The withdrawal of troops from civil duties

THE Federal Government has announced a gradual withdrawal of the military operations in volatile spots in the country, beginning from the first quarter of 2020. The Chief of Naval Staff, Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas, who announced the decision after a National Security Council meeting, explained that the withdrawal was to allow the military to focus on its primary duty of defending the country against external aggression. He went further to note that the withdrawal of troops would be done after an “assessment” to determine areas where peace had returned, to enable civil authorities to assume full control of security. According to him, the council decided that in place of the military, the Nigeria Police Force, which has the primary responsibility of providing internal security, should assume its duties fully in such areas. In his words, “It is the work of the police to handle internal security since Nigeria is not at war. The Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps will support the police to provide internal security.”

The military runs several joint internal operations in various parts of the country with different code names to deal with security threats that have tasked the capacity of the police. This has been the case for over a decade. As far back as 2010, the then Chief of Army Staff, Lt. General O. A. Ihejirika, announced that the Nigerian Army (NA) had deployed 17,000 officers and soldiers for internal security operations. Some of the 17,000 men were deployed to the Southeastern states of Imo and Abia, and the Niger Delta where kidnapping and militancy posed major security challenges. Others were deployed to Plateau, Bauchi and Borno States to checkmate ethno-religious violence.

By 2017, no fewer than 28 of the 36 states were under one form of military ‘occupation’ or another. The massive deployment of the military was informed largely by the escalation in the operations of Boko Haram and the fears  of its possible spread to other parts of northern Nigeria and the country, more broadly. This deployment has increased the number of officers in internal security operations significantly. It has stretched the military to a great extent; the result is that practically every army unit is engaged and there is no redundancy or reserve to cater for the resting and recuperation of troops. The situation has also stretched the limited resources of the armed forces. Thus, such deployments have taken a toll on military readiness for its primary responsibility of defence of the territory and core values of the country against external aggression.

Besides, there have been complaints about the increasing militarisation of democracy in Nigeria arising from the increasing involvement and presence of the military in police duties. Military operations in the Ayakoroma area of the Niger Delta raised a lot of controversies and conflicting reports following alleged massive civilian casualties.  In similar military operations in Odi, Zak Ibiam, and Onitsha, the military was accused of excessive use of force, looting, rape and torture of citizens. These incidents portrayed it in bad light. In addition, there are complaints that the deployments have not been systematically made to address crimes such as banditry and attacks on communities by herdsmen. The military may be legitimately called upon to act in aid of civil authority, but it is not set up essentially for police duties.  Frequent and long-term deployment of the military to police duties is neither in the interest of the military as an institution nor in the interest of democracy and civil culture. It is therefore plausible to withdraw the military from police duties.

Nonetheless, Nigerians are worried about this decision of the government because there is no indication that the security situation has been seriously ameliorated. Several governors and community leaders have called on the government to reconsider the decision. Following this, President Muhammadu Buhari reassured Nigerians that the withdrawal of the military would be from areas where peace had been restored and that it would not be done in a manner that would expose communities to more risks of attacks. The “administration will not abandon citizens in need of protection” and the withdrawal of troops would be done after an “assessment” to determine areas where peace had returned to enable civil authorities to assume full control, he reassured.

We think that this reassurance is not good enough. It will be recalled the president admitted during his new year speech that the fight against insecurity “has not been easy”. He also remarked during the same speech that the government faced the “challenge of winning the peace, the reconstruction of lives, communities and markets”.  We call on the government to provide a comprehensive long-term strategy to deal with the persisting and complex security situation.  This should include a framework for cooperation among all security agencies to ensure synergy among the various agencies in order to avoid situations that blight the image and readiness of the military by overexposure to police duties. Furthermore, the government must ensure that police reform is given priority.  This should include building the capacity of the police by providing them with specialised training, equipment and logistic support.  It should also include the retraining and re-orientation of officers and men of the police with the appropriate skills and values.

Furthermore, the government should look beyond the armed forces in addressing the issue of crime and policing. It is known worldwide that certain socio-economic and governance factors lead to an increase in the rate and gravity of crimes that pervade society.  These factors include unemployment, poverty, inequality, weak law enforcement and injustice. The government must work hard to reduce unemployment among the youths and also reduce poverty in the country.