Two events concentrated my mind last week – the escalating violence in Nigeria with its mounting human toll and the coup in Thailand.
On May 22, Al Jazeera, the Doha based broadcaster funded by the House of Thani, the ruling family of Qatar, had a story in its scroll bar, which said that “more than 100 people die in four attacks in 24 hours in Northern Nigeria.” The story was there all day.
There was also the story about Thailand where the military announced that it had taken control of the government after suspending the constitution. The coup followed months of political turmoil. Army chief, General Prayuth Chan-ocha, vowed to restore order and enact political reforms, ordered the cabinet to report to the military, suspended television broadcasting, banned political gatherings and placed a nationwide curfew.
Two days earlier, the army had imposed martial law and talks were held between the main political factions, but on May 22, key political figures, including opposition protest leader, Suthep Thaugsuban, and pro-government protest leader, Jatuporn Prompan, were taken away from the venue of the talks after troops sealed off the area.
Prayuth said he had taken over power because “of the violence in Bangkok and many parts of the country that resulted in loss of innocent lives and property, which was likely to escalate.”
One interesting thing is that there isn’t even a whimper from the “international community,” no condemnation of the putsch. If this had happened three years ago, the United States and Europe would have condemned in very strong language the action of the junta.
What happened in Thailand also evokes the memory of July 3, 2013, a day the Egyptian army chief, General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, removed President Mohamed Morsi from power and suspended the country’s constitution. In a few days, el-Sisi will transmute to a “civilian President” after spilling the blood of almost 4,000 Egyptians.
Again, the “international community” is looking the other way.
The circumstances that led to the overthrow of democratically elected governments in both countries may be different, so also the motives of the coup leaders. But the fact remains that Egypt is worse off today than when Morsi was in power, despite the life support in the form of billions of dollars from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Those who believe that the era of military governments was gone with the 20th century are deluded. More delusionary is also the impression that the West will fight against any attempt to overthrow a democratically elected government, no matter the circumstance.
What is happening in Nigeria today is a troubling indicator of the tenuous democratic project. The bickering and bad blood among the political elite will only exacerbate the crisis. The senseless waste of human lives will aggravate the already bad situation and make reconciliation difficult, if not impossible.
Granted, no Nigerian in his right senses will ever wish the military to return to power. I am also sure that the people of Thailand, which also has a history of military dictatorships just like Nigeria, never wished a return to military rule. But what happens when the political fissure becomes a gulf? What happens when the differences in the polity become irreconcilable?
Granted, President Goodluck Jonathan’s leadership capacity is suspect. The fact that he wants a second term in the face of obvious leadership deficiencies is the tragedy of our time. But there are democratically laid down rules of changing governments and I don’t know how many Nigerians will support Jonathan’s aspiration aside the Aso Rock leeches of today.
But everything should not be reduced to politics. Nigeria is in crisis. In fact, we have war on our hands and the president is overwhelmed and needs help. We need to salvage our country; but rather than doing that, we are creating situations that will make any military adventurer look like a saviour.
It is blood-chilling to think that Boko Haram has political backing. But it is inconceivable to imagine that the group could be acting without any strong political support. It is political support that makes it possible for them to get illicit funds. It is political support that makes it easy for Boko Haram to acquire weaponry.
There are people in this country who can exert influence on the Boko Haram terrorists the same way the Taliban government in Afghanistan had influence over the Osama Bin Laden leadership of Al-Qaida.
The leadership of the Muslim community in Nigeria has a moral obligation to intervene positively in the violence that has engulfed the country, particularly when the bombings are carried out by Muslims and the Boko Haram jihadists lean on Islam to justify their atrocities.
This is why Shehu Sani’s appeal to the Sultan of Sokoto, Alhaji Saad Abubakar, last week is perhaps the best noise that has been made by a Northerner in recent times.
Sani, in his letter to Abubakar, said: “As long as the Chibok girls continue to remain in captivity, it is not only the credibility of the federal government that is at stake but the moral perception of the nation and the relevance of your institution and influence is under question, and so also the image of all Muslims in Nigeria, irrespective of their verbal stance on the issue.
“Religious clerics, particularly in the North, should move beyond prayers and independently move further to reach out to the insurgents and amicably retrieve these girls via means that will guarantee their safe return.
“This option is an alternative to the use of force and the unavoidable consequences of it. The insurgents have consistently justified all their actions on religious grounds. As a spiritual leader you have a duty to engage them or intellectually confront them in line with divine teachings that promote and assert the imperatives of peace, dialogue and harmonious coexistence.”
It is mind-boggling that someone will deliberately detonate a bomb at the market square to kill and maim people who committed no crime against him. What kind of philosophy – religious, political or otherwise – would enamour someone to be so cruel and animalistic? Why are Northern religious and political leaders not showing enough outrage over the carnage perpetrated by their sons?
It is not enough to blame Goodluck Jonathan. Yes, he may not be fit for purpose but any other leader in his circumstance right now will also be overwhelmed. There is a grand conspiracy in the land but if this is a democracy, Nigerians should decide who governs them in 2015.
If the military capitalises on the insurgency and stages a comeback as they did in Egypt, and have now done in Thailand, it will be an ill wind that won’t blow anyone any good. Even if the military doesn’t strike, long after Jonathan had left the centre stage, the North will regret the grievous harm the sadistic insurgency waged by Boko Haram is causing the region.
Northern leaders need to step in now and rein in the dogs of war. They have the capacity to do that.