No Peace For Terrorists

The continued nefarious activities of criminal elements in the country are still a serious source of concern to Nigerians. These set of people, who indulge in their illicit pastime of inconveniencing peace-loving Nigerians, by their obduracy and unbridled recalcitrance, perceive the change in the nation’s security architecture as not serious enough to deter them in their deadly mission.

What is surprising, as far as this newspaper is concerned, is the politicization of criminality by some politically-exposed persons who may want to reap some benefits from the pain and anguish Nigerians are subjected to by these bandits, kidnappers and terrorists.

We are persuaded to arrive at this understanding of the call by some politicians on the government to grant amnesty to these criminals. In other words, that they should be given a slap on the back, asked to go and sin no more.

We recall that this was exactly what Buhari’s administration tried to do without success as it embarked on the wasteful deradicalization programme that actually emboldened the terrorists. Governors of the North west states, one after another, signed memoranda of understanding with these criminals that only exposed them to embarrassment as these terrorists reneged on the terms of the agreement even before the ink dried on the paper they were signed. Actually, the terrorists used the period of the agreement to regroup, restrategise and remobilize against the people.

It is from this perspective and mostly because of the inoperability of such decisions in the past by government that we support the Chief of Army Staff, Major General Taoreed Lagbaja’s position of not engaging in any form of embrace with elements whose hands are already soaked with the blood of innocent Nigerians. He made it very clear and we agree with him, that there will be no amnesty for bandits and terrorists. The General went even further to direct units under him to clampdown on all criminal elements in whatever form they may manifest.

Specifically, the army chief directed the deployment of more platforms and release of more funds to reactivate unserviceable platforms to boost troops’ operations in the various theatres. We are compelled to admonish the army high command to be professional in their command-and-control functions.

We make this appeal because, in the past, command interference for reasons that were not sufficiently professional were also assumed to have ruined many a military operation. This gave rise to allegations of the fight against insecurity becoming an industry. This, in our opinion, explains the failure of the security agencies under the past administration to rein in the excesses of bandits and terrorists who, at some point, started seeing themselves as state actors in some regions imposing and collecting taxes as well as carrying out other duties ordinarily reserved for elected political leaders.

Similarly, it is pertinent to remind the army high command on the advisability of equipping the foot soldiers adequately so as to enable them to carry out their duties in the desired manner. In saying this, we suggest that the use of technology be emphasized. Furthermore, soldiers in the frontline must be serviced with actionable intelligence that will guarantee efficiency and effectiveness of measures to be put in place to decisively deal with criminals and their sponsors.

It has been proved elsewhere that the only language criminals understand is the application and use of deadly force. To them, negotiation is a sign of weakness. The army, trained to apply maximum force, must understand this more even in the interpretation of the rules of engagement.

We, as a newspaper, will remain consistent in our argument that bandits and terrorists deserve no mercy because, in their own operations, they show no mercy to their victims. Besides, in all international conventions, some of which were domesticated by Nigeria, governments have the principle of not negotiating with terrorists.

In Nigeria’s peculiar case, most of these terrorists are the creation of politicians who engage their services, arm and pay them in the pursuit of their political agenda. As a matter of fact, that was the main reason why those agreements never worked in the first place. It was not that the criminals did not keep to their own side of the bargain which would have been unusual. In most cases, it was that the politicians themselves were not sincere enough in their dealings with the criminals, making promises they did not intend to keep.

However, it is imperative to stress, in our view, that the soldiers, this time round, must not show any sign of weakness that the criminals will take undue advantage of. Or for that matter, give room for speculation on their culpability, real or imagined, in the drive to deal the terrorists the kind of blow that will silence them permanently. The honeymoon of the past era must come to an end. About time, too.