Zamfara’s negative peace

Over the last few years, Zamfara state has been reduced to a theatre of violence. The orgy of bloodletting reached a crescendo some months ago. We cried out as Nigerians, pitching our tents with humanity against our differences. We can heave a sigh of a somewhat relief, for the measure of success recorded by military intervention. At the risk of being a party pooper, I dare to say if this is it, we have yet again wasted time and effort. As we know, the absence of war is not peace. Peace is negative when violence is curbed or hostilities are forced to stop without addressing their underlying causes. What prevails is negative peace, embers waiting for slight provocation to ignite into explosive fireworks. The only way out is to focus on the social conditions that promoted the banditry. Positive real peace is a product of social, economic and political opportunities on equitable terms.

When conflict and disagreement lead to wars or incursion, the temptation to diffuse the triggers and immediate causes of the outbreak of violence is rife partly because we need to deal with immediate effect, what has disrupted our lives and get back to normalcy. In the case of government, they need to be seen by citizens as performing a cardinal function of governance. But positive durable peace is a process that involves a gamut of activities which are multi-layered, complex and diverse in nature; it is an intimidating and daunting task. Even more so in a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society like Nigeria, where every action brings its particular connotation and is subject to prejudiced interpretation of citizens, who have lost faith and connection with their government. Though government cannot take away this prejudices and suspicion with an action or two, it can rebuild the broken bridge of connection through people-oriented policies that include the governed at the level of formation. Government tends to treat its citizens like consumers of policies rather than stakeholders. Half-hearted approaches to peace must be avoided because when peace ultimately breaks down, it leaves an enduring feeling of suspicion and vulnerability. A good start will be an inclusive approach or peace building. This shall in time shift the perception of the governed and decrease their feeling of vulnerability. We cannot make peace in a society we can only build and enforce its structures.

What we usually adopt to address violent conflict is akin to peacekeeping operations which aim to de-escalate conflict, prevent its spread and further degeneration, its main target is to separate warring parties through superior fire power, curfew, shoot on sight order, declaration of state of emergency. These are “quick fixes” but a non-effective measure that leaves root causes unaddressed. Crimes have also been recorded against the military during operations and extrajudicial killings, this leads to distrust and anger against the state that seldom bring them to account.

The Nigerian state and citizens alike has advanced several excuses in the bid to explain the killings that have become almost normal. Some are ethnic/cultural considerations and religious differences. The Zamfara banditry and killings defy the usually explanation of different people pitched against each other. The state is homogeneous in nature, mostly comprising Hausa/Fulani tribe that adhere to Islam as their faith.

Most crises that occur in Nigeria are ethnic or religious in nature. Though they often start as ethnic or identity crisis, they are ultimately given religious colourations. This is not strange because certain tribes and ethnic groups are mostly adherents of particular faiths. Majority of Hausa/Fulani mostly domiciled in the North are Muslims with different ethnic groups and tribes who are adherents of Christianity scattered among them. Often ethnicity and religion are meddled and expressed as one and same.

In the whole of Northern Nigeria only Zamfara, Katsina and Sokoto states lack the dichotomy of minority tribes that are Christians, so the usual ethnic/religious explanation we often adduce cannot hold sway.

Zamfara state was carved out of Sokoto on October 1, 1996, by Gen. Sani Abacha. Apart from the demonstration from Sokoto state people against the creation of a new state, the Sharia implementation crisis; it used to be one of the most peaceful states in Nigeria. Zamfara became one of the most hit by the criminal activities of cattle rustlers, and now banditry. Unapproved and unregulated mining of minerals turned the state into an epicentre of violence and crime.

The state is characterised by poverty and infrastructure deficit, 22 years after its creation. To great extents, economic and human needs theory of conflict may give valuable insights to the crisis that pervades the state at the moment. From the perspective of abject poverty, inequitable distribution of wealth, the huge gap between the very few rich and the vastly poor population, the struggle to fill the existing middle gap by an army of unemployed and aggrieved sets the ground for conflict.

The human needs theory shares similarities to relative deprivation and frustration aggression theories of conflict. Denial was adduced by Boko Haram as one of their reasons for raising arms against the Nigerian state; the agitators for Biafra also stated perceived marginalisation as one of their reasons for seeking to secede from Nigeria. These needs touch the core of humans and are non-negotiable. They are subsistence, identity, freedom, security, participation and affection. They cannot be countenanced. This theory argues that when these needs are met, the conflict they caused will be resolved; these are underpinnings of peace building.

In 2016, the UN Centre for Peace Disarmament in Africa warned that proliferation of illicit small and light arms and weapons in Nigeria has resulted to a stockpile of about 350 million. The numbers looked outrageous then, but weapons constantly intercepted by the Nigerian Customs have given this assertion some weight. Government must adopt the disarmament approach to facilitate a long term achievement of peace by making combatants armless, with no weapons to fight. This strategy reduces human and material destruction.

Crisis in neighbouring countries has fuelled this problem. Libya, Mali and Central African Republic had a trade route with Nigeria. This route has become the ways for weapons to reach us through our virtually unpoliced borders. In particular, there are many thriving outlets in Nigeria that produce and sell guns, popularly called “Aba guns”. These outlets also make petrol bombs. They are scattered around the country but mostly located in the eastern parts.

In the pursuance of durable peace through peace-building, the Nigerian government can borrow a leaf from UN Intervention in Albania that saved the country from total political collapse after large quantities of small and light weapons were looted from the army armoury in 1977. The UNDP developed a community based programme in Gramsch, Albania, where illegal arms were surrendered. The organisation embarked on local development projects like roads repairs and telecommunication build-ups, which were engagement in employment. The given incentives made the demobilisation a success.

As soon as the unfortunate peacekeeping exercise in Zamfara has achieved its aim of subduing the bandits, government must remove arms in circulation. Demobilisations if properly handled can help the bandits and citizens develop a culture of confidence-building and achieving mutual trust and cooperation in a new atmosphere of peace. The military structure of the bandits should be identified and disbanded and efforts should be made to reintegrate repented bandits into the society.

 Onido writes from Abuja.

Leave a Reply