FULANI HERDSMEN AND THE NIGERIAN STATE: What Next?

By

Kabir Ilyasu Wali 

Opinions shared on-line which seem naively to equate Dan-Fodio’s jihad with the ongoing insurgency is intended to diminish all chances of peaceful resolution the government is currently pursuing. While there is considerable merit in recognizing political reality, there are times when politicians and officials must lead rather than follow. Telling people what they want to hear, that our President is of Fulani stock and somehow is responsible for the spate of ongoing mayhem is cheap and demeaning as well as insulting our capacity to understanding. The prognosis inevitably is a failure because it lacks any verifiable evidence to stand the truth.

Voices far and near urging the abandonment of government stand on insurgency are no longer politically correct. The existing bipartisan consensus in favor of government’s war effort to contain insurgency can only attest to the truth.

So if the thesis “Hausa land, history and people yearning for freedom” is suggesting that Zamfara and Katsina were not part of Fulani dynasty therefore remained a siege as Fulani herders’ colony, why was Kano for example not subjected to similar treatment by the so-called Fulani herdsmen? What is striking here is that history was enlisted not in the service of the unity of the North, but in the service of some myopic, cheap and political blackmail. History will measure its blessings not by the extent of the square miles conquered by the Jihadist but by the beauty of its solidarity. Land to recall correctly was the issue when you interview people living in those states that enacted anti grazing law. There are more than two sides to the herdsmen debate. We recognized land, but ethnicity and religion is the other part.  Not surprising, no doubt to both sides (Insurgents and Government) in the negotiations, the failure and resumption of hostilities cannot be so far from the mark that they can be challenged plausibly. My concerns here is that the standard of proof of criminal conspiracy  requires proof beyond all reasonable doubt, otherwise such insinuations goes to portray lack of patrioticism and absolute denial of truth, as well as sabotaging the national security efforts.

It is relevant to recall that amongst history’s clearest lesson is that war has depressing tendency to emerge from significant miscalculation. The miscalculation can be rooted very substantially in the lack of respect for the quality of our leadership determination to rid the polity of insurgents. From my curious observations, there is agreement within the administration, including the States on war on terror. Public statements show that officials recognized the need to deal firmly with insurgents. We have equally noted the President conceding to viable State’s political leadership to continue dialoguing with insurgents on the expectations that the process can prosper in the future by signaling the willingness, even the eagerness to reengage the insurgents into their respective communities. Former President Umaru Yar’aduwa did that with the Niger Delta militants and it paid off.

I have on May 14th 2018 and July 9th 2019 respectively written on the topic as well as RUGA; Cow grazing, explaining the ongoing political ranting (cheche ku cheche) by politicians and their cohorts on the harm that they could cause for our collective psyche as well as our safety. This was before the 2019 elections that returned President Muhammadu Buhari to power. Today like then, it has been the “Fulani Herdsmen”. The war hawks have not relented, rather continued to hammer, with the support of media for the anti grazing laws where elites as we are witnessing have launched “the Great Fulani Hunt” that is characterized by harrowing atrocities committed not only to pastoral Fulani but to also Fulani settlers by State sponsored militia.

If state actually do possess rights as individuals do, then it is possible to imagine a society like the society of individuals. Every reference to aggression as in murder and every comparison of home and country or of personal liberty and political independence rely upon what is called domestic analogy, which takes the shape of a political society, the character of which is entirely accessible through such notions as crime and punishment, self defense, law enforcement and so on. This therefore brings me to warm that every conflict sponsored by a state, threatens the structure of that state’s society as a whole with collapse. Aggression challenges it directly and is much more dangerous because of the absence of legitimate police force. The rights of Fulani in the South-West region must be vindicated, for it is only by virtue of those rights that there is a society at all. If they cannot be upheld, those communities collapse into a state of war or is transferred into a state tyranny.

From this picture, following presumptions are thus;

a. The first is presumption in favor of Federal crackdown. Crackdown is important so that rights can be maintained and future aggressors deterred.

b. The victim of aggression fights in self defense. He isn’t only defending himself, for aggression is a crime against society as a whole. He fights in its name and not only in his own.

c. Other states can rightfully join the victim’s resistance, since all resistance is also law enforcement.

d. When fighting breaks out, there must always be someone responsible for deciding to break the peace of the society. Governor Akeredolu is the face in the South-West. Remember, no fighting can be just on both sides.

e. The paradigm as a whole is commonly defended in utilitarian terms: RESISTANCE TO AGGRESSION IS NECESSARY TO DETER FUTURE AGGRESSION.

Those sponsors of militants should be aware that once Otto von Bismarck remarked “Public opinion is only too ready to consider political relations and events in the light of those of civil law and private persons generally…..(this) shows a complete lack of understanding of political matters”. Would the South-West Governors be judged by history as the destroyer of peaceful co-existence of all Nigerians in the South-West? 

The government is fighting to reestablish the reign of law and to protect the liberties of all Nigerians. Acting by the  dictate of the constitution we are all are bound in duty. The letter of the law must not in supreme emergency obstruct those who are charged with its protection and enforcement. It would not be right or rational that the aggressor should gain one set of advantage by tearing up all laws because of the obvious advantage in numbers. Humanity as well as legality must be our guide.