Counterterrorism Consultant, Mr. Temitope Olodo, who worked with The Office for Security and Counterterrorism of Britain, tells LEKE BAIYEWU why the Federal Government should not swap Boko Haram commanders in its detention for the Chibok girls
Do you think it is safe to negotiate with terrorists?
There is reputational risk associated
with any negotiation with terrorist groups. But considering that every
Nigerian’s life is precious, it is imperative to negotiate with
terrorists, if certain conditions are available and there is a
willingness on the part of the terrorists to participate in the process.
While certain countries claim that they will not negotiate with
terrorists to avoid setting dangerous precedents, it is important to
highlight that negotiation with terrorists had been done by various
governments in the past.
After the deadly mortar attack by the
Irish Republican Army on the British Cabinet in 1991, the government
still maintained a secret back channel to the IRA; even the Spanish
government sat down with the separatist group, ETA, only six months
after the group killed 21 shoppers in a supermarket bombing in 1988. And
the Israeli government, which is known for sanctioning State
assassination of wanted terrorists, secretly negotiated the ‘Oslo
Accord’ even though the Palestine Liberation Organisation continued its
terrorist campaign and refused to recognise Israel’s right to exist.
Hence, I will encourage the government
of President Muhammad Buhari to negotiate with Boko Haram if it is
interested in an exit strategy to the insurgency campaign against the
Nigeria nation.
President Buhari in his
recent interview with Al Jazeera said the Federal Government might
consider offering cash in exchange for the Chibok Girls. Is this
advisable?
The offer of cash in exchange for
hostages is not new at all; it is widely reported that the French and
Italian governments pay huge sums to get their citizens who are
kidnapped by terrorists around the world and that is why we hardly hear
of French or Italian hostages being killed in captivity or being killed
by terrorists. Most governments do have a non-negotiation policy with
terrorists because it is assumed that such encourages more kidnapping,
but there are no statistics to back that assertion and they negotiate
behind closed doors. I believe Nigerians will support Mr. President
offering cash in return for majority of the Chibok Girls because it is
now a national matter. And for me, personally, I prefer a
Commander-in-Chief who is honest in his assertion and willing to do
anything to rescue the girls safely than playing politics on the matter.
The United States will threaten war in the protection of their citizen;
why shouldn’t our President pay to get the girls back?
Will offering cash to Boko Haram not be counterproductive to the war against terrorism?
There is no evidence to support the
assertion that payment of ransom is counterproductive for the war
against insurgency. In fact, I believe the contrary is the case. The
growth of insurgency and increase in their appeal to the local community
is based on the narrative that the Nigeria government does not care
about its people. To win the war against terrorism, we must sell a
superior ideology to the vulnerable people in our midst that they are
valued, loved and special to all of us! For Nigerians in the North-East
that prefer a religious approach to resolving their concerns; let us
educate them that there is Shariah Court. For people interested in good
roads, schools and standard of living; let us remind them that the
government is now working and accountable for all the money in its
custody. That is the way to fight terrorism and all forms of violent
extremism gradually encroaching on our daily life.
The war against insurgency in the
North-East is almost over, with the armed forces disrupting the
activities of Boko Haram. But I sincerely hope that the government is
now working on a clear roadmap to address management of violent
extremism across the country to ensure that ‘Boko Haram 2’ does not
emerge and other jihadist movements like JAMBS and ANSARU are dealt with
completely.
One of the conditions Boko
Haram is giving the Federal Government in the ongoing negotiations is
the release of its Improvised Explosive Device expert. Should the
government agree to this?
In the first instance, Boko Haram is not
in a position to dictate how the negotiation should be managed.
However, it is normal for the sect to request for the release of their
IED expert, but I will not encourage the Federal Government to agree to
exchange of Boko Haram IED expert or any key strategic commanders of the
jihadist movement until there are concrete evidence that they are
interested in conditional peace.
If I were part of the Federal
Government’s negotiation convoy, I would demand that the Boko Haram
leaders release at least 100 Chibok girls immediately, as evidence of
good faith. Then, they could afterwards request for anyone they want to
be released. Requesting for prisoner exchange is a normal thing in
situations like this but with the menace caused by Boko Haram over the
years, especially in suicide bombing, the Federal Government will be
reluctant to release their IED expert, even for 1,000 Nigerian
abductees.
The President has also
offered the insurgents amnesty if they release all the Chibok girls in
their custody? Can the amnesty be justified?
I am in support of amnesty because there
are fighters within the rank and file of Boko Haram that were forced or
brainwashed into fighting for the sect, including children, vulnerable,
unstable individuals and women. It is important that these Nigerians
get the opportunity to opt out of the Boko Haram sect and that is why
the idea of amnesty must be encouraged for those willing to drop their
arms against the Federal Government and people of Nigeria.
You asked if it is justified to grant
amnesty and I will say ‘yes’ because it will be unjust to condemn anyone
that was vulnerable and brainwashed by Boko Haram just because they
were at the wrong place at the wrong time. Today, the amnesty programme
currently running in the Niger Delta area is producing graduates and
employers of labour who will be adding value to the Nigeria polity in
totality. That, I believe, is the success story of allowing peace to
reign. And I believe the amnesty programme in the North-East of Nigeria
will allow peace to return to that region and eradicate the challenges
associated with insecurity.
Is it not appropriate for
the military to intensify its onslaught against the terrorists,
especially when it has raised hopes that it is winning the war?
The military activity in the North-East
of Nigeria is ongoing and no stakeholder so far is against the offensive
approach undertaken by Nigerian security services to tackle the
insurgency challenges. The war of terrorism can’t be won on the
battlefield because it is about winning ‘hearts and minds.’ And if a
serious ideology is not developed to counter the Boko Haram narratives,
the drivers of terrorism that facilitated the emergence of Boko Haram
will remain in the community to breed more violent extremism.
Will the amnesty not amount
to injustice on the side of those whose loved ones had been killed and
whose lives had been wrecked by the insurgency?
In war there are casualties and it is
the job of the government to ensure that appropriate mitigating
initiatives are available to address any grievances that may emerge from
the process. I believe it is important to highlight that Boko Haram
emerged out of frustration and despair with the authorities. Both sides
lost loved ones and it is all about ensuring that there is an avenue for
proper healing and psychological support to cope with the death of
loved ones. People lost loved ones in the ancient communal conflict
between Ife and Modakeke, the Biafra and even Niger Delta. We all learnt
to forgive and forget – we need peace in North-East Nigeria thus the
need for amnesty
What if the sect reneges on the agreement reached with the government after a deal had been signed?
There is the possibility that some of
the Boko Haram members will not accept the deal and there are ways to
manage that. In fact, not all Niger Delta militants accepted the amnesty
deal and not all IRA fighters dropped their weapons but the peace
agreement was reached.
Do you think all the girls will still be in the same location?
Based on the information available in
the public domain, it is impossible for the girls to all be in the same
location and Boko Haram will not take that risk to do that.
Can you rule out the
likelihood that some of the girls might have been sold off, killed or
married off and impregnated by the insurgents?
There is no doubt in my mind that some
of the girls would have been married off or impregnated but not
intentionally killed. I believe it is our collective prayer that they
are all still alive wherever they are.
How is the Federal Government sure that it is negotiating with the real Boko Haram leaders?
I am confident that appropriate checks
would have been carried out to avoid the embarrassment that former
President Goodluck Ebele was confronted with on the Chibok girls saga.
Some critics of the ongoing
negotiation strongly believe Boko Haram cannot be part of any
negotiation without the involvement of ISIS, which the sect recently
declared its allegiance to. Is this true?
Not really! ISIS is not actively on the
ground in Nigeria and I don’t believe ISIS could stop Boko Haram’s
leadership from negotiating with the Federal Government of Nigeria, if
that is what they (insurgents) want to do. Nigeria military are really
working hard to eradicate Boko Haram and this approach employed by the
military must be applauded. But I must highlight that anti-cultural
movements like Boko Haram must be defeated in ideology to prevent their
growth, because Boko Haram is a symptom and aggressive containment
strategy will reduce their capacity.
How is the ongoing negotiation different from the several failed ones initiated by the Goodluck Jonathan-led administration?
The current administration is careful
about discussing the negotiation process in the public domain and
ensuring that they have verifiable source. In that way, they are
ensuring that all aspects of the process is managed properly.
Unfortunately, the Goodluck Jonathan administration did not manage the
negotiation process effectively.
Some people believe the
whole issue of Chibok girls’ abduction is a political game, hence the
likely release of the girls and amnesty for the insurgents. Do you
agree?
No, I disagree with that assertion because there is no evidence to support it.
Source: PUNCH.
