Boko Haram: Unity, not political opportunism

With the February 2015 election on the horizon, political imperatives loom increasingly large in Nigeria. There is perhaps no more pertinent example than the fevered politicisation of the brutal Boko Haram insurgency. The decision by certain politicians to focus their energies on criticising the

Federal Government, rather than helping to build a united front against the terrorists themselves, may seem like shrewd political maneuvering. At best, it is deeply misguided; at worst, such shortsighted tactics promise only to create further division – playing straight into the hands of the extremists.

Boko Haram’s strategy embodies the ‘divide and rule’ approach to warfare. The group seeks to establish divisions between men and women, Christians and Muslims, Northerners and Southerners. By allowing themselves to be seduced by Boko Haram’s lexicon of hatred, and driving a consistently political narrative about the extremists’ activities, those that seek to politicise the group are doing the terrorists’ work for them. It merely solidifies the divides Boko Haram seeks to entrench.

The recently released Global Terrorism Index 2014 Report highlighted the significance of the threat posed by Boko Haram. This is no localised threat – the group has become one of the terror “Big Four”, along with Islamic State, Al Qaeda and the Taliban in terms of fatalities for which it is responsible. Now more than ever, there is a pressing need for the creation of a united, cross-party coalition against terror in Nigeria.

The Federal Government would be the first to recognise the scale of the challenge the Boko Haram insurgency has posed. It has faced a tactical, well-armed opponent in inhospitable terrain, with foot soldiers who are unafraid to use the most brutal means possible to cause maximum devastation. From suicide bombings in schools to beheadings, barbarism is its chosen modus operandi. It is a classic example of asymmetric warfare.Yet politicians have repeatedly focused on cheap political wins for their own ends, rather than a critical national victory for the Nigerian people. Examples of such politicisation abound.

Serious questions continue to be asked about the exploitation of the #BringBackOurGirls movement, which drew worldwide attention to the plight of the abducted Chibok schoolgirls. While the group is supposedly apolitical, its often overtly anti-Federal Government messaging has called into question its political neutrality.

Recent comments by an APC leader, Audu Ogbeh, did little to assuage concerns. At an event to mark the presidential declaration of Muhammadu Buhari, Ogbeh said: “We commend the #BringBackOurGirls movement led by members of this party; we thank them for their commitment to Nigeria because they remain the only living evidence that Nigeria has a conscience.”

The problem is not the fact that the movement is linked to the APC. It is that it increasingly appears that the group has not been open about its political affiliation, and has used its campaign, and the abduction of the Chibok schoolgirls, as a Trojan horse to deliver a decidedly political message.

The same could be said of the American University of Nigeria Foundation, which has been raising money to provide scholarships for the Chibok schoolgirls who managed to escape their captors. While the aim of the foundation is noble, concerns have been raised about the degree to which the trauma the girls have faced is being used for political gain. Atiku Abubakar, a high-ranking APC politician is the university’s founder.

In a further example of Trojan horse trickery, an email to the International Criminal Court, ICC, was recently circulated on Nigerian news websites, supposedly written by Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau. The letter sought to draw the ICC’s attention to alleged links between Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan and Boko Haram.  The email, which had clearly emanated from Jonathan’s political opponents, was a farcical attempt to politicise a deeply serious issue –Boko Haram’s financing. Little attempt was made to create even a veneer of credibility – for example, the letter included Shekau’s supposed email address at ‘Boko Haram HQ’ (‘bokoharamghq247a@gmail.com ’) .The political motive behind the letter was clear – two months earlier, a Nigerian civil society organisation had written to the ICC’s Chief Prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, regarding reports that high-ranking politicians were sponsoring Boko Haram.

A further tactic the APC has deployed is critiquing the Federal Government’s response to Boko Haram, while denying it the resources it requires to boost its capacity to tackle the insurgency. There are serious questions to be asked about the party’s underlying motivation in opposing the $1 billion loan requested to expand the Nigerian military’s defence capabilities.

Nigeria has reached a critical point in the fight against the Boko Haram insurgency. In the same way that Nigerians came together to defeat another deadly pandemic, Ebola, establishing a united front against terror is now imperative. It is, quite literally, a matter of life or death. Politicians from across the political spectrum need to lead the way in this regard. In the battle against an enemy whose driving force is the creation of division, unity can be the only path to victory – something all parties urgently need to recognise.

-- Vanguard News