Dr. TUNDE OSENI, lecturer at the Department of Politics and International Relations, Lead City University, Ibadan, speaks with Senior Correspondent, ISHAYA IBRAHIM on the international dimension of Boko Haram insurgency, 2015 break-up prediction on the country, on-going Russia/Crimea crisis among others.
Given the rapidity of Boko Haram attacks on Nigerians in recent times, some have suggested international assistance in curtailing the insurgency. Would it for instance be out of place for the government to seek help from America’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in fighting the menace since it appears our intelligence agencies are ineffectual in this fight?
Dr. TUNDE OSENI,
Ordinarily, countries collaborate in a globalised world to find solutions to problems of international dimensions. However, the kind of help to be sought must be clearly defined. If human capacity building is needed, why not? If counter-terrorism strategies need to be shared between these two countries, why not? Nigeria is a strategic ally of the United States of America. Any constructive, diplomatic and collaborative effort should be encouraged. It may however be counter-productive to think in terms of drones and military options.
Why do you think so?
My thinking is that military option from the United States will over militarise the fight against Boko Haram. Even as it is, the state of emergency is basically a military approach. For me, asking for military support in terms of arms and ammunitions and personnel or may be the use of drones which has been quite precise, can over militarise the fight against Boko Haram insurgency.
Are you saying that dialogue remains the viable option in dealing with the problem?
Carrot and stick approach, dialogue and military approach should be concurrently used to curb the violence in the North.
How should Nigeria act since it is suspected that these terrorists have some foreign backing, especially in terms of arms movement?
That is why I said the use of intelligence is very important. Number one, the United States of America and other countries that have faced similar terrorists crises, should share intelligence report with Nigeria on how they deal with it. Secondly, you need international collaboration between the neighbouring countries like Niger Republic, Cameroon and Chad. So I think if those two approaches, the use of cross martial intelligence and international boundary collaboration efforts between Nigeria and neighbouring countries can be capitalised on, I want to believe that that will help in the fight against insurgency.
How much damage do you think the insurgency has done to Nigeria in terms of our standing in the international arena?
It has done quite a big damage in political terms, in economic terms, in social terms, in humanitarian terms. In the diplomatic world, countries choose to relate with countries that are peaceful, countries that are economically viable and countries that are politically stable. So, in the area of diplomacy, it has done damage to Nigeria’s image. But if you look at it critically, Nigeria is a big country, the giant of Africa so to speak. The recent rebasing data shows that Nigeria has the highest GDP in Africa. So, no country can just say that because of Boko Haram, we will not relate with Nigeria. But if you look at it well, countries will still have to calculate their steps in relating with Nigeria particularly when it comes to the North eastern part of the country. So, they will have to be careful and embassies around the world will continue to issue warnings to their citizens on how or when not to go to Nigeria.
The weapons being used by members of Boko Haram give the impression that there are international armed dealers supplying weapons to these terrorists. It also gives the impression that some countries give tacit support to Boko Haram in terms of finance and logistics. What is your view on that?
Yes, it is an inevitable conclusion given the nature, dynamics and character of attacks ascribed to Boko Haram so far. The sophistication of the weapons calls for concern. Light must be beamed on the potential sources of funds for these activities.
Looking at the threat posed by Boko Haram and the tension it is already creating ahead 2015 election, do you think these were the factors that the American think-tank which predicted Nigeria’s disintegration in 2015 thought of?
The situation now is what we might call a precarious case. Predictions and analysis ascribed to the American think-tank might have been based on some projections based on the dynamics of politics in Nigeria. But the American think-tank has denied mentioning disintegration. I think Nigerians can prevent a self-fulfilling prophecy of calamity by taking things easy. Politicians in particular must put the interest of the nation above that of the individuals. 2015 will come and go if the political class and their followers play by the rules of the game.
Why is it difficult for the Nigerian government to either secure its borders or seek the assistance of our neighbours, especially Cameroon, Chad and Niger in dealing with Boko Haram menace?
The problem started with the arbitrary partitioning of Africa by the colonialists. It began in 1884 with the Berlin Conference, and solidified after the Brussels Conference of 1890 where conscious efforts were made to effectively occupy Africa. African former empires and ethnic groups were divided in the most arbitrary way. So, colonially imposed borders contribute to ineffective control of borders. Some ethnic groups largely exist in Nigeria but have kith and kin in other neighboring countries which easily facilitate the abuse of inter-country travels and migration.
What do you think would have informed Zimbabwean President, Robert Mugabe’s aspersion on Nigeria as a very corrupt country, recently?
President Mugabe only capitalised on the general stereotype that Nigerians are generally corrupt. It is not a big issue because in reality most Nigerians are not corrupt and even within Zimbabwe there are some who would say President Mugabe is a pot calling the kettle black.
With Mugabe’s derision of Nigeria, how much of influence do you think Nigeria still has in Africa?
President Mugabe’s comment was just a passing comment. It has no weight whatsoever.
What is your assessment of Nigeria’s domestic politics as it concerns the 2015 election? Is there anything to fear given that the country is split between North and South- South and each of these regions wants to produce the next president of the country? What is the implication if any of these regions fails in 2015?
The problem now is complicated because President Jonathan has not declared his intention to run. I think in the name of peace and unity, elite and leaders from both regions should either prevail on the president not to run or persuade the North not to demand for presidency by all means. On a personal note, I would say the North should produce the next president but this is just an opinion.
Let’s look at Russia/Ukraine standoff. Does it have the potential of a Third World War?
The Third World War has been a mirage. When you look at the First World War between 1913 and 1918, the Second World War, 1939 and 1945, Third World War has been a mirage. Many people even said that the U.S.A/ Iraq war was a Third World War. But the truth of the matter is that the circumstances and trend of what can be called a World War has changed over the time. Those two first wars (the First World War and Second World War) took place when most parts of the world were still under one empire; I mean colonialism. But if you look at it very well, you will discover that a World War is very difficult to conceptualise. For instance, the Russia/Ukraine crisis is seen basically as a European crisis. But if the United States of America and may be the Unied Nations as a result of what is called collective security, now say that we are going to discipline Russia for annexing Crimea, because what Russia is doing is a modern way of annexation, there could be reaction on the part of the United Nations. But I want to believe that Russia/Crimea crisis will definitely fade out in time.
Nigeria has not taken a position on crisis. Is that the right move?
What Nigeria has done so far is to take a decision that is similar to the non-aligned movement of the Cold War era. That is to say that we are neither for Russia nor Ukraine. It’s like basically a European crisis that can be resolved by the European Union or United Nations. So I think Nigeria is just being strategic in delving into what is not African in nature. And you know that the foreign policy of Nigeria centres more on Africa. Africa is the centre piece of Nigeria’s foreign policy. So it is less concerned about what goes on in Europe, unless and of course if what goes on in Europe affects the corporate existence of Africa or Nigeria as a country.
You lived and studied in the UK. Why did you return to Nigeria given that many Nigerians would have thought that the prospect for you was higher there?
Thank you for this question. Many have asked me the same question. The truth remains that there is no place like home. I think and believe that my education, experience and exposure would make greater impact in Nigeria and Africa. Of course, I still need to relate with my contacts abroad. I still travel when necessary. We live in globalised world.
