The government of former President Muhammadu Buhari, shortly after he took the oath of office at the Eagle Square on May 29 2015, directed the military to relocate to Borno as the theatre of operations where the insurgency hit the hardest. Earlier in his inaugural speech, he had told the country that his administration’s three-point agenda was going to be on economy, security, and corruption.
Sadly, the administration’s performance was eclipsed by the same insecurity it promised to eradicate.
Before Buhari’s administration, Nigeria, under former President Ebele Goodluck Jonathan was being ravaged by the insurgency in the North East of the country comprising Yobe, Adamawa Bauchi, Gombe, Taraba and Borno which was the epic centre of the war spearheaded by Boko Haram.
It was a relief of sorts when Buhari, a former general, contested the presidential elections and won. The excitement of his emergence was borne of the fact that his military background would be of good use to taking out the insurgents in a matter of months.
Eight years after his departure, the country is still grappling with pockets of attacks from the insurgents.
The insurgency, however, is one of the several security challenges the country is facing. There is banditry, which became more pronounced during Buhari’s government. kidnapping became an industry. Both young and old, male and female, public and government officials, including military personnel, were being kidnapped with billions of naira and millions of dollars paid in exchange for their release. The victims, in some cases, were killed, even after ransom payment and collection. Communal clashes, herders-farmers clashes, and extra-judicial killings among others were some of the security failures of the Buhari administration.
As President Bola Tinubu settles to make his appointments, competence should be the currency. He is not what this. But in the instant case of a National Security Adviser, NSA, there is a bigger conversation going on, with emphasis on a shift from appointing a former military officer to that office. Indeed, and without prejudice to their efforts, were military officers the only ones who possessed the franchise to deal with issues of national security, the unenviable move from bad to worse would have been avoided.
In the last seven years, according to the Nigerian Security Tracker, which is a project of the Council on Foreign Relations of the United States of America, an estimated 53,418 Nigerians lost their lives to one form of insecurity or the other.
A breakdown of the figures is as follows: South-West: 2,170 deaths (Ekiti – 109; Ogun – 507; Ondo – 340; Osun – 198; Oyo – 310; and Lagos – 706). South-South: 3,688 deaths (Akwa Ibom – 373; Bayelsa – 350; Cross River – 685; Delta – 720; Edo – 463; and Rivers – 1,097). South-East: 2,271:(Abia – 249; Anambra – 613; Ebonyi – 562; Enugu – 273; Imo – 574). North-Central, including the Federal Capital Territory: 8,593 (Benue – 2,771; Niger – 2,572; Plateau – 1,709; Kogi – 654; Nasarawa – 320; FCT, 317; and Kwara – 250
North-East: 23,106 (Borno – 18,213; Adamawa – 1,853; Yobe – 1,375; Taraba – 1,335; Bauchi, -169; and Gombe – 161.
North West: 13,590 (Katsina – 2,037; Zamfara – 5,6164; Sokoto – 872; Kaduna – 530; Kebbi – 331; Kano – 149; and Jigawa – 55.
The Federal Government of Nigeria, under Buhari, made counter claims that the figures are exaggerated.
Not agreeing with the figures will not make the perception that insecurity is a problem go away.
So, must we continue the same pattern after 24 years of democracy and expect a different result?
Unlike the previous administration, the appointment of an NSA must be devoid of any sentiment. The NSA, by protocol, is the head of the security apparatus of the country. Every and all heads of security institutions report to him. It is he that usually reports all security matters to the president.
The office of the NSA is a special one where the occupier must enjoy the absolute confidence and trust of the president. His briefing must, of necessity, guide some of the president’s decisions even in the economic and diplomatic spheres.
There is nowhere in the constitution of Nigeria where it is stated that whoever becomes the National Security Adviser must have a military background.
The NSA of the military administration of General Ibrahim Babangida, Bukar Shaib, didn’t have a military background. He was a diplomat. Yet, he performed, and creditably, too.
President Tinubu must realise that politics can’t be a factor in determining who becomes the next NSA. searchlight can be beamed on professionals from the police and intelligence community because most of Nigeria’s insecurity issues are what could be resolved using non-kinetic means and well trained people who understand the techniques of handling these.
Nigeria still has a few of former IGPs that can handle the brief and they have been trained sufficiently. Same goes for professionals in the intelligence community.
Even in the United States of America, after which our democracy is modelled, only three of its past NSAs had military backgrounds. Condoleezza Rice, Henry Kissinger and a few other academics in America occupied the NSA’s office. Tinubu can make that shift happen to the extent that the challenges of insecurity are brought to their barest minimum.
The performance of some past occupiers of the office isn’t desirous. Between conflicts of interest and an inability to foist unity among security agencies, as well as allegations of corruption, the office of the NSA in some past administrations became a cesspit of controversy and graft.
Tinubu is known to spot talent. There are talents outside the military that can deliver on the mandate of the office of the NSA to create an environment for investment, stability and progress. An NSA’s brief in modern times has shifted from purely military and combat security to diplomacy and economic and political security.
Elegbede, a criminologist, sent this peace from Asokoro, Abuja.
READ ALSO FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
and then