Is governance a conspiracy?

Almost everybody who knows something is familiar with the saying that change is a constant element in life and living. Heraclitus, a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher, is always remembered for his immortal lines “Change is the only constant”. His doctrine of constant change teaches that change is the basic rule of the universe. In other words, nothing stays the same.

As humans who inhabit the geographical space called Nigeria, we are bound and guided by the inevitability of change. We cannot possibly operate outside this natural order. But the worry lies in the kind of change we experience in our shores. No doubt, Nigeria, since its advent, must have gone through certain changes or mutations that you could be tempted to describe as positive. But the hard fact is that it is not easy to point out what this could possibly be. In fact, the argument as to whether anything positive has ever happened to Nigeria can form a field of study on its own. But what is not open to any debate is that Nigeria has, over the decades, experienced innumerable changes that make change wear an ugly face. In other words, while Nigerians, like other inhabitants of planet Earth, are compulsively subjected to the immutable directives of change, they (Nigerians) worry about the kind of change or changes they experience in their quest for nationhood. Their worry simply stems from the fact that each passing day brings to the Nigerian something uglier and more detestable than what he used to know.

But we are not writing or speaking in general terms here. Trying to do so will be a tall order. Rather, we will, for the purpose of this reflection, isolate one or two aspects of our national life where change, rather than elevate and enliven, has, instead, brought woes to the people. Let us take security as our subject of inquiry today. In doing this, we will not search too far afield. Recent developments in Nigeria readily provide us with handy materials for illustration. It should be recalled that insecurity became a serious national challenge in Nigeria during the presidency of Goodluck Jonathan. What we had then were isolated cases of terrorist activities carried out by the terrorist group called Boko Haram. But their activities did not fester. It reduced in tempo and dimension the moment Jonathan was swept out of power by the promoters of that brand of terrorism.

But if Nigerians thought that the ouster of Jonathan would bring an end to terrorism as the Muhammadu Buhari campaigners told us, they were wrong. Terrorism mutated under the Buhari presidency and assumed a more frightening dimension and impetus. This was in spite of the claim by Buhari’s presidential promoters that his pedigree as a military General was enough to end terrorism in Nigeria. It was, for instance , under the Buhari presidency that murderous Fulani herdsmen took over the entire country. They were ably supported by bandits who operated largely in the North West axis of the country. In fact, terrorism under the Buhari era reduced what obtained Jonathan to child’s play. In their bid to rationalize anything that poses a challenge to them, Nigerians went to work. They wanted to find the reason behind the the growing menace called Fulani terrorism. The handiest explanation they came up with was that Fulani herdsmen were emboldened to operate with reckless abandon because one of their own, Buhari, was in the saddle. The expectation, therefore, was that Fulani terrorism would become a thing of the past if a non-Fulani President emerges.

Sadly, however, Bola Tinubu, a non-Fulani, and a non-northerner, has since taken over from Buhari for more than three years. But his coming has not brought an end to Fulani terrorism. If anything, the situation has changed for the worse. Terrorist herdsmen have spread their tentacles wider. They are now in every hamlet of Nigeria. They kill and maim freely. They have cowed and intimidated the natives so much so that indigenous communities are begging government to rescue them from the stranglehold of Fulani occupation.

But the regret is that our government, whether at the centre or in the states, has not picked up the gauntlet. They have not been able to come to the rescue of the people. Fulani terrorists are comfortably nestled in forests and bushes across the country. They operate from these bases by day and by night. They are not in hiding. Everybody knows where they are, including the security agents. But there is no effort at dislodging them. They are left to operate as if they constitute an arm of the government that we cannot do without. Whenever and wherever they strike, it is treated as if it is normal. Our government does not seem to be perturbed by what is going on.

This brings us to the question of conspiracy. Is governance a conspiracy against the people? How does one explain the fact that our government does not see Fulani terrorism as an issue that needs to be tackled? Who is benefiting from this dangerous culture of silence? What do we do about a situation where people cannot go to their farms for fear of being killed by terrorists inhabiting their farmlands? In Nigeria, you cannot even move freely in the streets and on the highways. Killers have lined up the roads waiting for the next victim. And this is happening in a country that claims to have a government. What does government exist for if not for the sake of the security and welfare of the people?

Now, our national Independence Day has come. The President spoke to the people from somewhere. He painted a picture of hope. The governors across the states offered goodwill messages. In all, they gave the impression that the country is making progress. None of them, beginning from Mr. President down to the governors, made a serious comment about insecurity in the land. Nobody told the people that security of life and property will occupy the front row on the national priority list. It has become normal to be killed in one’s farmland by gun-wielding terrorists. It is now a daily routine for travellers to be kidnapped on the highways. The real worry here is that those perpetrating the evil that has paralyzed the country are not hiding. They are operating in the open. But government is not perturbed. The President and his governors are not enraged. They simply look the other way. They are indifferent to the people’s plight. Is that what governance is about?

If we must face facts as they are, we will readily agree that our governments are not and cannot be overwhelmed by terrorists. What is the case instead is that the concerned authorities have chosen, for curious reasons, to treat terrorism with kid gloves. Sadly, the people are paying a huge price for the negligence or connivance of the authorities. Why are our governments indifferent in this matter? This question raises yet another question: Is governance a conspiracy?