The
federal government recently denied that they engage Australian
negotiator Stephen Davis to help broker peace with the Boko haram
insurgents. Davis in an interview with Vanguard corroborated the FG
stance but he added that Boko haram members have promised to release the
Chibok girls if their sponsors were arrested. Below is an excerpt of
the interview:
What do you have to show that you were engaged by the Nigerian government to negotiate with Boko Haram?
I
was not engaged by the Federal Government of Nigeria, any state
government or any other party. I went to Nigeria in late April in an
effort to facilitate a handover of the Chibok captives after discussing
such a possibility with former commanders of JAS (Jama’atu Ahlul Sunnah
Lih Da’awa wal Jihad otherwise known as JAS) and others close to Boko
Haram.
Why did you release the report of your assignment to the media instead of sending it to government?
I
did not construct a report of my efforts in Nigeria. As I said earlier,
I was not engaged by any party and therefore had no obligation to
report to anyone.
Some
Nigerians find it curious that you decided to give your report only to
Arise TV, owned by a Nigerian, Nduka Obiagbena, who also owns Thisday
Newspapers and may be sympathetic to some politicians in Nigeria.
I
gave a radio interview to the ABC in Australia which subsequently told
me that after the transcript was posted to their online site, it had
been picked up in the UK and Sky News requested an interview. In the
hope of bringing attention to the many other girls and boys kidnapped by
Boko Haram, I agreed to a television interview. That interview took
place in Channel 7 studios in Australia and it was at that point that I
was told it was an interview with Arise TV. I had not heard of Arise TV
and did not know it was owned by a Nigerian or indeed that it had any
association with Nigeria. At the time of giving the TV interview, I was
of the understanding that it would be broadcast by Sky News in the UK.
On Mr Obiagbena, I have not met him or ever been contacted by him.
Many
Nigerians find it extremely difficult to understand how the former
Chief of the Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Ihejirika, who actually fought Boko
Haram elements and was accused of genocide could be linked with
sponsoring the violent group.
It
is much easier to understand Mr Sheriff’s alleged association with Boko
Haram than any association of Mr Ihejirika. Mr Sheriff was said to
have a long history of promoting groups to assist in his past efforts to
win the governorship of Borno State. On 29 July 2009, there was a
confrontation with security officers at Mamudo Village, along
Potiskum/Damaturu Road, Yobe. 33 JAS members were killed. Later that
night, there was a long battle with combined security operatives at
Railway Terminus, Maiduguri, Borno State. Scores were killed and the
JAS operational base was destroyed. Yusuf was subsequently captured by
the military and handed over to the police. The JAS alleged that it was
on Sheriff’s orders that Yusuf was executed in Maiduguri on 30 July
2009. Shekau was presumed killed in the same battle and a corpse was
identified as that of Shekau. Thus the remaining JAS leaders made it
clear their intention was to kill Sheriff and so it is right that
Sheriff claims he is a victim of JAS. The Boko Haram we see today is
not the JAS that was operational under Yusuf. Shekau emerged in mid-2010
and publicly claimed the leadership of a reinvigorated JAS.
Shekau
formed Ansaru which he used for kidnapping and beheading victims. This
behaviour was a major departure from the original mandate of the JAS
which was to purify Islam and return it to the behaviour example in the
life of the Prophet. Many among the JAS leadership are no longer active
and others have been killed. This has allowed Shekau to take the JAS to
more extreme action and expanded the kidnapping, bombing and
slaughtering. The Boko Haram we have today is a much expanded Ansaru.
What we see now is not the Yusufiya which wanted very much to settle
scores with Sheriff. It is Boko Haram as a partner to ISIS and Al
Shabaab.
Now
I will offer an opinion as to the motives of the sponsors of Boko
Haram.The political sponsors of Boko Haram seem to think that they can
use Boko Haram to terrorise Nigeria to demonstrate that the current
government cannot ensure the security of Nigerian citizens both Muslim
and Christian. Therein the sponsors assume they can undermine any
efforts of the current government to be re-elected in 2015. Herein lies
the flaw for the conflict and instability currently being fanned suits
the aims of Al Qa’eda and the architects of terrorism. Should the
sponsors of Boko Haram win government in 2015, they will likely find
that they cannot turn Boko Haram off or that Boko Haram will demand
control of at least Borno State in return for reducing their attacks.
Borno State may be just the beginning of an expanding caliphate.
Several
Boko Haram commanders and other persons close to and respected by Boko
Haram have told me the names of some of the sponsors of Boko Haram. They
have also described how some funds are transferred and arms made
available. I have made public some of that information. I have also been
told by some commanders that if one of the sponsors is arrested, they
will surrender, release the girls and give information on the
sponsors. Not all Boko Haram commanders will follow this lead but it may
be a firm step towards dismantling or at least isolating Boko Haram.
No comments:
Post a Comment