It’s never a good sign when your political mentor starts publically 
questioning your decisions as President, particularly if he is the man 
who laid the path to the presidency in the first place. For weeks 
Nigeria’s revered former President, Olusegun Obasanjo, had been quietly 
criticizing his former protégé and current President Goodluck Jonathan’s
 ability to combat the Boko Haram militant group. But when the Nigerian election commission announced a six-week postponement of elections to allow for a military operation against the insurgents, Obasanjo turned up the volume, publically insinuating
 that it was a ploy for the President to cement his position in the face
 of the rising popularity of his rival Muhammadu Buhari before endorsing
 Buhari in an interview with the Financial Times.
The elections come at a difficult time for Nigeria. Boko Haram has 
increased its attacks, and its terrain, over the past few months, 
expanding into neighboring Chad, Niger and Cameroon and raising fears 
for the stability of Africa’s biggest economy and most populous nation. 
Boko Haram has killed an estimated 13,000 Nigerians, and has abducted 
more than 1,000 others, including 257 schoolgirls
 in April. Despite a promised military operation, Nigeria’s ongoing 
political squabbling continues to prevent a unified national response. 
Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau has pledged to disrupt the polls, 
laying the groundwork for a fraught election season.
It was really only a matter of time before the divorce between 
Jonathan and Obasanjo became final. No one, however, expected it to be 
quite so theatrical. In front of a gathering of journalists and members 
of the ruling People’s Democratic Party, Obasanjo handed his membership 
card to a colleague to be torn up and announced his resignation from the
 party he helped found in 1999, when he became the country’s first 
post-dictatorship President. “Henceforth I will only be a Nigerian. I am
 ready to work with anybody regardless of his or her political 
affiliation,” he said in a statement
 that ran in national newspapers. That small act of petulance
 is likely to have far-reaching consequences for Jonathan’s campaign for
 re-election, already under strain from wide-ranging accusations of 
incompetence and weakness. While Obasanjo declared that he would not 
join the opposition, many will interpret it as an endorsement for the 
party of Buhari.
Shekau pledged to disrupt the elections “at any cost” also on Tuesday in a 15-minute video
 released via the group’s new Twitter account. “This election will not 
be held even if we are dead,” he vowed, speaking in the Hausa language 
of northern Nigeria. As if to prove his point, two suicide attacks killed at least 38 people on the same day the video was released. Two days before, on Feb. 15, a female suicide bomber killed at least 10 passersby in a market, also in the country’s northeast.
The number of Boko Haram attacks has increased dramatically since the
 announcement of the postponement of the elections, which were slated 
for Feb. 14. As a result, few Nigerians believe the leadership’s 
assurances that the insurgency will be defeated in time to allow 
residents of the northeast, where it is strongest, to vote. “Even if the
 ongoing military operations smash all the insurgents’ camps, as 
promised, Boko Haram has shown itself to be highly mobile, tactically 
adaptable and considerably resilient,” says Nnamdi Obasi, Nigeria 
researcher for the International Crisis Group. “So it is doubtful that 
the government will achieve an environment sufficiently secure for 
displaced persons to return home and for the electoral agency to conduct
 polls all over the northeast on March 28.”
The governments of Chad, Niger and Cameroon have promised to lend a 
hand by sending troops, but they are finding themselves bogged down with
 combatting Boko Haram on home turf. Shekau, in previous videos, pledged
 to attack any country that went after Boko Haram. He has followed 
through, threatening leaders by name in his video broadcasts, and 
sending forces and suicide bombers across the borders of all three countries. Cameroon’s army announced
 on Feb. 17 that it had killed 86 Boko Haram fighters and detained a 
further 1,000 suspected supporters. On the same day, Niger’s government 
claimed to have killed 200 rebels, detained 160 supporters, and averted a
 suicide bomb attack in the town of Diffa.
 Such assertions are difficult to corroborate. If true, they are an 
alarming indication of Boko Haram’s reach and strength. Obasanjo may 
have criticized Jonathan’s inability to manage Boko Haram, but if the 
combined forces of Nigeria, Niger, Chad and Cameroon can’t defeat the 
insurgency with international support, then his successor may also find 
it difficult.
Culled from Time 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment