeyed their commanders even unto death used it against the Christian Crusaders in Syria. Since then aside religious sects, secular political organizations have used it more often to oppose the state pointedly heatedly to express their deep-rooted anger. Examples of such targets of hate and anger are replete in history.
Originating from France where it was called ‘terreur’, modern terrorism, though not specifically orchestrated to destabilize the state was used by the French in their revolution to change the French society from a monarchical regime to a democratic order. However, after the French, modern terrorism assumed an antigovernment posture and thenceforward, clandestine organizations everywhere in the modern world such as the Russian Revolutionary Group, the Italian Red Brigade, the German Red Army and, the Irish Republican Army used it to describe their violent struggles against the state. One characteristic that is common to all terrorist groups is that they assume a defining name and mount a sustained pressure on society designed to communicate a message until a mere mention of their name is capable of breaking up a house party and throwing an otherwise peaceful society into panic with intent to undermine confidence in the leadership of the society. We
all know the names and modus operandi of modern terrorist organizations and they run the whole gamut of the underworld.
But does Boko Haram, the name of the Islamic sect, known to be unleashing terror and hate in the North East states of the country have the aforementioned defining feature? Of course, it does. Like the Israelite Zealots, Boko Haram has opposed the nascent democratic order in the country starting from the days of Umaru Yar’Adua with a sustained campaign of murder and destruction. Like the Persian Assassins they have terrorized the Northeast using a campaign of systematic murder and religious convolution. Like the Italian Red Brigade they have tried to weaken the fledgling democracy with intent to establish a theocracy. And like Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda they have continued to swell in number and technical preeminence.
At this point, it is important to note that crushing terrorist violence in the Northeast should not be left to Badeh alone because alone Badeh cannot do it. It is equally important to note that all terrorist caucuses have the backing of powerful nations and individuals who act subterranean to achieve their cantankerous politico-religious desires. Such powerful states or people, of course, using surrogate terrorists and stand-ins, have no qualms what they do to their target audiences so long as they communicate a message. More often than not such people label themselves freedom fighters who strive to free a supposedly oppressed society. While hiding underground, the covert terrorists fund their surrogates and turn them into formidable forces. If they are state-sponsored they even have the luxury of state facilities. The states of Libya and Sudan, our very close neighbours, for example, had been certified guilty of state-sponsorship of terrorism where
racial extremists made use of their states’ embassies to unleash terror across the globe. Responsive governments of their target countries like the United States and Britain approached terrorist projections of Libya, the al-Qaeda organization and other terror countries from all fronts. They used the military, created specialized agencies to direct their governments’ efforts, consolidated into one agency dozens of agencies that share responsibility to respond and prevent terrorism, suspended temporarily democratic provisions of habeas corpus and the rule of law in all corners of their countries, permitted their security operatives to search the homes of certain citizens without warrants, enacted stringent laws designed to forestall terrorist moves. All these efforts, call them marshal rules if you like, are geared towards achieving effective counteroffensives to terrorist threats. But there was one thing they did not do: they did not leave the
jurisdiction of counterterrorism in the hands of their military commanders. But in our own case we seem to rely on General Badeh alone.
If we may ask again, how poised is our government to wrestle Boko Haram to a standstill? Of course, to win this fight against the terrorists calls for well-coordinated counteroffensives involving not just Badeh and his military forces but all well-meaning Nigerians and critical segments of our society. It is interesting to note that the current terrorist campaign in the Northeast has been somewhat designed not in accordance with the universally-acknowledged terrorist motives where terrorist violence is a means to an end rather than an end in itself. But Boko Haram, in most part, uses violence simply as vengeance rather than as a means to effect a politico-religious change in the polity.
And this fact points to one thing; that the Boko Haram Islamic sect can hardly qualify as an enemy within but a surrogate army of Nigeria’s external enemies who have scores to settle with the Nigerian state. This fact explains in parts why the vestibule of the Islamic sect is widening and their cavalry becoming more formidable by the day. Hence, this is no fight for the military forces and the police alone but one that should involve also the NIA, SSS, the NSA, NIS, NASS, NSCDC, NCS, NAFDAC, NDLEA, NDE, NEMA, NJI, NURTW, NUJ, NTI, the Bus Companies, the Pilgrims Board, the hospitality industry, the show business and, in fact, the whole caboodle of our intelligence services and the national consciousness.
In the last seven years since Umaru Yar;Adua, the Boko Haram Islamic sect has caused grave terrorist incidents in the North East states of the country for which the Chief of the Defence Staff, Air Chief Marshal Alex Sabunduh Badeh may soon be scapegoated. Like the old adage: we only give a dog a bad name that we may kill him, Badeh has recently been vilified in the press, called names and held over the barrel for not accomplishing the task that should be tackled by dozens of countrymen who hold key positions like him. But rather than scapegoating the defence boss I think Badeh’s critics should ask, matter-of-factly, how are the government and people of this country organized to call the terrorist bet? I guest honest answers would go a long way to aid us in charting a new advance in the ongoing war against terror in the Northeast.
Of course, it is about time the Nigerian government got their acts right about how to and how not to handle terrorism and armed insurrections in this country before the rest of this tottering African giant slumps under the heavy weight of masquerading external aggressors. From their high-level weaponry, the predominance of their volunteer forces and the technical preeminence of Boko Haram terrorists it is obvious that a terrorist consortium of Nigerians and foreign nationals have concluded arrangements to destabilize our federation and, this does not call for idle armchair bureaucracy nor trading of blames on the military high command. Rather, what we need now is a well-coordinated peace offensive to secure the national power and save the federation from imminent colapse.
There is nowhere in the modern world where the fight on terror is won ouside of public support from the target country. A case in point is the terrorist attack directed against the United States on September 11, 2014. That singular attack evoked the consciousness of the American people both at home and abroad and, Americans dubbed condemnation slogans of the terrorist attack on T-shirts and denim trousers and carried placards denouncing terrorist threats in major cities across America. Hence, both the surrogate terrorists and their sponsors in Afghanistan were effectively isolated by the moral majority which encouraged the U.S government foreign policies on tackling the perpetrators.
To say the least, what Badeh and his officers and men need most at this trying time in the counterterrorism campaign is unwavering support and morale reawakening of the military personnel through the mass media and organized groups against the terrorists in the North East states; not controversial arguments and vilifications; not calumny, of course. But if the media executives and their reporters who are supposed to champion mass conscientization against terrorist threats begin to deride and ridicule and denigrate the military and security forces’ efforts then the nation is roundly finished because that is the kind of public attention that terrorists all over the world seek to fuel their obnoxious campaigns.
But while Badeh’s critics may argue that Badeh’s statements, so far, are misleading and unbecoming and not conforming with military etiquette when he said that he would harry Boko Haram out of the country, let us not forget that he was addressing his officers and giving them marching orders. Badeh’s address was nothing short of consciousness raising. It was not, in the real sense of it, designed for public consumption. I think that the defence boss was only setting a goal for his officers and service chiefs following the presidential orders on terrorism in the northeast. But maybe we expected the newly-appointed CDS, at that time, to tell his men to make haste and scurry underground because the terrorists would soon overrun the entire country in a matter of a few days?
Although using the force of arms in counterterrorism may have some advantages, the disadvantages oftentimes, outweigh the advantages in that while some of the terrorists may be killed in crossfire with the military, experience has shown that a great many law-abiding members of society are also killed. So, Badeh may have said that he would bring terrorist violence in the northeast to an effective end by April this year, on one hand. On the other hand, because the terrorists carry out their attacks at sporadic intervals, often without pattern and, then dissolve back into the society it would take a genocidal general to roll his tanks into the civilian population which Boko Haram obviously uses as a shield. To do that, Badeh would require express executive order or legislative advocacy otherwise he would be guilty of war crime. For example, over the September 11 terrorist attack against the United States, the U.S government vowed to displace al-Qaeda in a
matter of a few months. To that end the U.S army invaded Afghanistan and heavily pounded the terrorist stronghold. Although many of the terrorists were killed the U.S army was not able to displace Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda group until two years after in 2003. And none of the U.S military commanders was crucified or even vilified for not ending al-Qaeda in a few months. It is important to note here that the U.S army had all the moral justification to wipe out the Afghanistan civilian population even as they were non-America citizens to get at al-Qaeda. But they would not do that lest they be guilty of war of crime. Thus, if military operation is nonpartisan why would anybone wish to have Badeh’s head because he set a war target that he did not meet?
General Owoye Andrew Azazi, a former defence chief who later became NSA once said that the military action against the Boko Haram in the North East states would not deter the insurgents but would rather cause serious military incidents amongst defenceless civilians. Two years have gone since Azazi made that observation and terrorist violence has escalated amid military actions. It has even erupted with volcanic strengths thus shaking the very foundation of our nation state. Badeh’s military campaign seems ineffective and is seen as veritable vehicle for martyrdom by the terrorists whose membership keeps rising because they believe that God would reserve a place for them in the heavenly if they as much as die in their cause.
The question is where is the Nigerian public’s support for the ongoing counterterrorism efforts? Proffering answers, Michael Olawuyi, a Nigerian-born, U.S-based defence strategist said, “No doubt, public support for counterterrorism efforts of government in Nigeria evaporated the day the military tolled in their tanks. Because they feel awed by extreme force of arms the public feel alienated, excluded and unfit to contribute to the whole business of trying to find a lasting solution to the terrorist palaver. But government has failed to realize that winning the people on their side is vitally important in the war against terror back home”.
Olawuyi maintained that because government tends to rely too heavily on their military might while exclude critical segments of the civilian community in the country western nations are less sympathetic in their approaches to the use, pointing out that until our national government begins to look up to its publics winning the fight against terrorism in the North East state would continue to elude the nation.
YOCHUKU OFOKA YOBOLISA, a security consultant, is the author of There’s Terror in the Street.