Neutralise the Threats

Nigeria is witnessing new conversations and conflicts around secessionist movements and threats against the state authority. For different reasons, including perceptions of neglect, marginalisation and ineffective governance, different sub-regional groups and clandestine associations are mounting pressure, often violent on the Nigerian state, demanding more public goods or outright self-governance. New cases include the renewed pro-Biafra secession movement across the southeast and parts of the south-south zones. There is also Yoruba nation movement in the southwest zone. Threats of renewed militancy in the oil-rich Niger Delta, eleven years of violent jihadism in the northeast and menacing banditry in the northwest and northcentral zones add to the avalanche of security issues threatening public safety and national security and unity.

The Nigerian government has mostly reacted with combative measures, conducting military missions against groups that threaten peace and stability. However, the issues and their propagators largely remain unmoved, still pushing their agenda. For instance, the prosecution of self-rule agitators from the southern part of Nigeria has not ended secessionist calls but may have fueled it. Also, the military incursions against banditry and terrorism in the country\’s northern parts have not summarily ended the violence. Therefore, the Nigerian government may look towards increasing the non-combative approach to the cluster of threats.

New measures may positively impact military needs and operations. The pro-secessionist calls have usually been met with repression from security agencies, which has not deterred their supporters from continuing the calls for secession. Therefore, the government must, through dialogue, create an atmosphere that seeks to effectively communicate grievances, address the perceptions of maladministration of public goods and the marginalisation of certain groups. This effort, beyond verbal assurances, must also reflect in the governance and decision-making processes and outcomes. The dialogue approach makes democratic sense that the government is willing to accommodate opposing views and ready to seek a pathway towards sustainable and collective peace. Counteracting group perception through governance equity and fair distribution of public goods indicates that the government is walking the talk of ensuring equal opportunities while preventing the resort to grievance-driven agitations and violent conflict.

On the terrorism front, increased military operations must be followed by increased development interventions. The eleven years insurgency in the northeast and broader Lake Chad Basin (LCB) has deepened existing vulnerabilities, with about 2.7 million displaced in the affected area. Over 10.6 million require urgent humanitarian assistance. Non-combative measure in the sense of improving livelihoods and providing succour to the conflict-impacted population is a good approach towards reducing their predisposition towards aligning with terrorists and restating the government\’s authority and apparently threatened sphere of influence in the violent hotspots. The Institute for Security Studies (ISS) holds that states should address and resolve local grievances, increase community trust in government, and encourage social cohesion in counter-extremism. Increased development intervention efforts must seek to manage the issues the conflict has triggered.

The bandits\’ violence in the northwest and northcentral zones requires a collective regional effort. Much more than words, the government can tackle the security emergency through a regional framework just like the Amotekun regional security structure in the southwest zone. Banditry is mostly a dominant security issue prevalent in the northwest and northcentral zones. News and anecdotal accounts suggest inter-state movements and operations of bandits. The porous and unregulated borders within the affected states have made it easy for bandits to move about at ease. A regional security structure will be strategic in ridding the zone of bandits. The growing ferociousness of banditry must move the Nigerian government to match words with action in saving lives and livelihoods. The Nigerian government must therefore collaborate with its development partners to increase development-focused interventions in the crisis hotspots. The interventions must be tailored to be proactive and reactive. This is to prevent and manage emerging and existing challenges around development that could trigger conflict and instability.