RELIGION AND THE FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP IN NIGERIA: THE CASE OF BOKO HARAM.

Abstract

This paper examines how religion has affected leadership in Nigeria. It also emphasizes on how the two major religions in Nigeria; Islam, and Christianity created unhealthy rivalry among the various groups in Nigeria through their expansionist agenda. This work also examines the inter faith clashes between Muslims/Christians; and how Islamic Sect movement aided the rise of Boko Haram insurgency. The central argument in this paper therefore, is on how religious rivalries resulted in the emergence of Boko Haram insurgency. Arguments were also put forward on how sustainable peace can be achieved among various religious groups.

Introduction

Nigeria unarguably came to be a country born not out of the consent of its people, but out of the making and imagination of British colonial government. Prior to 1914 different ethnic groups that make up the Nigerian state had an organized ways of life. Following the outcome of the Berlin conference of 1885, the part of West Africa that would later be called Nigeria was ceded to British like a piece of cake on a birthday party. (Achebe, 2012). Consequently by 1914 Lord Lugard merged the northern and southern protectorate and named it Nigeria.
Nigeria is a multi-ethnic, and multi religious state with over 250 different languages, and a population of about 170 million people cutting across ethnic divides and religious beliefs. Hence Nigeria is unarguably regarded as the most populous black nation in the world. Although this huge population however, does not automatically translate into good governance and quality leadership. (Sahara Reporters, 2014).

Nigeria comprises 36 States, a federal capital territory, and 774 local government council. It is therefore a complex nation state. (Ogenyi, 2012).
Since independence Nigeria has experienced several ethnic and religious crises of various degrees, and magnitude. (Gilbert, 2013). In view of these crises, successive administrations have been criticized for failing to come up with realistic
framework that will ensure peace and stability. Hence allegiance to a particular religion often dictates the pace of governance in Nigeria.

In the world today, organized religion remains the most powerful force in society; about 5 billion people identify with one of the world’s four biggest religion, and that figure is rising (CNN world News). One of Karl Marx’s popular dictum “religion is the opium of the people” made in 1843 still resonates after 173 years. Religion has therefore remained relevant in Nigeria.
The volatile nature of religious animosity in Nigeria has compelled government at every level to find ways of dousing tension, in other to promote peaceful coexistence among adherents of Islam and Christianity; the dominant religions. Although African Traditional Religion which has lost most of its followers still creates conflicts, but these are subdued by Christian/Muslim divisions. The big question is why is religious resentment so strong in Nigeria that people can resort to violence, insurgency, in order to force their beliefs against other people.

The Muslim/Christian Dichotomy

From a historical perspective, we can recall that Islam entered Nigeria from the North; Christianity came in from the South; the conspicuous similarity is that both religion have expansionist agenda as it is the case in other parts of the world. While Christianity pursues its goal through verbal and moral persuasion, Islam believes in jihad (holy war), which appears violent when compare with the former. As Christianity attempts to expand to the north, Islam resists and pushes it back to the south, the two opposing beliefs therefore meets at the middle belt region of the country; from there the stage was set for series of religious conflict that would later metamorphose into the perennial crisis in the present day north central region of Nigeria. With irreconcilable differences between Christianity and Islam, Plateau State became the springboard for future religious violence and conflict in the middle belt region, as well as other parts of Nigeria. Sadly as this war rages on, the political leaders have not taken any serious lasting measures to douse tension between these opposing beliefs. Over the years, these inter religious rivalries metamorphosed into what we have today in Nigeria as Politics of Religion. Since ethnic, religion, and politics are intrinsically tied together, whenever a follower of any of the two dominant religion ascends to the highest political office in Nigeria, despite our multi religious nature, his primary objective is to use the power at his disposal as a tool to support and spread his religion, while consciously suppressing other opposing religious beliefs with strategic instruments of the state.
For instance, during the reign of the Sarduana of Sokoto as the Premier of the northern region, there was a visible attempt to use the instrument of the state to expand Islam. Hence it became clear that during his administration, Islam was the preferred religion and Muslims were systematically given political and administrative positions to the detriment of other religion, the implication of this motive on Nigeria’s politics is that successive leaders from both religions consciously ensured that ownership of strategic resources and conglomerates is concentrated in the hands of their followers. This trend continued unchecked, overtime economic opportunities and class struggle became intertwined with religion, therefore making it the prism through which the people views and assess political and economic dominance. If the political power is lost, the economic well-being of the losing religion is threatened; hence religion comes in as a protest, and bargaining tool to win it back. For instance, problems arising from president Goodluck Jonathan who is a Christian continuing as President during the Northern and Muslim unofficial “quota” of office (in the PDP then ruling party’s “agreement”) after the premature death of President Umaru Yar’adua was seen as both a provocation, threat , and tantamount to seizing the economic strength of the Muslims. It was therefore not surprise that Islam in the North fought back ferociously as evident in the 2015 general elections in Nigeria to win back political power, although not without the support and votes of some Christians who thought President Jonathan’s leadership is not moving Nigeria in the direction. This resulted in the emergence a Muslim faithful as the new Nigerian leader, in the person President Muhammadu Buhari.

The fragile relationship between Christians and Muslims hindered the possibility of a successful and united response towards Boko Haram insurgency especially at the early stage of the insurgency. Instead of working together to advance a feasible solution towards ending the brutal attacks of the group, the differences inspired anti-Islam bigotry, extreme hate, and resentment of Islam by other religious group. Regrettably the failure of these religious groups to forge a united force against the forces of insurgence, religious extremism, and the rising tide of blame games among its leaders paved the way for the perpetuation of this mayhem, and killings by members of the Boko Haram terrorist group.

Islamic Sect, the Rise of Boko Haram Insurgency.

Shiite and Sunni relationship in Nigeria have never been cordial because of the differences in their mode of worship. This has often created rift and security
challenge in Northern Nigeria. The Shiite are a Muslim minority, their differences according to history was due to divisions resulting from leadership disputes following Prophet Mohammed’s death. Since Sunni are the majority in the Muslim world, Shiites (an abbreviations of “shiatu Ali” or “followers of Ali”) are often suppressed; this is therefore, a large source of conflict not just in Nigeria, but also in the Middle East today.
A Shiite tradition involves elaborate processions, marches, and festivals, and these have led to widespread animosity from the Sunni. There were minor feuds between Shiite, and Sunni Muslims in Sokoto State. Things however escalated rapidly when an anti-Shiite Iman in Northern Nigeria, Iman Umaru Danamaishiyya was murdered by unknown gunman in 2007. His death marked the beginning of Shiite/Sunni violence in Nigeria. The Sunni Muslim followers argued that the former is a violent sect, and trains militias in pursuit and defense of its spiritual obligations. In 2002, Ibrahim Zakzaky, a Muslim cleric and the leader of Nigeria’s Shiite population in an interview with the BBC claimed he trained his men as guards, but it is more “like teaching karate to the boy scouts”. His followers’ also claimed he is no supporter of violence. However incidents involving the group in the last few years (Coincidental, or not, with the rise of Boko Haram) seem to undermine this remark. The increasing tension between the Shiite and Sunni Muslims on one hand, and the Shiite, and the military on the another hand may have contributed to the need for a militia arm of this group in other to shield and protect its members and followers from attack. Regrettably this may have also aided the emergence of Boko Haram. Hence among the Muslims in Nigeria, the Sunni blamed the Shiite for the rise of insurgency in the North. (AIT News Hour, 2015).

Another argument linking the Shiite militias’ group with the insurgents in Nigeria, is the allegiance of Boko Haram to the Islamic extremist group Isls terrorist whose members are mostly Shiites Muslims. On December 16 2015, Nigeria Army attacked members of Shiites Muslims killing some of its followers including the sons of its national leader, while Zakzaky sustained some bullets wound. Reacting on the killings, the King of Saudi Arabia Salam bin Abdulaziz Al Saud in a conversation with the Nigeria’s President Muhammadu Buhari, said the killings of hundreds of Shiites in Zaria was a fight against terrorism. (www.signalng.com December, 2015). This account further explains how Religion contributed strongly to the rise of Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria.

Religion and Leadership

In search of economic survival and sustainability Nigeria joined the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC) in 1986 to the amazement of Christian elites who thought that Nigeria’s admission into the OIC was going to turn the country into an Islamic republic. The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) was formed as a direct response of that event to rally Nigerian Christians in protest against what they perceived as a direct attempt to Islamize Nigeria. Here we can clearly see that an Association that was expected to encourage the advancement of kingdom of Heaven as directed by the Holy Bible is rather involved in movement against government policy even when such policy does not expressly infringe on their constitutional right to freedom of worship. The blatant misinterpretation of the organization of Islamic countries, and what it stands for as evident in Dr. Okogies’ assertion which appeared in the Guardian of February 23, 2000, demonstrates how deliberate misinformation or perhaps ignorance has fanned the amber of religious discord among Christians and Muslim communities in Nigeria. Dr. Okogie went further to stress that the inclusion of the Sharia law in the 1979 constitution was part of the conditions for joining the OIC. As a student of Diplomacy, and International Relations, I can confirm that multilateral relations among countries sometimes produce better results than bilateral relation. This is evident in the contribution, and achievement of Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), Africa Union (AU), and Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) etc. What Nigeria can achieve working with about 56 member countries of the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC) cannot be achieved working with each of them bilaterally. The same is true with all other regional and international bodies where Nigeria is a member nation.
A country drifted towards ethno-religious politics in pursuit of its national interest cannot completely achieve its set goals, and targets. Hence leadership formed on the basis of divisions along religious lines should be discouraged by all and sundry. Today in Nigeria, religious affiliation, and allegiance takes precedence in political appointments at the Federal level. The implication is that we are institutionalizing the political culture of sacrificing excellence, and merit on the altar of ethnicity and religion. And this is not the path towards a stable leadership in Nigeria. Between 2000-2007, the government under Chief Olusegun Obasanjo was strongly criticized by the Muslims for what they described as lopsided Federal appointment
favoring mostly Christian faithful. For instance they argued that the Central Bank of Nigeria Governor, Prof Charles Soludo, being a Christian, should not have been the right person to replace the retired, and outgoing Governor, Dr. Joseph Sanusi who himself was also a Christian. They further questioned the wisdom behind replacing a retired Muslims with Christians, and replacing Christians with Christians, therefore suggesting that President Olusegun Obasanjo is tacitly implying that there seems to be no competent Muslim to ensure a fair distribution of Federal jobs. 9 years after, President Muhammadu Buhari a Muslim is now incumbent President of Nigeria, about 7 months into his 4 years tenure of office, Christians began calling for his resignation from office because of what the perceived as an attempt to Islamize Nigeria through appointment of mostly Muslim faithful in Federal government jobs. This continuous religious agitation between Muslims and Christians further depicts how religion has eaten deep into subconscious thoughts of Nigerians. This ultimately poses threat to elections, democracy, and national development.

Following Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999, the fear of Islamization did not cease, especially among Christian followers as Muslim politicians raised religious based militant groups to unleash mayhem on perceived political opponents. After using them to win elections: they were disbanded, and abandoned. These mercenaries metamorphose into what we see today as Boko Haram; because they were well trained and armed, upon the realization that they politicians had abandoned them, the international Islamic fundamentalists recruited them to fight Jihad, so what started as religious sect, has transformed into an international terrorist organization. Between 2002-2015, they have radically increased in strength and in number with an organized structure to ignite crisis, destroy lives, and properties. They had allegedly links to al-Qaeda, but in March 2015, Boko Haram announced its allegiance to Islamic State of Iraq, and Levant (ISlL). Between 2009-2015, Boko Haram has killed about 30’000 people, and displaced about 2.5 from their homes (News Week Magazine 2015). By 2011 their attacks on Nigerians intensified with sophisticated weapons in strategic locations; suicide bombing of Police stations, followed by the bombing of the United Nations building office in Abuja, made the Nigeria government to change the initial soft approach towards curbing the menace to a more determined military might towards bringing an end to the insurgency. This notwithstanding, the group continued its ferocious attack, killings, and abductions. The height of their inhuman attack was the abduction of about 276 school girls from Chibok community in April 2014.
In response to this, the government under former President Goodluck Jonathan, with support from international community made several committed effort to free the school girls, and crush the insurgents; but corruption in the security service hampered every genuine efforts to counter these terrorists.

The Way Forward To a Sustainable Peace

Unity in diversity remains strength as a nation, understanding the values that differs one tribe from the other will go a long way to ensure lasting peace in Nigeria. Every religion preaches peace, respect, and tolerance, this we must follow carefully in other to build a better society. More so, leaders of various religious bodies should also desist from making inflammatory statements that is capable of inciting their members into violence, because no societal challenges can be addressed through violent means. Increased communications and dialogue remains the way out of a difficult situation. Government at all levels must swiftly engage religious leaders in the event of any disagreement that can degenerate into violence and killings, because protection of lives and properties remains the priority of government. Proactive measures should be put in place to prevent escalation of volatile religious disagreement.
In another perspective, speaking on the menace of insurgency during Channels Television’s weekend breakfast show sunrise, on Saturday June 28, 2014, Mr. Ladi Thompson, a security expert, urged Nigerians to always remain alert, security conscious, and always report any strange movement, or items, to the nearest security agency.
Also speaking on the program, a public affairs analyst, Mr. Dare Ogunlana, noted that there were different approaches to fighting terrorism but noted that using brute and military forces has never solved an insurgency. He went memory lane to mention the case of Hamas-Hezbollah in Lebanon, stating that “there is no way you can deter them; the only thing you can do is to deter their supporters”.

In view of the above suggestion by these security expect, one thing is common in their analysis, and that is temporary measures to take in order to crush the insurgents.
While these suggestions are good approach towards ending the insurgence, it however does not prevent a future occurrence, or resurgence of this brutal movement in the years ahead. Therefore in the long run, I suggest that the federal government take a holistic research on the insurgency
and come up with objective recommendations on preventing future occurrence of similar situation.

Conclusion

Several conflicting issues have been linked to ethnic tension among various groups, but far more dangerous than ethnicity is religious division in Nigeria.
In Nigeria three things are intertwined; as I have earlier stated in this work. Religion, ethnicity, and politics. Sadly these three have been clothed with corruption, poverty, and insecurity, therefore making it difficult to solve one without considering all other factors. This is why a civilized leadership that has the political will, devoid of sentiments is very important in moving Nigeria forward. Therefore religious and political leaders must set aside ethno- religious resentment, partisan politics, and work hand in glove in other to bring this desired leadership to reality.

SOURCES

Oyenyi B.A. (2012), Political Narratives as Historical Realities: Conflict and Ethno-Religious Conflict in Albert I.O (ed), A History of Social Conflict and Conflict Management in Nigeria. John Arches, Ibadan.

2. Newspapers, Magazines, and Journals
Gilbert L.D. (2013), “Ethnic Militancy in Nigeria; A comparative Re-appraisal of three major Ethnic Militias in Southern Nigeria”. ISOR Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. (IOSR-JHSS)
The Genesis; News and Events/Religious Crisis in Niger April 22, 2013.
Newsweek, May 2, 2015.
The Guardian, February 23, 2000
The Guardian, 1 May 2015.
BBC News August 13, 2015.
Flex Onuoh, (2014) “Nigeria Islamist better armed, motivated than army”
Oscar Nkala (defense web) July 29, 2014.