John G. Stoessinger, the famous political analyst and author in his book ‘Why Nations go to War’ emphasised the role of political and military leaders in taking their nations to war.
In conventional terms, it is the leaders -political or military- who decide whether the nation goes to war or not. The buck stops on their table hence it is instructive that leaders take optimum precautions before going to war so as not to plunge their nations into needless cataclysm.
Stoessinger’s assessment of the theory and practice of war is also predicated on what really a nation stands to gain by going to war. In his analysis of the continuous nay incessant Arab – Israel war in the Middle East, Stoessinger described the leadership decisions of the Arab and Israeli leaders as a zero-sum game which these leaders use to make war attractive and draw their nations into conflict which most times is not necessary.
Obviously, the decisions to go to war do not usually go according to plan as they don’t achieve the desired political or economic outcomes. A war is like a closed keg of gun powder. Don’t open it unless you must because if you do, the powder spills and everybody gets some drops on their bodies.
There is never a winner in a war as all gladiators will at the end of the day, count their losses no matter how minimal. At the end of a war, all gladiators fall on the losing side.
The current scenario of a possible war between Nigeria (leading the ECOWAS forces) and Niger Republic can be described as a zero – sum game because any gains by Nigeria will be cancelled out by the losses of Niger Republic and vice versa. Come to think of it, Niger Republic is more or less an extension of Northern Nigeria not less the other way round. These two identical parts of Africa are brothers intrinsically tied together by blood, marriage, religion, tradition, trade and tribe. Any attack on Niger republic could well be construed as an attack on northern Nigeria. This is the reason behind the continuing diplomatic shuttles by prominent northerners in Nigeria; traditional rulers, Islamic clerics and notable elders and politicians to stop any attacks on Niger Republic by Nigeria and its allies in ECOWAS with the Western powers lurking behind the scene and waiting in ambush. Indeed, we shouldn’t forget in a hurry how France supported Biafra who fought albeit unsuccessfully to dismember Nigeria leading to the civil war between 1967-1970.
The North is understandably edgy and disturbed by the potentials of war between Nigeria and Niger republic. Even before the first shot is fired, the North is already counting huge losses; the economy of the region is on the downward spiral, Nigerian communities particular those along the borders with Niger republic and who have been terrorised sufficiently by bandits and terrorists are becoming more edgy.
The losses in terms of trade and commerce in the unlikely event of a breakout of hostilities between the two sister-nations could be devastating. So far, traders mostly from Northern Nigeria are reported to be losing billions of Naira weekly due to the closure of the border with Niger republic. The Arewa economic forum (AEF) reports that traders mostly from Northern Nigeria are losing N13 billion weekly due to the closure of the Nigeria – Niger border. This is just as over 2,000 containers carrying perishable food items and coming into Nigeria through the border with Niger republic are trapped and the products lost.
Equally, the centre for the promotion of public enterprise (CPPE) estimates that Nigeria could lose $2 billion annually in trade in the event of any military intervention in Niger republic.
Recall that the closure of the Nigeria – Niger border was part of the strategic nay daydreaming efforts by the Nigerian government to force the Niger junta to handover power back to the ousted President Mohammed Bazoum.
Is a military intervention in Niger Republic really worth it?
Between 1989- 1997, Nigeria spent $8 billion as the sponsor-in-chief of the Liberian war but what did the country gained from it? Nothing but the loss of hundreds of our gallant soldiers.
Why should Nigeria go to war with Niger Republic when ragtag bandits and terrorists have held our country especially the Northern part of Nigeria to ransom and they have not been subdued by our military?
Going to war with Niger Republic will amount to overstretching our military who are already fighting an unconventional war with bandits and terrorists in Northern Nigeria some of whom are nationals of Niger republic. In fact, it is doubtful if the Nigerian military can defeat that of Niger Republic when juxtaposed with the fact that our soldiers have not been able to smoke out and finally decimate Boko haram, bandits and terrorists in the North, IPOB/ESN terrorists who have turned the South East into a war zone, Niger Delta economic terrorists who are stealing Nigeria’s oil and have done so much damage to Nigeria’s oil infrastructure.
If the Nigerian military cannot defeat bandits and common criminals in its backyard, how can we be confident that they (our military) can defeat a conventional army in far away Niger Republic? The Boko haram war has been going on in Nigeria for 14 years now and counting.
This is not saying that our gallant soldiers are not doing anything about the current rate of insecurity in Nigeria. They are doing a lot, we appreciate what they are doing because without our gallant military, the situation could have been worse than it is today. A lot of our servicemen and women have paid the Supreme price to defend us. May their souls rest in peace Amin
The political consequences of the break up of war between Nigeria and Niger Republic could be dire. For one, President Tinubu’s second term agenda will be in jeopardy if Nigeria goes to war with Niger Republic because it will be difficult to get the Northern voters to buy in and support Tinubu in 2027. The North is currently under siege from bandits and terrorists hence any war with Niger republic will only add to the misfortunes of the already traumatised Northern region.
War is not a tea party or a coffee sipping event but a very serious and sensitive issue. It must be a last resort and should only be on the table if all diplomatic measures have failed. In the case under reference, there is no need to place war as an option. All that is required from the Tinubu administration is to continue applying diplomatic pressure in form of talks, dialogue and negotiations until the Niger military junta releases a realistic transition time table for the restoration of democracy in that country.
To continue calling for Bazoum’s reinstatement as President of Niger Republic will amount to begging the question. One has to believe that the camel can pass through the eye of the needle to think that the military will ever transfer power back to Bazoum.
The Tinubu administration should as a matter of urgency, open up the border and restore electricity supply to Niger Republic.
At the end of the day, it is the poor man on the street that bears the brunt. We should not be unmindful of the fact that the Kainji Dam, the major source of electricity in Nigeria passes through Niger republic.
The decision to draw the line between war and peace is a difficult one for a nation especially when certain conditions are not satisfied. Key among such conditions is the threat to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a nation. Another is when the economic or political interests of a nation are at stake. None of these conditions is at stake for Nigeria to justify going to war with Niger republic.
The only issue driving Nigeria towards a possible war with Niger republic is alleged to be pressure from France and other western powers. From all indications, France, a major slave – master to Niger republic is not ready to lose Niger as it did Mali, Guinea and Burkina Faso that have falling into the hands of military putschists and crusaders who have vowed to ‘take their country back. Mali and Burkina Faso have both declared that any attack on Niger republic is an attack on them . The coming into action by these countries in the event of war could heighten stakes and further destabilise the west African subregion.
THE DOMINO EFFECT
The fear of a domino effect could be one of the reasons why the ECOWAS led by Nigeria is hellbent on going to war with Niger republic. If the coup in Niger republic is allowed to succeed, it could encourage other wannabe coup plotters in west African countries including Nigeria to do a copy cat of the coup in Niger republic.
France is the major beneficiary of Niger republic’s huge Uranium deposits and will always want to be in control to avoid Niger Republic falling into the hands of its (France’s) enemies.
The U.S, Britain and their allies will also not be happy to see Niger Republic slipping away. Remember that Russia is on the sidelines waiting to form alliances with Africa to checkmate the seeming monopoly of America and Europe in Africa. In fact, Russia has opposed any military action against Niger’s junta and even extended an olive branch to Niger republic and other African countries for a security and economic cooperation.
The only silent voice is that of China who controls Niger Republic’s oil reserves but China has remain mute and yet to publicly take sides in the current debate on Niger’s coup quagmire.
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION
A realistic assessment of facts on the ground will reveal that a Nigeria-Niger war is not likely. This is because President Tinubu cannot unilaterally declare war and/or deploy troops to invade any country without the consent of the Nigerian legislature; the two chambers of the National Assembly viz senate and the House of Representatives sitting in a joint session. The position of the constitution, Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) is very clear on the deployment of troops outside Nigeria.
Section 4(a)(b) of the CFRN 1999 (as amended) is clear, explicit and unambiguous that:
- (a) the President shall not declare a state of war between the Federation and another country except with the sanction of a resolution of both Houses of the National Assembly, sitting in a joint session; and
(b) except with the prior approval of the Senate, no member of the armed forces of the Federation shall be deployed on combat duty outside Nigeria.
Although section 4 forecloses any window for the President to unilaterally declare war with another country without the consent of the National Assembly, section 5 offers a short window for the President to deploy troops to another country in consultation with the national defence council (NDC) but with the condition that Nigeria’s national security is under imminent and real threat. Even in this window, the President must seek the consent of the senate within 7 days of actual combat and the senate may give or refuse such consent. In fact, section 4(b) is clear that no member of the Nigerian armed forces shall be deployed outside Nigeria without the consent of the senate.
Clearly, it is difficult and possibly impossible for President Tinubu to secure the consent of the senate and the House of Representatives to go war with Niger Republic.
In the light of the senate’s objection on 6/8/23 to President Tinubu’s request to deploy troops to Niger republic ‘to restore democracy’, it can be concluded that even if the President represents any request to the senate for military intervention in Niger republic, such request cannot scale the hurdle at the senate and House of Representatives.
Recall that the senate has rejected President Tinubu’s request to deploy troops to Niger republic in its sitting on 6th August 2023.
A WORD FOR THE PUTSCHISTS
The military junta in Niger republic should understand that a coup is an aberration. The current world order promotes the ideals of democracy and the rule of law. Any country that employs martial law and military dictatorship or uses the barrel of the gun to capture power at the expense of constitutional democracy and elected government will be soundly rejected, sidelined and isolated from the global family.
To this end, the General Abdourahamane Tchiani-led junta must as a matter of urgency, return Niger Republic to democracy and constitutional order within 16 months. In this regard, the junta should release a time table for a return to civilian rule with a handover date of 1st January 2025. The military junta should remember what happened to Samuel Doe of Liberia and Charles Taylor of the same country just to mention but a few.
In conclusion, The current efforts by ECOWAS against the military junta in Niger republic can be understood if they are meant to pile up pressure on the junta to move faster and return the landlocked nation to civilian rule. However, such efforts should not be upgraded to a military intervention as a result of the dire consequences a war will have on both countries.
What is required now is for the Tinubu administration and the ECOWAS to step up efforts and get Niger republic’s military junta to release a realistic time table for the republic’s return to civilian rule with a handover date on or before 1st January 2025.
A war cannot achieve what peace cannot.
–Dr Alkali is petroleum engineer and public policy analyst
