The Federal Executive continues to act as MEND's defender-in-chief while simultaneously insisting it is not doing so. In this article from NEXT, the presidential spokesman is quoted saying that rushing to convict MEND in the court of public opinion could compromise the investigation if the security agencies only focused on the MEND angle.
This actually makes sense, and if this was what the president said, I would not have criticized him. However, this is NOT what the president said. Goodluck Jonathan said MEND did not do it, and (worse) said he knew MEND did not do it because he is from the Niger-Delta and he knows the people of the Niger-Delta would not do it because they like the government and know that doing it would compromise the government's support of the Niger-Delta ...
... which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. As I said in my initial reaction, it is both dangerous and stupid to equate the actions of a specific militia group, MEND, with the thoughts and actions of the millions of Nigerian citizens of Niger-Delta heritage.
The assumption that the actions of five army majors reflected the decisions of an entire ethnic group was the source of much bloodshed in the 1960s. Likewise, towns like Odi and Zaki-Biam have paid the penalty for similar assumptions of collective guilt. The British colonial regime was also a practitioner of collective punishment.
Jonathan showed himself to be much like his predecessors (in both the post-colonial and colonial eras) who had a tragic tendency to impute the actions of a few to their entire ethnic, religious or regional group.
Let me digress for a moment.
No one elected any of the organizations that claim to speak on behalf of Nigerian ethno-cultural communities. No one elected Ohaneze or Igboezue, Afenifere or the Yoruba Council of Elders, the Arewa Consultative Forum or the Northern Political Leaders Forum. No one voted for MASSOB, MEND, Boko Haram or the OPC.
These are all self-selected groups of like-minded individuals, who insist their private thoughts are the thoughts of entire regions of Nigeria.
Meanwhile, we can never hold a credible election because the political class (these pressure groups inclusive) is scared to put their ideas (or lack thereof) to free, fair, substantively democratic tests. Even the supposedly "free and fair" elections of June 1993 were manipulated from start to finish by the Babangida regime; the regime created the parties it wanted, and engineered the nominations of the candidates it wanted.
It is astonishing to see so many people claim to speak on behalf of groups of Nigerians when in fact Nigerians as a whole have never had the chance to express what we really think about issues.
Elections (in theory) are not simply about picking one man over another; if both men offer credible, but varying solutions to specific problems, our votes would be the indicator of which of the policy options we prefer. But aside from the lack of democracy, our politics are a policy vaccuum; no substantive issue is ever debated or decided. Heck, we are still struggling with issues that first reared their heads in the 1950s, and which we have made no effort to resolve till today. You cannot distinguish two politicians or two parties on issues like electricity and reform of the Nigerian Police Force; you do not even know what their position on the issues are, probably because they have no positions on the issues.
But back to the topic.
The presidential spokesman went on to say:
“(The president) thus considered it a gratuitous insult for anyone to claim that it was done by MEND, or had anything to do with the Niger Delta. This is even more so, he said, since government was in touch with the leadership of MEND (all of whom had renounced violence), and they all agree that the organisation had nothing to do with the blasts.
A"gratuitous insult"? to whom? To MEND? To the president? Or (worst of all) to the Niger-Delta?
MEND has been using explosives to blow up pipelines in the Niger-Delta for years. They have also attacked and killed soldiers, policemen and civilians (the Human Rights Watch website has copious information on their attacks).
MEND launched an explosive attack on the city of Lagos.
MEND planted explosive devices outside a Vanguard-sponsored post-Amnesty conference in Warri. And just like the Independence Day blasts, MEND issued a warning before the explosives went off. Again, just like in Abuja on the 1st of October, the authorities in Warri did not react to MEND's warning.
None of the above facts proves that MEND was behind the Independence Day blasts. But at the very least, it is not "a gratuitous insult" for anyone to suspect MEND ...
... and that is without even considering the fact that MEND gave warning of the Abuja Independence Day bomb blasts, and accepted responsibility immediately after the bombs went off (same as happened after the Warri and Lagos attacks).
So, why is it a "gratuitous insult" to suspect MEND?
Perhaps it is a "gratuitous insult" to the president? Why should it be? Why does he identify himself with MEND? Human Rights Watch has gathered a lot of data about the connections between local and national politicians and the various "militant" factions in the Niger-Delta. The presidential spokesman said the government had been in touch with various leaders of MEND, and Jonathan invited a group of them to Abuja as part of his campaign to assure the country MEND was not involved. On a different day, we can discuss the appropriateness of these connections, but even if we take it as it is, President Jonathan's remarks become even more unfortunate. All he did was draw the attention of everyone in Nigeria to the fact that he has a positive opinion of MEND ... which means, as I have said in previous blog posts, that any outcome to the investigation that exonerates MEND will be immediately subject to conspiracy theories, even if the outcome is factually correct.
You can't talk like this, and act like this, if you are the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. At least pretend.
For goodness sakes, there are enough people in Nigeria who blame entire religious, ethnic and regional groups for the actions of a few individuals. Our country has been wracked with "communal violence" for years, testament to the fact that our political leaders have failed to rally us past these self-defeating internal prejudices.
The first duty of a Nigerian president in the aftermath of an event like the Abuja blasts is to insist that all citizens focus their anger only on the guilty parties, and then assure the public that you will catch those guilty parties, whoever they are. I have no idea why President Jonathan thinks it is a good idea to continue tying MEND to the Niger-Delta, much less why he is acting as though he is their defence lawyer.
The president's spokesman say they were in contact with leaders of MEND, and the leaders of MEND said they didn't do it.
Wow.
Gee.
The leaders of MEND said "We didn't do it," so the government concludes there is no reason to investigate?
This is the stupidest thing they have said to date.
You are supposed to investigate, and come up with hard evidence to either confirm their protestations of innocence or to expose them for having perjured themselves!!!
Haba!
President Jonathan's position would not make sense even if ex-MEND leader Henry Okah's accusation had never been made or had been disproved instantly. Even so, you don't have to believe Okah (I don't believe any of them) to know Jonathan's exoneration of MEND has no evidentiary foundation.
Jonathan is exposing himself to the accusation he is conducting a politically-biased investigation designed to come to a politically favourable conclusion from the president's perspective. The government has cast a shadow of suspicion on Jonathan's poltical opponents, especially former dictator Ibrahim Babangida (who is the chief suspect in the 1980s bombing death of journalist Dele Giwa). Even if Babangida was guilty,the way the President has gone about things opens vast space for Babangida's campaign to accuse him of using the tragedy as a political tool.
I don't understand it. Who is advising the President? Or are these incoherent, self-defeating interventions all the president's ideas?
No comments:
Post a Comment