Boko Haram, Nigeria and the US…Time for a re-think on the US intervention…
The news is rife with the Terrorist Designations of Boko Haram Commander Abubakar Shekau, Khalid al-Barnawi and Abubakar Adam Kambar. In a Media Note dated 21st June, the Office of the Spokesperson for the US department of state announced that following consultations with the Departments of Justice and Treasury, the Department of State has designated these three (3) BKH leaders as Specially Designated Global Terrorists under section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224.
This action itself is not news, the whole world saw it coming and knew it was going to happen soon. What is news is the zeal with which the Nigerian nation, its leadership and people, welcomed this development. For the average man on the street, it is seen as the final end of the menace of BKH. With the embarassing failure of leadership in governance, it is well understood why the citizens will welcome this development. After all, many innocent lives have been terminated in their prime with the government response being to hold its arms in despair that the problem defies the ability of its security entities to resolve. for the government, the intervention of the US might have been taken to mean that the government responsibility to solve this uprising and threat to the Nigerian state is now that of the US. What a blunder!
As for me, the issue here is more than the designation of these three (3) people as persons of interests but what happens after? For those who could read between the lines, this action by the department of state means that these three individuals, wherever they may be found, are susceptible to elimination by the US forces and arsenals. In essence, if Abubakar Shekau were to be found in Maiduguri, the US can send its Special Forces or drones to eliminate him there. this is what worries me and unfortunately is of no concerns to our so called Leaders. In fact, to further encourage the US in doing this, the letter from the Nigerian Embassy in New York failed to remind the US government of the territorial sovereignity of the Nigerian State and hence warn it to desist from any act that will violate such. Rather the letter only urged the US government to ensure the safety of neighbours of the targets, whatever is done to deal with them, on the soils of Nigeria.
To put my fears in context, supposing these targets were members of the IRA or ETA, would the US have done the same and could it dream of sending drones on the UK or Spanish soils in order to eliminate such targets? I do not think so. Of more importance than drone attacks is the history regarding US interventions in various conflicts over the years. This history informs that once the US steps in, it never leaves. Evidences of this abound in South Korea, Japan, Afghanistan and Iraq where the US has sort of permanent camps for its forces.
We need to be wary of this greek gift by the US, afterall the US is not a charity and will do nothing except it furthers its interests. This is the more reason why despite the killings going on in Syria, the US has not thought it fit to intervene – that uprising will not impact oil prices! So the question is, what is in this for the US? Apart from the instability to the Nigerian State and the remote potential to affect crude oil eportation to the US, the immediate need of the US is to establish an African command. This has been on the table for a long time and the US has been seeking such opportunity to establish a base where it can host its Aircraft Carriers and launch attacks against targets perceived as enemies of the US.
It was President Bush that first announced plans for formation of a new U.S. military command based in Africa when he promised AFRICOM would “strengthen our security cooperation with Africa and create new opportunities to bolster the capabilities of our partners in Africa.” However, critics of the plan said the only thing AFRICOM would do was to bolster the U.S. government’s hold on Africa’s resources, especially oil and as such resisted the plan for AFRICOM to be based in Africa. This led to the establishment of the command in Europe. The US State Department views Nigeria as a “failed state,” and wants to make sure oil keeps flowing. I would think that the intervention in this BKH upsurge provides the US the opportunity it’s been looking for to establish a permanent command on our soil. We cannot afford this to happen and should resist it.
The Yorubas are full of wisdom, wisdom most often reflected in their parables. One of these parables says ” Ole ni oun o ba e so ile re, o je fura!”. Literally interpreted, it means that when a thieve offers to help you to watch over your house, you need to be wary. We need to be wary of this US offer. It is time for our government to be emphatic to the US that its presence on our soil is not welcome. We saw what happened to Iraq – Eleven years of US intervention in that state destroyed it totally and even with the commencement of the US troops withdrawal, bombs are still being detonated in that country. We do not want the same for our nation. The message to the US is simply that it can eliminate the BKH threat, whichever way it wants, but should not destroy any other Nigerian live in the process or step unto our soil to commit suc.
Bimbo Bakare
It gladdens my heart to read today that the Nigerian Government now think the same way I thought. Reading the article posted at http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2012/08/16/Nigerian-government-opposed-to-Boko-Haram-terror-listing-by-US/UPI-25441345121670/ it seems Nigerian Leadership now sees that there is much more at play in curbing the dangers that Boko Haram is than adding to the woes by allowing the US to step into the issues. Nigeria’s problems must be solved by Nigeria and Nigerians.