The Nigerian government in the last 13 years has treated the menace of terrorism, banditry, and insecurity with kids gloves as if they make returns from the tears and blurd of the people.
They have treated the menace of insecurity and destruction of lives and property like shareholders watching the graph of their stocks edge a little higher with every life lost.
The federal government failed woefully in doing what a government should do when faced with such existential threats, it started with GEJ ostriching while the carnage raged.
Buhari was even the worst as terrorism graduated and swamped larger spaces while banditry escalated with a new toga of farmer herder clashes. What did the government do?
NOTHING BUT EXCUSES!
BAT vehemently refused to learn anything from the failures of his two former predecessors, rather more time and attention are being focused into media propaganda and deflection than actually tackling the menace.
Today, we have more ungoverned spaces spanning across the six geopolitical regions than we had under the last two presidents. Areas that were safe say three years ago are unsafe today. So what are we saying?
Yet the federal government kept playing Russia roulette while the country burned.
The very arguement that it is not only Christians that are victims of the menace, while reflecting the position, adds little or no value to their communication strategy because what it is saying is that the “genocide also has collateral damage to non Christians.”
But the central weakness of this line of argument is that every student of strategic armed crisis knows that whenever and wherever there’s armed crisis crisscrossing faultlines.
Especially within a multiethnic or multi-religious community, the “us and them” scenario always always plays out because perpetrators naturally unleash more pains against those that are not like them. Who don’t speak their language, or worship their god. Sudan is an example.
And you don’t expect the victims who witnessed and survived such not to see it from a religious or ethnic point of view because that’s their undeniable lived experiences.
You can’t and shouldn’t determine how a victim frames the consequences of his victimhood if you have failed ceaselessly to prevent or stop his victimisation.
And if the Nigerian government’s denial is centred on the fact that there is no genocide, then it is a weak framing because it doesn’t exonerate the fact that wanton loss of lives are being perpetrated by rampaging groups most of whom are constantly being fetted and celebrated by both religious leaders, and government officials. Those are messaging cues.
I am not a novice about the “interests” fueled politics of the Orangeman and why he is doing what he is doing. I understand the background drivers edging him on. I understand it is not about the interest of Nigeria.
Also see: The Existential Threat of Islamic Terrorism and How We Got Here
But why should we allow these things fester for so long until strangers start pointing their hypocritical fingers at us is why we should be ashamed of ourselves.
That we have allowed political and material interests dictate security interests of our people is the reason why I don’t care again about any foreign meddlesomeness.
This is because all our top government officials have dual citizenship and they treat the country as backyards they plant vegetables in.
So if this is what it would take for our government to be a government and tackle head-on all non state actors, that man who I do not agree with will get my support.
Can someone define how a country disgraces itself for me?
By Kelechi Deca
