It’s good to be back on this page. While we were away, a lot of things happened.
Twenty-one of the kidnapped Chibok schoolgirls were released by Boko Haram. That was a good headline for a government in recession. The only pending controversy is whether the release was in exchange for something; as alleged.
Meanwhile, the Senate seems to be living up to its responsibilities at last. A few days ago, it spoke the minds of the majority of Nigerians when it rejected attempts by the executive to take a foreign N30 billion loan to finance the 2016 budget.
I’m neither an economist nor a politician; so I may be considered as lacking the credentials to authoritatively comment on this issue. But as a Nigerian, I’m concerned about what’s going on.
Why do we need to borrow when, at the last count, over a trillion naira had been recovered from those assumed to have looted the treasury?
I use the word ‘assume’ because the court is yet to convict anybody. In fact, no trial has taken place so far.
Everybody seems to be afraid of what SamboDasuki will tell the court during cross-examination. It is expected that he would mention everybody that benefited from the arms deal loot; and that could set parts of this country on fire.
The nation would likely be shocked to know that some of those walking around freely and asking for former President Goodluck Jonathan’s head in a saucer may be mentioned as beneficiaries of the loot.
By the way: Jonathan has started talking. He went to Oxford to speak to some eager young entrepreneurs two weeks ago and commented on the Dasuki case.
He said Dasuki couldn’t have stolen the amount he is accused of when weapons used in fighting Boko Haram were procured with the same amount.
What this means is that there must be some element of exaggeration in the amount claimed to have been stolen or shared by Dasuki.
Immediately he made the revelation, Vice President, YemiOsinbajo, started talking about how Buhari and his team will not influence the arrest of Jonathan.
It was a subtle way of saying that Jonathan may soon be handcuffed and made to face trial over what the probe of his administration has thrown up against him.
The arrest and humiliation of Jonathan seems to be the ultimate target of all that has been going on. With that statement from Osinbajo, Jonathan should be prepared for something bigger than his expectations.
It doesn’t really matter to me whatever Buhari does to Jonathan as long as it is in line with democratic procedure.
Let the intention not be to lock him up as a common criminal. He should face immediate trial and not merely detained to create headlines; as has been the case with others.
Another issue raised by Osinbajo was that Jonathan had no genuine intention of fighting and defeating Boko Haram. His reason was that Jonathan felt comfortable that Boko Haram only affected a part of Nigeria controlled by the opposition political party at that time.
Immediately I read that falsehood on the internet, I asked a friend what politics has done overnight to Osinbajo, a pastor.
I have no reason to defend Jonathan; but as a journalist, I am under a professional obligation to either state or defend the truth.
Jonathan and his team could have done more than they did in the fight against Boko Haram. They were pretty slow in fighting back. But to say that nothing was done because of the reasons cited by Osinbajo is absolutely not true.
One better reason for Jonathan’s seeming failure at the early stage of the emergence of Boko Haram has been offered by Abubakar Umar, a retired army officer, to www.theinterview.com.ng
He said: “In our assessment of that administration’s performance, we need to take into account the nature of the threat of the enemy.
“People often talk about the stellar record of the Nigerian military in international peacekeeping operations and compare it with its seeming weakness in the war against Boko Haram. This is very unfair.
“The Boko Haram insurgency cannot be compared to those peacekeeping operations. It is more challenging and complicated.
“It is more difficult to fight an enemy such as Boko Haram that does not present targets you can attack, an enemy that has no regard for any principles or laws of warfare.
“It is difficult to engage an enemy that can easily blend with the very people you are to defend.
“The military inherited by Jonathan was more familiar with conventional warfare and it took a while for it to adapt and become proficient in fighting asymmetrical warfare.
“However, there is no question that given more funding, more and better equipment and greater motivation, the military could have achieved much more as was witnessed from January to April 2015.”
No one can argue with that.
We must also remember that acquiring arms to fight the war exposed Jonathan’s administration to international mockery when Barak Obama’s America refused to sell arms to Nigeria on the excuse that the Nigerian military was mentioned in extra-judicial killing of the terrorists.
Would that amount to political indecision as cited by Osinbajo? No!
