Boko Haram: Who Pays The Piper?

Boko Haram: Who Pays The Piper?

  It was the year 2002, a Muslim scholar Mohammed Yusuf ignited a flame, the flame of Jama'atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda'awati Wal-Jihad (people committed to the propagation of the prophet's teachings and jihad). While the name might sound strange to many, Boko haram will not be strange to citizens or aliens.  The flame is now the wild fire that has consumed ferociously our peace, in the Northern Nigeria and mocked our government. While we precariously had the former in most parts of the country, the latter is a constant occurrence we don’t need a terrorist group to point out. Our government is a toothless bulldog, a clawless cat and a fangless snake. Clueless and useless.      

  As a movement, the object of boko haram has been obscure, and from some points its membership. As it stands today, I doubt if it has any objective. To Sheik Yusuf, his was a movement against western technology, a secular state and boko.  However after the uprising and infamous execution of the self styled founder, its objective as changed as fast as its modus operandi. As John Campbell notes that "the context of Boko Haram is easier to talk about than Boko Haram itself”, the only thing most Nigerians know about the group is its name, and what it does. As to why it does these things, who are behind it and its target (if it’s not to wipe out Nigeria), no one knows. Or those who know are not telling.

  While there are excesses of theories and postulations on boko haram, some lines of reason remain unexplored. Many of these theories point in similar direction. First are those who consider the scourge a product of government failure, unequal resources distribution and educational backwardness in the region. Mallam Lamido Sanusi would be in this school of thought, alongside Nasir el Rufai. According to Nigerian analyst Chris Ngwodo. "The group itself is an effect and not a cause; it is a symptom of decades of failed government and elite delinquency finally ripening into social chaos."

   This line of reason is not without some merits. Yusuf won many people to his group by speaking against police injustice, government corruption and preaching a glorious Islamic state that would eradicate all this (looks attractive even to me). A report on Nigeria by Human Rights Watch notes "corruption is so pervasive in Nigeria that it has turned public service for many into a kind of criminal enterprise. Graft has fueled political violence, denied millions of Nigerians access to even the most basic health and education services, and reinforced police abuses and other widespread patterns of human rights violations” Also An estimated 70 percent of the population lives on less than $1.25 a day (its realistically worst than that).  And from Nasir El-Rufai; "Indeed, most of the apparent ethnic and religious crises in the North, and the youth violence and criminality in the south, can be linked to increasing economic inequality."

  However, as attractive as this line of reason is, it is defaultive. Very defaultive. While it is true that north has been less developed than the other parts, only the northern leaders can be blamed. And boko haram has not called for their heads. From Balewa, Gowon, Murtala, Shagari, Buhari, Babangida, Abacha, Yaradua, northerners have ruled more than all other tribes put together. Should Ibo people be bombed for the decision of northern leaders to neglect their people? In terms of resources distribution, in a state like Nigeria, what is written on paper has little bearing on reality. Those states that get more allocation, has it really affected the standard of living of the people? Not better than it has in Northern Nigeria. With people like Ibori and Alams in-charge, those allocations are meaningless. Governor Sanusi should know this. Besides why should states that are directly affected by the various wrongs that are perpetuated by multi national oil companies get same as those that are suffer nothing? A chongai man plants on his farm, he harvests. Our Ogoni friend dares not plant, oil spillage bans such activities, yet they are to get the same in allocation?

  Alright, assuming but not conceding that the problem is an effect of the many notorious problems facing the Nigerian people, how do the activities of boko haram remedy this? In the Niger delta case, attacks were targeted at government officials and oil companies, the root cause. However, boko haram though has targeted government institutions seems to be more in conflict with the people than the government. The group has killed more of masses than elites, where, therefore is the difference between boko haram and our criminal justice system which will “punish somebody for stealing a goat or less--but a governor steals billions of naira, and gets off scot-free," (Jean Herskovits, an expert on Nigerian politics.) Ironically, Sanusi who advocates against unequal allocation gave millions to victims of boko haram bombing in Kano as a corporate social responsibility, what becomes of the victims in Borno and other places?

  Before you consider the bombings an act against the inequality of resources or revolt against corruption, consider the questions, how does the Christmas day bombings protest against government incompetency? Does it tilt the public opinion for or against boko haram? Does it elicit masses support for the group as to justify it being a pro-masses movement? Do you fight for the masses by slaying them while those responsible for the problems are untouched?

   The second school of thought is of those who see it as a product of religious fanatism and ethnocentric craze.

 

Some experts argue that the struggle between Christians and Muslims over political power is a significant factor in the country's insecurity problems. This sectarian violence, particularly in the central part of the country where the north and south collide, has killed more than 14,000 people since 1999, according to Human Rights Watch.  Alex Thurton wrote in Foreign Policy that a country with a history of polarization between the majority-Muslim north and the majority-Christian south, Boko Haram's message is a polarizing one at the national level and within the Muslim community."

 Many contend that religious extremism is evident throughout Nigeria, including among Christians, hence boko haram spills from extremism. In this school, attention is usually drawn to the Jonathan candidacy which led to a rise in the activities of the group because it was an usurping of the tenure of a northern candidate, by zoning. "The Nigerian voices heard most loudly around the world, and in Nigeria itself, are Christian and secular, reinforcing the sense among Nigeria's Muslims that they are invisible," G. Pascal Zachary writes in the Atlantic. Therefore boko haram is a protest against the ‘invincibility’.

  However this does not totally explain why boko haram has carried out many attacks that left Muslims as prone as Christians. Many of the attacks were carried out in such places and manner that it can’t but be noticed that the object was maximum casualty, be it male or female, Muslim or Christian. By some peoples count, boko haram has killed more Muslims than Christian. Even at its nucleus stage, members of the group alienated themselves from the Muslim community, which shows that the groups’ aversion cuts across religious sentiments. Therefore, boko haram is not a completely a product of religious fanatism.

  Finally, the last school is most controversial, those who see boko haram as a means to an end: making Nigeria ungovernable or pushing Nigeria to division? This school is more plausible because in the incoherence that has characterized the group’s actions is a little purpose the sharp witted can deduce, to invoke provocation. There is a purpose! But whose purpose? In the words of Kasshim Shettima, Boko Haram has become a franchise that anyone can buy into. It's something like a Bermuda Triangle, (and northern leaders are buying into the franchise to make Nigeria ungovernable for Jonathan, so some claim). Analysts such as Lubeck and CFR's Campbell, say it is unclear which attacks are actually the work of Boko Haram. Some of the acts may be the work of criminals looking to capitalize on the mayhem (some of the targets supposedly attacked by Boko Haram have been banks, for instance) or perpetrated by other groups hostile to the state and also by disgruntled politicians. At one time or the other, fingers have been pointed at notable northern politicians like Buhari, Babangida and Atiku amidst others. The question is what do these men benefit from such actions? To my mind, they are providing an excuse for Jonathan should his government fail, if they are behind these actions.

          Moreover, a line of thinking not formerly exploited is the problem-reaction-solution theory (coined by David Icke). The theory postulates the creation of a problem by government officials, provoking a reaction from the people and the same government officials providing a solution (which is an act that has been the aim) In the Nigerian case, could the powers at the topmost have an interest in these bombings? Relying on statements of northern elites, the escalated bombings will serve many purposes to the interest of the current regime. Aside from providing a valid excuse should this government fail (his camp has harped on the distraction of boko haram), it garners for him public sympathy which he really needs. Most importantly, the manner of this bombings show that far from being random occurrences, they are calculated to provoke reprisal attacks which might lead to division! As at when last i checked, a division would be most pleasing to oil producing states (use your tongue to count your teeth)! President Jonathan himself said there are boko ‘haramists’ in his government, meaning he knows them but till date none has been named, why? General Azazi claimed there were boko haram funders in PDP, heard the President warned him to desist from such talks. If boko haram drives the country into turmoil prior to the next election and election cannot hold........... (Fill in the blank spaces).

          An analysis of these thoughts show us one thing: the cause and purpose of boko haram’s current aggression remains shredded in obscurity, however, failure to pin a purpose can only mean one thing; a group of bloodthirsty maniacs with means holding the country to ransom. I am disinclined to this view. The group do not agitate for any coherent and achievable goals like Niger Delta militants. There demands continue to vary. They seem to carry out acts and find reasons for it later. They have figured they are above the law, and they ride as they wish.

          Epilogue! As the saga continues to unfold, we can only patiently wait for boko haram to tell us what it is the real reason behind there actions , if there is any at all. Either in this season or another (if there would be), the purpose of  boko haram might one day come to light. End of story.