Governance

by

Fundamentalism and democracy in Nigeria

What is the underlying issue driving the state of insecurity in Nigeria: is it terrorism by Boko Haram or ethnic nationalism or the economics. Ethnic nationalism has been defined by security theorists as the ‘clash of the peoples,’ everywhere and in the case of Nigeria it may indeed drive Nigeria’s politics for generations to come. With Nigeria’s troubled past of ethnic clashes I believe ethnic nationalism is the underlying driver due to lack of fair distribution of economic and political resources which seem to roll back the gains made by Nigeria insofar as the democratization process is concerned. So if there is the inability of the Nigerian successive governments (note I use successive governments) to deal fairly with the economic and political interests of ethnic groups this may indeed lead to ethnic regionalism. However, ethnic nationalism has been masked by terrorism. Terrorism first has masked other different ideas such as ethnic nationalism in an era of political and economic struggles in Nigeria. Secondly, it has masked the weakness of state institutions. Thirdly, it also masked the role of Islam in Nigeria which has resulted in Boko Haram challenging the legitimacy of the State.

Militant

Militant

Terrorist attacks are undermining the security and safety of many Nigerians living in the northeastern part of the country. It certainly undermines its democracy, since the government can’t seem to provide security for its citizens. The insecurity in Nigeria is very severe, just like any war zone in other parts of the globe, so says a political risk map by a U.K risk management firm. Nigeria, one of Sub-Saharan Africa’s leading oil producers, is afflicted with an outbreak of political violence, insistent ethnic tensions, and a hazy legal and regulatory condition. Nigeria has suffered a steep deterioration in its political and security environment. The federal government is at war with an Islamist militant insurgency – Boko Haram – in the northern region of the country and terrorist attacks are widespread, undermining the security situation and escalating sectarian divides. Foreign investments often use political risk to assess whether or not to participate in businesses in a country. On a scale from 1 to 5, with 5 being the most risky, Nigeria ranks 5 and many foreigners have been kidnapped and some killed by Islamist militant insurgents. Fighting terrorism in a democracy is not easy, particularly for a country like Nigeria with many ethnic groups and a budding democracy. The government also may still be wary of its army. However, recently the Nigerian government had no choice but to involve the army in this fight by declaring marshal law in three states, where Boko Haram is very active. Although, prevalent corrupt practices and the weak capacity of the Nigerian government to push through reforms to make private-sector activity challenging has considerable impact on the prospects of development in the country. Hence, the country’s capacity to tackle the causes of terrorism in the country is greatly crippled.

There has being an exchange of relations between the Islamist and the security forces that has disrupted security in the region. This has created an environment of fear and uncertainty, changing the realities in the region. The continual exchange by security forces and the Islamist militants has ensured a resurgent insecurity and unsafe environment for residents of the Northern part of Nigeria, particularly Christians who have come under recurring attacks from the Islamist militants. The exchange has led to an intrusion of basic human rights in the region.

Explosions

Explosions

This security dilemma is scarcely exclusive to Nigeria. Many countries are faced with the questions on how to firmly hold onto democratic principles, civil liberties and freedom of movement even as those characteristics of societies make citizens more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Terrorism, which is defined as a “calculated use of violence or threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature and executed through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear” is a threat that no government has any idea of how to deal with and has tremendous impact on democratic principles. How does a government, any government, tackle the issues of terror within its territory? Providing security to its citizens without embellishing the rights of its citizens. This has been the challenge for many democracies particularly states with fledgling democracies. Nigeria has had several challenges with its political environment to address the threats from the terrorist group, Boko Haram, with little result, due to its vast ethnic divide. Even its military prowess can do little to lessen the dangers those cities in the northern part of Nigeria encounter, which are subject to unpredictable and unpreventable attacks by small nongovernmental actors like Boko Haram.

The Nigerian government has categorized the general insurgency in northern Nigeria as that driven by Boko Haram. Its foundation has been in the northeastern city of Maiduguri, in Borno state. Its leadership is associated with the Kanuri ethnic group, which Abubakar Shekau now leads, after the demise of Mohammed Yusuf at the hands of the Nigerian police. Shekau is the leader who communicates mostly with the aid of videos from an unknown location. Violence connected with his insurrection has been almost entirely directed against agencies of the Nigerian government, especially the police and the military, and Muslims who are seen as having sold out to the current administration. His insurgency has also attacked Christians living in the region. Over the past year, assaults on Christians have also increased, though it is usually unclear what group has actually carried them out. However, the attacks appear to be a war with the Nigerian government and with the fellow Muslims who participate in the present administration. The victims cut across the traditional ethnic divide.

The Nigerian government declared a state of emergency in three state most affected by these terrorist acts and this won enormous support in the political environment. The military has since claimed victory in apprehending several members of the militant group as well as destroying several camps in the region. However, considering the features of the militant group, it’s too early to assume that the region is secure from terrorist attacks, which are skillful at hiding and resurfacing at a later time. There is also concern about human rights abuses in the region for the Nigerian security agency in tackling the insurgency. Many claims are recorded that supports the atrocity of the military to regular citizens residing in the region. Nigeria’s heavy-handed military has escalated the conflict. The Joint Task Force is accused of using indiscriminate violence in retaliated attacks. Amnesty International criticized unlawful arrests, extra-judicial killings and unexplained disappearances. But that has been a major challenge for democracies to tackle terrorism. And Nigeria is no exemption. The Nigerian government is, however, already handling victory to terrorism by sacrificing human rights and the rule of law to fighting terrorism. As these features are essential to democracy everywhere.

Nonetheless, for the Nigerian government to effectively curb terrorists’ acts, it has to address the cause of the terrorist attacks by first dissuading disaffected groups from employing terror acts to achieve their goals. This can be achieved mainly through human development in the region. The Northern Nigeria is the most impoverished region in the country with a 76% poverty rate. The illiteracy level is the highest in the country as well as unemployment rates in the region. In addition, the government has to develop state capacity to prevent and tackle terrorism, which compliments human rights and the rule of law.

Article written by Afis Alao and Denis Bogere.

Related articles
by

Culture the Heart of Africa

When I blogged on the importance of elections a number of you challenged me on that and raised the question of the economics and culture. Setting aside the quality of African democracy, in relationship to elections one ought to consider the political, economic and cultural history of Africa’s dilemma with democratic rule. And as rightfully so questions were raised whether Africa had a viable alternative to democracy and whether Africa needs it, hence where did Africa go wrong.

I look at democracy as encompassing the economics and politics and culture. Democracy is a quintessentially contested issue as it is evident from the responses. How democracy is understood and interpreted is an issue that is up for intense discussion and I will leave it for your own conclusions. To me I see democracy as a culture and culture is a receptor in which different elements or variables such as the form of government people want can be plugged, and that does not mean that the variables will work. Africa’s tragedy as it relates with democracy starts right at its independence from colonial rule.

Present day African States at some point in time were empires, kingdoms and chiefdoms that had their traditional political, economic and social structures that made them independent and autonomous. However on the eve of independence of African countries from their colonizers these traditional structures or institutions were deemed archaic and seen as obstacles to the newly independent nation-states. As a result wrangling between various ethnic groups and allied interests over the fate of the newly independent states in the post colonial order produced various regimes on the continent from Authoritarianism, Military Rule, Neopatrimonialism, and “Big Men” regimes of the likes of Gnassingbe Eyadema – Togo, Idi Amin Dada – Uganda, Jean-Bedel Bokassa – CAR and Mobutu Sese Seko – [Zaire] Congo and the list goes during the 1960’s, 70’s and 80’s and now to illegal electoral democracies and so-called hybrids.

It should be noted that these entities prior to their dismantling had political, economic and social administrative power to govern. They had their own courts, ability to collect tax from their people and deep ethnic cleavages that provided legitimacy for the kings and chiefs to govern. In the new modern state kingships were regulated to cultural figure heads without political, economic and administrative power. After four decades of post colonial governance in Africa as the map below from the Economist indicates most of the African countries are weak nation states.

African Democracy Rating 2011

The implication being that if you’re a kin observer of history it should not take long to realize that culture is and should be part of Africa’s ideological dispensation. Culture is a receptor in which different elements of various political and economic ideologies can germinate and each and every culture has one, although to the eye of a common observer this may not be apparent. Culture accepts or rejects given aspects of political and economic ideologies.

The failure of earlier leaders and yes to a certain extent we; to look at kingdoms or culture as a means of addressing the political, economic challenges of African solely lie on our feet. Basically we started from scratch in building institutions in Africa yet we had kingdoms and due to their long traditions already had a culture that had habits and practices or political culture that current institutions lack.

In the end Tradition and Modernity are not antithetical to each other and we should be ready to use these institutions that the common man identifies with to curve out an African Ideology that at its core meets the developmental needs of the nation-state and must work for working families. Otherwise the experiment of nation-state so far as proven to be a challenge because it hasn’t delivered on its promise. In fact Thabo Mbeki’s Letter on the need for an African Renaissance at its core speaks of an African Ideological dispensation deep rooted in our culture that yes recognizes the progress made in modern times but also looks at how our cultural heritage can be used to spur growth and development and also protect those gains if any.