This topic became germane following the decision of some embassies in the country to publish security alert for their nationals staying in the country, in anticipation of deadly terrorist attacks within and around Abuja, our federal capital. America, United Kingdom, later Canada and Australia all published their separate warnings on the same subject matter. Expectedly what would have passed for embassy routine responsibilities to their citizens living or doing business outside their home shores, suddenly assumed a life of its own and this is understandable.
America and United Kingdom and even Canada are no ordinary countries in modern world affairs, especially politics. America for one is the world leader country presently. Britain is no less very powerful; it was once a world leader nation even though her influence diminished like it will always happen to great empires, giving way to the rise of America. Yet Britain›s influence in world affairs has remained very strong. What is more, Britain, a former colonial master to Nigeria has managed to sustain a deep relationship between her and the United States of America, a union which has enabled her to retain considerable respect in the comity of nations.
When any of them talks or takes a position the world listens or quakes depending on what the issue is. So, it wasn›t surprising that when their embassies decided to issue security alert to their citizens, highlighting possible breakdown of law and order in Abuja, such was bound to cause ripples. Their release did and nearly dovetailed into controversy with many asking if they had to do so and in the manner they did. Those in power feared destabilization moves.
Nations have a right to warn their nationals in foreign countries of possible dangers if facts available to them appear credible. Come to think of it, these nations have capacity, required expertise and reach to ferret information. They usually have a rich friendship base with locals of all stations of life. Now whether it is right to post security threats on noticeboards available to every Tom, Dick and Harry is another big question on its own. My position is that when security concerns are involved, as appears to be the case in this instance, when the matter is so weighty such that it is capable of creating panic in the host country with high probability to provoke instability likely to lead to breakdown of law and order, foreign countries and their embassies should display some appreciable level of circumspection in the manner they handle the information including its dissemination.
Nothing wrong in drawing the attention of their people like I already admitted, but the nature of information to be passed should dictate whether alternative channels of communication outside the open market type could be employed. United States, Britain and Canada from what the whole world knows are no beginners as far as science, technology, development and deployment are concerned.
They are giant nations in technology use and applications, they are very advanced in documentation and linkages, there is no argument to the fact their embassies have phone numbers and email addresses of all their citizens domiciled in the country. These alternatives would have served the purpose far better than taking to the public and thereby creating an atmosphere of panic which is gradually moving into the level of instability.
Definitely none of these countries would like a similar approach to be adopted in their home countries by any other nation or group of countries with embassies and citizens in their countries. It is also difficult to say if the countries involved in our nation›s security alert controversy ever saw it wise to share their intelligence findings with authorities in the country to aid prompt reaction. If they didn›t, one hopes it isn›t the case, then malicious intent could be alluded to. In the world of imperialism nothing is spared to achieve predetermined goals. It has been so and has never changed and won’t change.
From the Nigerian perspective, it is clear that the reactions of the government and its agencies weren›t good. Taken critically, the method to our response exposes lack of sophistication on one part and high degree of dissonance in the administrative structure and processes. The alerts came from embassies which by extension could rightly mean their governments. Where things are properly done and departments know their job descriptions and placements very well, our approach to handling this matter would have been very professional depicting seriousness. The first and prompt response should have come directly from the government.
It could be through the Ministry of Information, Ministry of Foreign Affairs or the Ministry of Defence, to subtly scold the embassies for taking such a sensitive matter to the marketplace, urge for change of process going forward and then giving assurance that government was on top of the situation. This will end the matter, but behind the scenes, the government and security agencies would redouble their efforts to stem the tide. But what did we see? The Department of State Services, which shouldn’t be seen nor heard became the first to speak, followed by the police who began also to show us police personnel rehearsing, marching and doing combat drills for purposes of the cameras.
I have expressed disgust with things that should be done privately being thrown to the open. It is archaic tactics to choose to scare away criminals that should be apprehended and made to have dates in courts of competent jurisdiction. Distinguished Nigerians have suggested open show of force, but I disagree with the strategy. Security agents move secretly, pick intelligence leads to criminal hideouts. They should storm those and pick out the hoodlums. Crimes have kept rising because the ropes of sanctions are very weak. Felons commit heinous crimes and are allowed by state to just disappear, to enjoy the fruits of perversion. It shouldn’t be so.
The development in review raises for us some important questions that we have touched before and allowed to rest without answers to them. For instance, it brings once again to the fore reasons less tutored people and the «educated illiterates» among us should no longer be allowed to lead a country as vast and strategically located as ours in world affairs. Perhaps, many of us don›t know but we must know our country is important to the world. It is a very strategic country with great influence. Now take a look at those who have had the privilege to govern our country as President and parts of it as governors and tell Nigerians which one of them appeared well equipped to understand that countries don›t just exist on their own. There is always an interest other nations have in its affairs. In plain terms there has always existed a «cannibalistic» kind of relationship in which each tries to prey on the other.
Those who did a bit of history would know that most wars, irrespective of their nature and names, were conflicts over supremacy and controls. Inter-communal conflicts in Africa were essentially about dominion. Dominion is closely tied to economic ravaging by one enclave against another. Slave trade to colonialism and finally the current imperialism had one objective: subjugation and despoliation of economy of victim societies. Even the much-abhorred trade in humans has been successfully re-engineered to assume the form of «voluntary slavery» unlike in the past when people were captured.
Today people from badly governed nation-states voluntarily take the decision to leave their home countries for slavish tasks abroad.
The question is how many of those who lead us know a war goes on between countries?
How many of them know the developed world›s well-being is hinged on our dislocation and deprivation? How many of our leaders are aware it is not in the interest of the developed world to see us govern ourselves well or become inventors who can ensure self-sufficiency? Do we know the statistics they churn out which all of us wave as gospel truth which is designed to perpetually damage our mental stability and give us a demeaning image intended to leave us very vulnerable and then completely pliant to their manipulations? In the world of imperialism, terrorists can be hired and adequately paid to wreak havoc. Yes! How many of our leaders know this?
From every indication, our leaders know nothing. You see this from the eagerness to attend all manner of seminars. Our elite hop into available foreign airlines and go for medical tourism. All of us desire imported foods procured with scarce foreign exchange. Effects of imperialism have become so terrible that today the country is not conducive for our leaders to hold meetings. Britain, France, America and United Arab Emirates have become the spots. Recently, they added Spain. This is what the effect of imperialism does to a people. It destroys their ability to think correctly and engineers them to do terrible things against themselves, their society and people. Security alerts from embassies purportedly targeted at their people which can hold wider implications for an already decapitated host country is part of the bigger strategy to facilitate subjugation. The earlier we know this, the better.