Indict Violators, Not Liberators: New York Times’ Skewed Editorial on Nigeria
By Wale Adedayo
Buhari should be allowed to get quality military materials to end the menace of the animals called Boko Haram finally. He has shown good faith and the capacity of a competent Commander-in-Chief to contain them. TheNew York Timesshould not give Boko Haram room to wriggle out of Buhari’s grip due to a defective argument about selling weapons to a military that abuses human rights. The two are different issues. And should be so treated.
I am not a fan of President Muhammadu Buhari. And, arguments by the New York Times about gross human rights abuses by the Nigerian military, even under Buhari, persists. The Nigerian military acts as if this is not a democracy. Extra-judicial killings by its men is yet to abate.
Hundreds of unarmed Shiites were massacred by the Nigerian Army in Zaria recently. Till date, nobody has been questioned. Instead, one of Buhari’s closest political associates, Kaduna State Governor Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai, set up a kangaroo judicial commission of inquiry to investigate the killings.
Fate played a fast one on the governor as the secretary to Kaduna State government confirmed that hundreds of victims of the massacre were given mass burial by the authorities. It confirmed what we already knew, but which the Army, with Buhari’s support, had always denied.
But good as this Editorial is about concern for human rights abuses by the Nigerian military, it remains fatally flawed in its argument against the sale of weapons that the military could use to quickly put an end to the menace of Boko Haram. It is not only the New York Times that believes Boko Haram is deadlier than ISIS. The group has killed and continues to kill more people than Al Qaeda and ISIS put together.
Is this Editorial then suggesting that the killing of the innocent by Boko Haram should continue? Interestingly, it submits, and one agrees with it, that Buhari has done more than ineffectual former President Goodluck Jonathan in tackling Boko Haram. So, why not encourage the man to finish the job by assisting him with the necessary tools?
As Yoruba elders would say, “Ori bibe ko ni oogun ori fifo.” You do not behead a person with migraine. What a newspaper like the New York Times should push for are sanctions against the military officers and men responsible for the many atrocities recorded against the Nigerian military during encounters with the civilian population.
Good enough, there are names already. The officers in charge of these operations have been identified. Their units are known. Amnesty International and other human rights organisation have done commendable work in this regard. New York Times‘ effort should have just been a follow up on these laudable efforts.
We want to end the Boko Haram tragedy as quickly as possible. The New York Timesshould not lend itself as an accomplice to producing more widows and fatherless children in Northern Nigeria and beyond due to the ungodly activities of Boko Haram.
There is nothing wrong in the New York Timesurging the International Criminal Court to look into the many confirmed cases on the ground IF Buhari refuses to take action. That is the way to go. That is what is good for humanity. Unless, of course, New York Times feels that only the lives of Syrians and Iraqis matter, not that of some black people in a basket case called Nigeria.
This Editorial also says, “The Obama administration was so concerned about this record that two years ago it blocked Israel’s sale of American-made Cobra attack helicopters to Nigeria and ended American training of Nigerian troops.” This was wrong. Not just wrong. But very wrong.
As we accuse some of these military men of wrongdoings, many brilliant and very brave ones among them have been killed on the field of battle simply because they did not have access to quality equipment, which New York Times confirms was blocked from getting to them by President Barack Obama. For some of us, the blood of these slain officers and men of the Nigerian military remain on the heads of those who wrongly advised President Obama, as he then chose to cut off the head instead of treating migraine.
Buhari should be allowed to get quality military materials to end the menace of the animals called Boko Haram finally. He has shown good faith and the capacity of a competent Commander-in-Chief to contain them. The New York Times should not give Boko Haram room to wriggle out of Buhari’s grip due to a defective argument about selling weapons to a military that abuses human rights. The two are different issues. And should be so treated.
On a last note, abuses by the Egyptian military are worse than those that obtain in Nigeria. Yet, the American government hardly takes a dime from Egypt before supplying weapons to its military in the name of aid. We are not asking for aid in Nigeria. We want to buy the weapons.
We want to end the Boko Haram tragedy as quickly as possible. The New York Timesshould not lend itself as an accomplice to producing more widows and fatherless children in Northern Nigeria and beyond due to the ungodly activities of Boko Haram. If they feel that the Nigerian government is not doing enough, the New York Times and other concerned parties can activate the International Criminal Court against military officers disgracing their calling by killing unarmed civilians. That is the way to go.
Wale Adedayo, a journalist and author, lives in Lagos and can be reached through wale.adedayo@uhurutimes.com.
