I have a question

Sir, sir, with my finger up, but my teacher wouldn’t take notice. Then I screamed sir eh! sir eh! He saw the fire in my flapping finger and asked, what is it you want to ask? That was my elementary school days. Somehow, we managed to get the question across.

This thing happening, is it terrorism or intended conquest? I ask because a wrong understanding would certainly lead to a wrong response. If it’s terrorism, who is the enemy? What demand is placed on him? How come that Boko is in the Northeast, gets arms easily through the porous borders for its soft-targets and is able to filter them through to its forward fighting force- the herdsmen-  who fight free using cattle as dummy/smokescreen; and how come occasionally, men in uniform are found doing the Boko-act and thereafter, return to service? If not intended conquest, how would one explain cattlerearers who should negotiate for grazing permission suddenly turn to a fighting force, burning down host communities with so much ferocity if not to take over? How did they pay for the sophisticated weapons and the composite training to use them? Could this be just for grazing rights? Assuming they succeed in chasing away the inhabitants: Jukuns, Tivs, Biroms, etc., who would become the new owners of the land? Then is that terrorism or conquest? Match this with increasing desert encroachment, then you see why the latter holds sway. How come that as Boko insurgency is increasing, herdsmen militancy is on the rise, both simultaneously? Nobody till date has told us what Boko-Haram is fighting for. Fighting against Western Education but doing their postings in English is strange logic. That brings me to the next.

Are we sure Abuja won’t be an armed battleground in the months to come? How prepared is the government, the people too? I ask because, not long ago, Boko insurgents supposedly under maximum confinement, got access to GSM and guns with which they disarmed SSS men on guard, battled the rest until they were sparingly overpowered by the armed forces just next door to the Presidency. That rings a bell that their sponsors/sympathisers are within. The Nyanya report has it that two uniformed men drove the bomb-laden vehicle to the park thus making this thinkable. Why not when punishment meted is not deterring and back-door sympathizers subtly push the nation to negotiate with freelance killers. If they hit one or two other strategic targets in the FCT, the ensuing pandemonium will trigger mass exodus; its apparent success could cause some disloyal ones in uniform to change sides. I had once suggested that terrorists in detention be kept in islands not on lands; I don’t know if anybody heard. So I must say, sir eh!, sir eh! rather than sir, sir.

Now to my next: does it really make sense to prescribe ‘no-go’ areas in the ongoing National confab? Fortunately, the delegates are still in session and watching. People conduct warfare in a non-war situation, invade communities unprovoked, destroy their livelihood and aim to sack them from their ancestral home; so to what extent shall compromise be made to have peace if compromise the answer is? As some have overtly preferred Cameroun to Nigeria, won’t it make sense to ask people where they want to belong, to enable us know who we are and how best to respond to unprovoked aggression? People must agree to live together before the how. But it looks like the conference is assuming that we are already together and must be, much so, when it has been thus prescribed; that’s why they jumped to the how? Wrong. It is, shall we live together before the how shall we? If this fundamental question is not procedurally approached, we may be heading for a protracted conflict that will dwarf what we see today. Then, it will be each defend yourself. Rather than this, truly visionary minds like Tunji Braithwaite are advocating a con-federalism or a loose federation. That will enable people be themselves and respect how others are, whilst the centre harmonizes. But it is 45 years late; Aburi said so. If now it has been understood as right, then kill ego and do right. Through his depth, he has identified the faultline of Nigeria’s being: STRUCTURE. Without the right structure, the house will fall; so no matter the shoving and bickering, that conference must produce a new structure for Nigeria and only thereon can a new constitution be drawn.

To my final, when will government make Nigerians know this is their war and not government’s alone? Would Nyanya give that thought impetus and drive awareness thereon or will government miss the opportunity again?

Sorry that I proposed one question but asked many. The troubles are legion, that’s why.

Onyebuchi Onyegbule