No one is shouting down Mr. Mohammed. He is being rightly criticized for punctilious posturing in the U.K. when he should roundly stand tall in Nigeria. He does not seem to know what it means for a citizen to be proud and respectful of themselves and their country's sovereignty. Did he spare a thought on what the members of his U.K. audience thought of him and his country while he washed his country's dirty linen right before them in the Palace of Westminster? Should he not know that if roles were reversed, no publicity secretary of any British political party would consider making a similar presentation to a sub-committee of Nigeria's National Assembly. Is his mind that small?
Okay he made his presentation in London. What was his and his party's expected positive outcome? Has this outcome been realized? If it does would it augur well for Nigeria? Is it likely that the British government will work better and harder to help end the Boko Haram insurgency, because of Mr. Mohammed's presentation in London?
President Jonathan was criticized for not seeking or accepting Western assistance with bringing back the Chibok girls. He has now. Are the girls back? It is scary that the national publicity secretary of a national political party that seeks to govern Nigeria is as lacking in political consciousness as Mr. Mohammed seems to be. It is more scary that no one in his party's leadership saw what was grossly embarrassing and wrong with Mr. Mohammed's sojourn in the U.K. The Igbo say that anyone who uses their choice saucepan for ashes' disposal, risks a neighbor passing stool in the saucepan. If only Africa's past, present, and aspiring leaders thought better and more highly of themselves and their countries. Fela Anikulapo Kuti talked famously about colonial mentality. There are many in the APC who if they heard him, do not understand him.
oa
From: Cornelius Hamelberg [mailto:corneliushamelberg@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 2:35 PM
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Cc: NaijaObserver@yahoogroups.com; naijaintellects@googlegroups.com; naijanet@googlegroups.com; nigerianID@yahoogroups.com; Talknigeria@yahoogroups.com; Anunoby, Ogugua
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - How Jonathan, PDP benefit from Boko Haram insurgency
Sir,
My two kobo's worth:
We have yet to hear any region or group of people come out openly as supporters of Boko Haram. As things are today – from this distance - it feels safe to say that a vote for President Goodluck Jonathan is also a vote against Boko Haram – because he is the Nigerian authority that officially has the responsibility of protecting the lives and property of Nigerians, of safeguarding the constitution and solving the problem of Boko Haram, not permitting them to declare an independent caliphate on sovereign Nigerian territory etc...
We are to assume that if the APC front –runner, whoever he may be) were in Government/ governing Nigeria today, we would not believe that they were in bed with Boko Haram either, without any evidence to support such a claim. It is President Goodluck Jonathan himself who has said, " Boko Haram is everywhere !"
Considering that President Goodluck Jonathan has probably enlisted help from the UK government in tackling Boko Haram, however dubious Mr Lai Muhammad's representations may look in your eyes, the information that he presents to the sub-committee could be relevant in helping to track down some of Boko Haram's financial backers etc...
Otherwise, in my view there's always that lingering but still tenuous relationship between Man Friday and Robinson Crusoe , the colonial legacy of trotting over to 10 Downing Street to complain to Massa : the same kind of duplicity when the SLPP leader was eager to acquaint Downing Street with his premonitions, not to a sub-committee of the House of Commons but with a full page opinion piece "Britain can help Sierra Leone to free and fair elections" in The Guardian. We must be on our guard.
If there's any possibility that Mr Lai Muhammad is telling the truth (that the Goodluck Jonathan government is exploiting the Boko Haram people, for their own savage purposes) then what he has to say must be given a fair hearing - (they are ostensibly doing it for the good of Nigeria) so why shout Mr. Muhammad down even before you are familiar with the contents of the document presented: Challenges of Insecurity in Nigeria and Boko Haram Insurgency
This thing about "do not negotiate with terrorists" – if releasing the Boko Haram prisoners would result in peace and quiet, would you do it?
Over here it's three days to the General Elections. Power sweet...
On Thursday, 11 September 2014 19:03:03 UTC+2, Anunoby, Ogugua wrote:
What is the point of Mr. Mohammed's travel to London, England. Why was his presentation to a sub-committee of the U.K.'s House of Commons necessary? Is it U.K. money to help pay his party's 2015 presidential election expenses, beef up his resume- I made a presentation to a U.K. House of Commons sub-committee. visa privileges at the U.K High Commission in Abuja, all expenses paid vacation abroad? What I wonder?
Does Mr. Mohammed speak for himself and/or his party when he compares Boko Haram (BK) to MEND and the OPC? Either way is very instructive. He seems to blame the Jonathan government for BK's existence, brutality, and crimes. He seems to believe that BK is a political organization even though BK has always described herself as a radical Islamic movement with an unadulterated "puritanical" religion mission. Why else would he recommend political negotiations with them? Does he see possible benefits for his party from so recommending? He seems to me to be sympathetic to the BK's cause. Is that why he seems to advocate for BK?
Mr. Mohammed would be expected to know that his London audience members are part of a government that does not, repeat does not negotiate with terrorists? He apparently does not. Why is that? Mr. Mohammed in my considered opinion disgraced Nigeria in London and compromised her sovereignty by his presentation. He should know that the British government has enough intelligence assets in Nigeria to not need him or his party for reliable information on the BK insurgency in Nigeria. Did he and his party think through his course of action and the risks for their party and country? Why was it necessary? What are the expected benefits? Was he invited to make the presentation? Did he invite himself?
I have no choice but to conclude that Mr. Mohammed seems to have travelled to London, England to court British government's support for his party in the 2015 presidential election. Why his party needs that support only he and his party can tell Nigerians. Nigerians now know that the British government will hold some sway over the APC if she wins the 2015 presidential election. Will such a sway on a party in government, augur well for Nigeria and Nigerians? That is for Nigerians to take some time to ponder.
oa
-----Original Message-----
From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com [mailto:usaafric...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Kola Fabiyi
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 7:36 AM
To: NaijaO...@yahoogroups.com; naijain...@googlegroups.com; naij...@googlegroups.com; niger...@yahoogroups.com; usaafric...@googlegroups.com; Talkn...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - How Jonathan, PDP benefit from Boko Haram insurgency
[Premium Times Nigeria]
How Jonathan, PDP benefit from Boko Haram insurgency - Lai Mohammed
The spokesperson for the opposition All Progressives Congress, APC, Lai Mohammed, has told the British Parliament that President Goodluck Jonathan and Nigeria's ruling Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, are manipulating the Boko Haram crisis to return Mr. Jonathan to power in 2015.
Presenting a paper titled "Challenges of Insecurity in Nigeria and Boko Haram Insurgency" to a sub-committee of the House of Commons in the United Kingdom Monday, Mr. Mohammed listed six ways he said the ruling party was exploiting the bloody campaign by Boko Haram for political gains.
First, he said, the crisis has been used by the PDP to launder Mr. Jonathan's image through his participation at key international meetings.
"Curiously, Boko Haram has now become a way of getting the international community to talk and meet with President Goodluck, and gain international media coverage," he said.
He said the PDP-led government is using the crises, especially the #Bringbackourgirls campaign that follows the abduction of over 200 school girls from their school hostel in April, to blackmail opposition groups, and to impose emergency rule in states and areas controlled by opposition political parties.
He also accused the ruling party of using the crisis to harass and restrict media freedom (through military clampdowns), and for justifying illegal activities, he stated.
"The status quo favours the PDP and President GEJ. Why? Boko Haram affected areas and indeed the Northern region are APC strongholds, hence Boko Haram crises, the declaration of emergency rule and general atmosphere of insecurity in the North is likely to affect voting (low turnout due to displacement)," Mr. Mohammed said.
"There is already talk of cancelling elections in some areas in the Northeast, all plots designed to minimize President Jonathan-PDP electoral losses in the North and enhance the likelihood of a PDP victory."
The meeting of the House of Commons Monday received updates from the UK foreign affairs department on the situation in crisis-prone nations in Africa and elsewhere.
On Boko Haram, the committee was told that Boko Haram's claim to have established a caliphate in north eastern Nigeria "does not have any credibility outside this group of terrorists".
"Boko Haram does not command widespread popular support. They continue to deliberately target the weak and vulnerable, causing suffering in communities of different faiths and ethnicities," said Hugo Swire, the Conservative MP for East Devon.
In his presentation, Mr. Mohammed detailed the genesis of the group and how it grew into an ultra-violent sect after a government crackdown, and how its operations have increasingly been exploited by the PDP and President Jonathan.
"The Boko Haram crises is readily used by the PDP to rationalize the Jonathan Government's abdication of its constitutional responsibilities, including visits and assistance to areas affected, effective response to kidnappings and abductions," he said.
He added that the declaration of emergency rule in the three north eastern states of Adamawa, Borno and Yobe, and the massive increases in spending on security without correspondent impact, have become a "political gimmick" by the PDP.
Mr. Mohammed accused the ruling party of actively politicizing the declaration of emergency rule, saying that the government is ever quick to propose and declare emergency rule in areas controlled by opposition political parties, but not in PDP-controlled states even where the scale of violence, killings and destruction are similar.
"For example, despite incessant violence, killings, displacement and destruction in Taraba, Benue and Plateau (PDP controlled states), the PDP has been quick to discount the possibility of a full scale emergency rule, however it is quick to impose emergency rule in non-PDP states at the slightest episode of violence.
Mr. Mohammed said the Federal Government has spent about $32.88 billion since 2009 on defence, with nothing to show for it.
The APC spokesperson said his party was recommending an urgent formulation of a holistic counter-terrorism strategy that emphasizes the "synergistic use of military, political and economic elements".
He also called for a "political negotiation with Boko Haram", noting that all recent cases of internal security challenges (militias. etc.), including the OPC, MEND, etc. across Nigeria have all been resolved through political negotiations of some sort.
"Boko Haram cannot be an exception," he said.
The APC, he said, is also calling for development programmes for youth in the affected areas, and a United Nations-led peace initiative.
The party called for security reforms in Nigeria and for the trial of the alleged sponsors of the sect by the International Criminal Court.
"There is no doubt that Boko Haram has committed crimes against humanity in its scorched-earth campaign against unarmed citizens, and the most appropriate body to investigate and try the sect's sponsors is the ICC," he said.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsub...@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
No comments:
Post a Comment