The bomb outrage that aborted the Vanguard-sponsored post-amnesty dialogue in Warri recently is symptomatic of an endemic deficiency in the struggle for self sufficiency and resource control in the Niger Delta.
While those who perpetrate such acts often claim to be carrying them out on behalf of the people of the territory, more often than not the consequences are inimical to the welfare and interests of those who they are supposed to serve.
The unfortunate self-serving comments made by some articulate fellow travellers in response to this outrage might encourage the perpetrators to maintain their strategy of intransigence and violence although it has become obvious that this strategy has deepened rather than reversed the instability of the communities of the Niger Delta.
The promoters of militant insurgency are reluctant to consider the benefits of negotiation over confrontation with the Nigerian state as being an effective means of promoting the interests of the ordinary peoples of the Niger Delta. At the same time their dependence on instability suggests that they are the victims as well as the instigators of the collective psychological delinquency that has promoted youth indiscipline across the board throughout the communities of the Niger Delta.
In that wise the major groups that are associated with militant insurgency in the Niger Delta have not proven their worth as revolutionary reformers but have consolidated their reputation as irrational provocateurs instead.
To disrupt a genuine attempt at discussion within the community concerning the best way to manage the amnesty at a time when the Nigerian state itself is being run by a leader from the territory is to say the least an unproductive and irrational act. In spite of this the perpetrators seem much more enamoured of creating mischief than of generating the effective restoration of peace in the Niger Delta.
The e-mail message that was allegedly dispatched by the perpetrators is a perfect example of how the rhetoric of liberation can be twisted to serve the purpose of distorting the objectives of a genuine cause. The message was more concerned with pursuing the objectives of disenchantment rather than those of progressive engagement.
The first lines of the message in fact made it plain that those who were sending it are involved not merely in promoting insurgency but are also linked to some of the dysfunctional competitive politics of the territory. The suggestion was made that the Governor of Delta State, Dr. Emmanuel Uduaghan had sought the permission of his colleague in neighbouring Bayelsa State to make certain comments attributed to him about the provenance and effectiveness of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND).
Any assessment that suggests that the Delta State Governor has anything in common with his Bayelsa State counterpart exposes a high level of ignorance of the true situation in the Niger Delta. There is no doubt that serious errors of judgement and failed policies have dogged the process of governance in the Niger Delta States, but it is unfair to generalise over the performances of the governors of these states.
Without a doubt some Governors have performed far better than others and in contemporary records Dr. Uduaghan has exhibited a keen sense of awareness of the real issues at stake that is quite the opposite of the frivolous utterances and inefficient record of the Bayelsa State Administration under Timipre Sylva.
Those who formulated the e-mail message wanted to make a point about their disenchantment with the Governor of Delta State by showing that miscreants can still operate in the territory with impunity rather than being truly interested in guiding the Federal Government in its dealings with the young people of the Niger Delta.
Many young lives have been disrupted by recruitment into a life of violence and crime under the guise of revolutionary insurgency. It is also no secret that many of the most vocal advocates of continued insurgency who claim to be fighting for the interests of the common people are themselves engaged in or have in the past been deeply involved with the illegitimate trade in petroleum products generally known as “bunkering”.
In order to justify their participation in what has been widely characterised as an economic crime they have developed a defensive argument in favour of compensation for social neglect and marginalised rights. There is no doubt that these demands and assertions have a basis of truth but in real terms it is unfortunate to have to admit that the insurgency that has bedeviled the Niger Delta over the last few years has been as much a part of the cause as of the cure of the problem.
Those who make wild and generalised comments concerning the activities of the Governors and the state governments as a basis for continuing the insurgency are being not merely dishonest but also brutally unfair to their followers. Most of the young people recruited into the insurgent movement are being maimed for life both psychologically and socially and quite often physically as well.
No matter how often this is explained away as part of a wider war the main consequence of the present stage of insurgency is the ruination not the salvation of the lives of innocent young men (and sometimes young women as well) on the altar of an agenda of personal rather than collective anger. Those who claimed responsibility for the bombing have given the impression that they care little or nothing for the safety of the lives of the ordinary people as long as they can terrorise the communities that they claim to be representing.
The stated purpose of the bombing outrage in Warri reinforced the perception that the insurgency has been misapplied in the past and is of doubtful relevance for the future. While it is true that the ultimate responsibility for insecurity in the community can easily be blamed on the failure of the authorities to prevent criminals from committing crimes this does not automatically render the criminal a justifiable hero.
It has become obvious that the oft-mentioned link between insurgents and the political thuggery that becomes rampant once electoral exercises are imminent still plays a substantial part in provoking outbreaks of violent behaviour in the Niger Delta. Those who say they are the militant vanguard of a spontaneous revolution are clearly taking advantage of the tolerance and good faith that motivated the amnesty offer from the Federal Government to further escalate instability.
Their purpose is not actually to strengthen the process of renewal and peace that the amnesty is supposed to usher in or they would certainly have welcomed the opportunity offered by the convening of the Vanguard-sponsored conference to express genuinely critical opinions and to establish definite positions on post-amnesty relationships between the people and the authorities.
The establishment of a structure that will bring about meaningful reform cannot emerge overnight. It is particularly sad that the impatience and imprecision governing the attitudes and actions of some of the insurgents is now to be used to justify acts of terrorism against the public.
Vanguard publisher Sam Amuka’s and Delta State Governor Emmanuel Uduaghan’s genuine concern for creating a stable agenda for leadership in the Niger Delta certainly deserves to be supported by all well-meaning advocates of peace and stability instead of being undermined by self destructive advocates of internal conflict.
BY LINDSAY BARRET (Thursday, March 25, 2010), Sun News 'From the Other Side'
While those who perpetrate such acts often claim to be carrying them out on behalf of the people of the territory, more often than not the consequences are inimical to the welfare and interests of those who they are supposed to serve.
The unfortunate self-serving comments made by some articulate fellow travellers in response to this outrage might encourage the perpetrators to maintain their strategy of intransigence and violence although it has become obvious that this strategy has deepened rather than reversed the instability of the communities of the Niger Delta.
The promoters of militant insurgency are reluctant to consider the benefits of negotiation over confrontation with the Nigerian state as being an effective means of promoting the interests of the ordinary peoples of the Niger Delta. At the same time their dependence on instability suggests that they are the victims as well as the instigators of the collective psychological delinquency that has promoted youth indiscipline across the board throughout the communities of the Niger Delta.
In that wise the major groups that are associated with militant insurgency in the Niger Delta have not proven their worth as revolutionary reformers but have consolidated their reputation as irrational provocateurs instead.
To disrupt a genuine attempt at discussion within the community concerning the best way to manage the amnesty at a time when the Nigerian state itself is being run by a leader from the territory is to say the least an unproductive and irrational act. In spite of this the perpetrators seem much more enamoured of creating mischief than of generating the effective restoration of peace in the Niger Delta.
The e-mail message that was allegedly dispatched by the perpetrators is a perfect example of how the rhetoric of liberation can be twisted to serve the purpose of distorting the objectives of a genuine cause. The message was more concerned with pursuing the objectives of disenchantment rather than those of progressive engagement.
The first lines of the message in fact made it plain that those who were sending it are involved not merely in promoting insurgency but are also linked to some of the dysfunctional competitive politics of the territory. The suggestion was made that the Governor of Delta State, Dr. Emmanuel Uduaghan had sought the permission of his colleague in neighbouring Bayelsa State to make certain comments attributed to him about the provenance and effectiveness of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND).
Without a doubt some Governors have performed far better than others and in contemporary records Dr. Uduaghan has exhibited a keen sense of awareness of the real issues at stake that is quite the opposite of the frivolous utterances and inefficient record of the Bayelsa State Administration under Timipre Sylva.
Those who formulated the e-mail message wanted to make a point about their disenchantment with the Governor of Delta State by showing that miscreants can still operate in the territory with impunity rather than being truly interested in guiding the Federal Government in its dealings with the young people of the Niger Delta.
Many young lives have been disrupted by recruitment into a life of violence and crime under the guise of revolutionary insurgency. It is also no secret that many of the most vocal advocates of continued insurgency who claim to be fighting for the interests of the common people are themselves engaged in or have in the past been deeply involved with the illegitimate trade in petroleum products generally known as “bunkering”.
In order to justify their participation in what has been widely characterised as an economic crime they have developed a defensive argument in favour of compensation for social neglect and marginalised rights. There is no doubt that these demands and assertions have a basis of truth but in real terms it is unfortunate to have to admit that the insurgency that has bedeviled the Niger Delta over the last few years has been as much a part of the cause as of the cure of the problem.
Those who make wild and generalised comments concerning the activities of the Governors and the state governments as a basis for continuing the insurgency are being not merely dishonest but also brutally unfair to their followers. Most of the young people recruited into the insurgent movement are being maimed for life both psychologically and socially and quite often physically as well.
No matter how often this is explained away as part of a wider war the main consequence of the present stage of insurgency is the ruination not the salvation of the lives of innocent young men (and sometimes young women as well) on the altar of an agenda of personal rather than collective anger. Those who claimed responsibility for the bombing have given the impression that they care little or nothing for the safety of the lives of the ordinary people as long as they can terrorise the communities that they claim to be representing.
The stated purpose of the bombing outrage in Warri reinforced the perception that the insurgency has been misapplied in the past and is of doubtful relevance for the future. While it is true that the ultimate responsibility for insecurity in the community can easily be blamed on the failure of the authorities to prevent criminals from committing crimes this does not automatically render the criminal a justifiable hero.
It has become obvious that the oft-mentioned link between insurgents and the political thuggery that becomes rampant once electoral exercises are imminent still plays a substantial part in provoking outbreaks of violent behaviour in the Niger Delta. Those who say they are the militant vanguard of a spontaneous revolution are clearly taking advantage of the tolerance and good faith that motivated the amnesty offer from the Federal Government to further escalate instability.
Their purpose is not actually to strengthen the process of renewal and peace that the amnesty is supposed to usher in or they would certainly have welcomed the opportunity offered by the convening of the Vanguard-sponsored conference to express genuinely critical opinions and to establish definite positions on post-amnesty relationships between the people and the authorities.
The establishment of a structure that will bring about meaningful reform cannot emerge overnight. It is particularly sad that the impatience and imprecision governing the attitudes and actions of some of the insurgents is now to be used to justify acts of terrorism against the public.
Vanguard publisher Sam Amuka’s and Delta State Governor Emmanuel Uduaghan’s genuine concern for creating a stable agenda for leadership in the Niger Delta certainly deserves to be supported by all well-meaning advocates of peace and stability instead of being undermined by self destructive advocates of internal conflict.
BY LINDSAY BARRET (Thursday, March 25, 2010), Sun News 'From the Other Side'
Comments
Post a Comment