The United Nations “Reparations” Of War, Hunger And Discontentment To Nigeria: The Book Haram Saga

 

 

Defining the Focus:

For those who are inclined to behave that the United Nations organization (UNO) has relevance in world peace, the widely reported maneuvering of its permanent security  members into the affairs of other nations will come as a rude surprise. France, who feels Nigeria, was not her colonial child is in the forefront of the destabilization process of Nigerian political, economic and social stability. This has emanated from destabilization of North and West Africa to have control over the Sahara desert and the outlying areas for the purpose of mining cheap uranium. France was the first country to recognize the failed break away of Azawad in Mali. It was France that airdrop weapons to the so - called Libyan rebels only that 85% of the weapons were deliberately allowed to fall in the hands of the Tuaregs and Al- Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).¹ France is known for her undemocratic policies ever since the period of colonial possession of Africa. The Arabs who made up bulk of the population of Algeria were denied political rights.² French colonial policy seemed to have provided access to political process, but this participation was sporadic and without undue relevance until decolonization was well advanced.³

            Viewed negatively, the reported involvement of France does appear to hold out a serious threat to the politicalsovereignty of nations in general and Nigeria in particular. This failure can be attributed to the failure of the United Nations because of its disappointing progress. The failure of it members particularly France that is a permanent member of the Security Council in attributed to the failure of United Nations. Though we are aware that, all powers great and small, resent interference in what they consider to be domestic affair. The Boko Haram insurgence is by no means a domestic politics but hydra-headed and dreaded phenomenon affiliated to Al Qaeda and associates in an international disruption order.

            This paper will attempt to highlight the mandate of the United Nations Organization which we equally  think Nigeria as a nation, is a stakeholder showing how far and how good Nigeria  as contributed  to Africaand World peace only to be rewarded with international destabilization through sponsored  insurgent activities  for the Boko Haram. Nigeria is a peace- loving state and has promoted international cooperation in economic, social, cultural, educational and medical fields. She has assisted in the realization of human rights and fundamental freedom for all. On the African continent, Nigeria is simply the “Giant of Africa” providing succor to the less-privileged States. She has been instrumental to the jettisoning of apartheid policy especially on Southern Africa.What also could she have done to be acknowledged and supported in her stabilization process? We will conclude by looking at the internal mechanisms for our elimination of any insurgency even if international efforts fail us. Our military must also be hailed  aside of the technical support of some  of our African  neighbors like Cameroon, Chad  and Niger, who not minding the negative mind-set  of their colonel master, bailed us out of it.

Exploring the UNO Mandate.

Based  on the unhealthy crises and lack of peace and safety  in matters of social, political and economic welfare,⁴ a remedy was sought  in matters of ‘collective security’, that,  nations must agree to the principle that, in matters which touch more than one  nation, they will be bound  by the decision arrived at by a common international body in which all nations are in some way represented.⁵The world wars of 1914-18 and 1939-45 also showed that human beings are in dire need of international security as a result of the failure of national security. The understanding was that “every state or group of states cannot be stronger than every other state or group.⁶The rule of law and collective security sought would pivot on three fundamental principles namely (i) states must agree to the principle that, in matters which affect other state besides their own, they will accept the rule of conduct laid down by a common international authority as binding on themselves; (ii) they must agree to renounce the right to settle dispute by making war, (iii) they must bind themselves to regard any act of war by any state in breach of this primaryobligation as an act  of War against  themselves and to come to the assistance of the victim of the aggression.⁷  

Records have it that, the League of Nations formed in 1919 failed, though it succeeded in minor spheres of activity. It was against the failure of the League of Nations that the UNO was finally formed on the 24^th October, 1945, at San Francisco in California (United States of America).  The main aim of its formation been peace-loving.

Other than the many organs, the Security Council comprising of fifteen members: the five permanent and the ten non- permanent, the permanent members are from China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and United States of America. The non-permanent members are elected by the assembly for two year-term.⁸Top on the agenda on the  security council is to maintain international security besides the investigation of any dispute  or any situation, the continuance of it might lead to international friction or give rise to dispute to the extent that, the  Security Council  to call upon some  members  or all members to make available the forces, facilities or assistance thus agreed upon , including national air force contingents  which member- states would hold immediately available to  enable urgent military measures  to be taken by the organization.⁹

 In principle therefore, the foundation of peace- building had been   layed as summarized above concerning the mandate of the UNO. It must  however be pointed out here that, the practicality  of such a facility could only be achieved as much as possible if the member- states corporate among themselves and to a large extent refuse  to involve themselves in conflicts with other member- states. There would also be greater peaceif member- states settle their internal crises as a matter of building international peace and security. This observation is necessary because Nigeria as a nation- state has done far above average to be applauded by the international community in her efforts to maintain national and international peace and security. To this we turn now.

Nigeria’s Foreign Policy vis-à-vis UNO Peace- building Process.

A foreign policy according to Professor Oyovbaire in Ubaka is “the overall orientation and policy intentions of a particular country towards another. Foreign policy… implies the objectives behind country interrelations with other nations of the world and the means through which these objectives are pursued.”¹⁰ Nigeria’s Foreign       Policy can be summarized as follow:

Non-Alignment – This implies the refusal of Nigeria as a nation to support any of the two blocks or superpowers namely Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and the United States of America (USA), and their allies. The support of Nigeria either way is indicative of the supporting conflicts which will be against themindset of the UNO. This Nigeria has not done and therefore is indicative that she supports the UNO in all ways to eliminate conflicts on the globe.

Non-Aggression-Nigeria has always featured in world politics as a non- aggressive state. Respect for other nations, peaceful coexistence and the discouragement of war and settlement of conflicts as well as the campaign against colonialism on the African continent andelsewhere in the world are evidences to Nigeria’s non-aggressive posture. A good example could be that of the peaceful settlement of the Bakasi Peninsula which she ceded to Cameroon on international order and jurisprudence. Nigeria spearheaded the collapse of the policy of Apartheid in South Africa. She supported liberation movements in Namibia Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Angola, Zambia¹¹ and today the African continent is not under and colonial domination by foreign powers.

Africa as the Centerpiece of Nigeria- this is the concern of Nigeria to make sure the whole of the problems and difficulties, be they political, economic, social, scientific and otherwise are the concerns of Nigeria. Ubaka puts it that, Nigeria pays the greatest attention to the African continent and the rest of the world.¹²

Nigeria is a member to almost all international communities namely Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and she plays a leading role on this sub- regional organization. She is a member of African Union (AU)and as already underscored, African is the centerpiece of Nigerian’s foreign policy and what that implies must be applauded in all ramifications. Nigeria is also a member of the UNO. Here too, her role as the ‘Big Brother’ of all African countries cannot be overemphasized. The UNO has acknowledge this role and use Nigeria to penetrate difficult political terrains and economic interests around Africa. This she does through the Commission for Medication, Conciliation and Arbitration and the Economic and Social Commission beside other Technical committees such as  Education and Cultural Commission; Health, Sanitation and Nutrition Commission; Defence Commission and the Scientific,  Technical and Research Commission.

Nigeria’s leadership role on the continent has brought African unity as the African continent speaks with one voice on international forum such as the UNO. This has to some extent suffocated conflicts and division that were rife based on colonial mentality and has gone a long way in diffusing the Anglophone and Francophone  factors on the continent. One can see clearly the problem of France with Nigeria here as she (France) feels Nigeria is against her international plans to subjugate Third-world economies.

Nigeria has contributed greatly toworld peace beginning with the pursuit of peace on the ECOWAS, AU and the rest of the world.For example,Nigeria was in the lead of all African Heads of States and governments to intervene in the MiddleEast conflict between Israel and her Arab neighbors.¹³

            Beyond, the political and economic scene, Nigerian’s have put their feet on the sand of time in their intellectual defence of human dignity not just for the Africans but the world over. The likes of Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Dr, Nnamdi Azikiwe among others passed unto others the philosophical, economic and socio-political ideas of liberation on the continent based on human dignity, respect for others and human life. Awolowo was known for his “Socialism” while Azikiwe was known for his “Neo- Welfarism.”They therefore became the band of zealous reformers and ‘evangelists’ of the old and new isms which have influence the general pattern of human life everywhere in the world.¹⁴ Indeed, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe was nicknamed “Zik of Africa”,¹⁵ judging from his Pan- African approach and statesmanship. ¹⁶

            There are even records  to show that Nigeria has always offered some of her military and police forces to help keep peace around the world since gaining independence in 1960. Nigeria has shown interest and commitment to world peace in the numerous peace keeping operations around the world. Over 100, 000 Nigerian troops have served in UN peace-keeping missions around the world since her first participation.¹⁷

All the above analyses on Nigeria’s foreign policy in accordance with the UNO, aims at showcasing how Nigeria atall times supports the activities of the UNO in all ramifications and particularly towards the drive to world peace.Rather than dislodge Nigeria’s political, economic, social and cultural plans, we thought, the UNO should have supported Nigeria since what she is doingis not against the objectives of the world body.     But the world governing body has left  much to be desired and has rewarded Nigeria in punitive measures which is what we call United Nations  and her ‘reparations’ to Nigeria in terms of wars, hunger and discontentment.

United Nations and Her ‘Reparations’ to Nigeria in terms of Wars, Hunger and Discontentment.

We would like to begin this segment by and explanation of what constitutes‘reparation’- the act of giving something to somebody or doing something for them in order to show that you are sorry for suffering that you have caused.¹⁸ According to Walter Rodney, “the development of Africa by the colonialists was acynical short-hand expression for the intensification of colonial exploitation in Africa to develop capitalist Europe”. ¹⁹ For over seventy years, Europe plundered Africa and developed and revolutionized their technology to enter a nuclear stage. This led to Africa’s position vis-a-vis its colonizers become more disadvantageous in the political, economic and military spheres. ²⁰ The rise of the preparations movement and the collective power of African and Asian nations to force the West to confrontits own history. In  1999, the African World Reparation and Reparation  Truth Commission called for the West to pay $777 million to Africa within  five years.²¹  Rather  than pay back for the damage  they caused  to the Africans, the West is paying back through wars, hunger, destitution, terrorism and the like, yet the UNO in its  globalization  agenda is in support of  international  imperialism of money, where by the rich grows richer and the poor poorer,  and globalization has been understood by many as the pinnacle  of imperialism  (imperium sine fine) whereby  there is an element of political,  economic and cultural domination of some nations over others. ²²

Focusing our search light on the UNO, it has undoubtedly accomplished much in its non-political work. A look at the history of UNO since 1945 shows that it has made only disappointing progress with the problem of disarmament. Like the League of Nations, it has been caught up in the rivalries of the great powers and often prevented from taking effective action. ²³ Our understanding here is that the success or failure of the UNO is the success or failure of its members.²⁴ The organization represents the collective will of the nations of the world. This implies that, it has no existence in isolation  so when it may  be said to ‘fail’  therefore the ‘failure’ is that of the nations as a whole who have lacked the determination, the unity and perhaps the strength to achieve ‘success’. ²⁵ Some of these failures include the following:

            Terrorism and Terrorist activities  

            The world has witnessed a number of catastrophicfailures resulting inmillions ofinnocent civilian deaths. Experts have agreed that “Modern” terrorism began with the 1968 hijacking of  ElAl Israel Flight 426 by a Palestinian terrorist organization. The UNO condemned the action, but failed to take any further action.These terrorists acts continued throughout the remainder of the twentieth century, with no reaction from the UNO, a simple condemnation was as far as they would go.²⁶

Something a little more concerted was put in place after the terrorist attack on United States of American on September, 2011. The UNO took action by outlawing terrorism and pushing those responsible for the attacks. But this applied only to Al Qaeda and the Taliban state funded terrorist programs- such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and Mossad were unaffected. Nations that support groups that are widely linked to terrorism, such as Iran are not held accountable specifically for these actions.  As we write, the UNO still does not have a clear definition of terrorism and the way to go about tackling it. ²⁷

Nuclear Proliferation ofArms:

            FitzGerald informs that, at the creation of the UNO in 1945, United States of America (USA) was the only nation in the world to own and test nuclear weapons. Twenty-five years later, the nuclear non-proliferation treaty was signed by one hundred and ninety nations (190) including five nations that admitted to own unclear weapons namely France, England, Russia, China and the USA. Despite this treaty, nuclear stockpiles remain high and numerous nations continue to develop these devastating weapons including North Korea, Israel, Pakistan and India. This has clearly shownthat the UNO has not been effective and unable to enforce crucial rules and regulations on offending nations.²⁸

Veto Power of the Security Council:

             By veto power it is meant that, a single permanent member can stop a resolution from passing even when all other members have approved it. ²⁹That is to say, if the ten(10) non-permanent members with four(4) of the permanent  members agree on a resolution but one(1) permanent member disagrees, such a resolution will not be implemented. It will be recalled that the Security Council is the most powerful organ of the UNO. Its primary duty is to maintain world peace and security.³⁰ This council consists of fifteen members, five of which are permanent: France, Russia, China, United States of America and the United Kingdom. The other tennations are elected to serve for two year term. The five permanent members enjoy the luxury of veto power as defined above.  Demonstrably, in 1996, Russia, Britain, France, and China voted in favour of a second five year-term of the office for Boutrous Boutrous Ghali of Egypt, the first African to occupy the post of Secretary General of the UNO. American vetoed the decision and denied the Egyptian a second term.³¹This was seen in the light of America’s interest in Israel and the non-conformity of Ghali to American- Israelrelationship asEgypt was seento be Israel arch-enemy. This created more wounds in the Egyptian polity and aggression against American and Israel.

            Besides, a more recent case of veto was by China and Russia on July 19^th, 2012. The Security Council attempted to evoke chapter VII sanctions from the United Nations charter to intervene and prevent genocide in Syria. But the vetoes of China and Russia halted and international intervention. Since the Syrian civil war began, an estimated 60,000 civilians have been killed with thousands more displaced. ³² One matter arising from this veto power clearly indicates that the victorious at the 1945 kept the right to veto and they have used it dispassionately and with bias, creating more security and peace challenges than achieving same. To  check this, in 1950 the General Assembly passed a “Uniting for peace” resolution, which claimed that if the Security Council, through lack of agreement among its permanent members, failed to act effectively to maintain peace, theGeneral Assembly could do so even to the extent of recommending the use of armed forces. But the charter was not amended and it remains open to dispute whether two –third majority in the General Assembly could overrule a veto in the Security Council.³³ We can conclude  conveniently  that the legacy of the UNO if any has been the creation of fear, social insecurity, violence and political instability.

            From all indication, the UNO has not democratized security to the members’, talk less of non-members who like religion will be convinced to democratize peace and security and join the organization. The UNO has not democratized social equality either. In fairness to the big question of the provision of security around the global, it has provided security to its permanent security members than the rest of the one hundred and eighty seven members. They are rather interested in the protection of their individual country rights, control of the economy of the world as can be seen just below.

The United States of America and Africa.

             The emergence of USA as the world’s only superpower after the destabilization of USSR means that “ignorant passivity and belligerence of America will worsen the leadership problems of Africa”. Hagher again mentions that “…constructive engagement and cooperation of the USA will positively impact on Africa”.³⁴ Judging by the leadership of USA and the rest of us, it can be rightly concluded that, the leadership of America is one that has not given much room for optimism. America’s response to the world’s crises seems to be characterized by the scale of preferences for American lives, followed by the European, Caucasian, other humans, animals and lastly African live. ³⁵

            Today, everywhere in Africa there is war resulting from primarily western influences and partly poor leadership qualities of our leaders.  Yet very little or nothing is done by American to help the recovery of these situations and sometimes worsen them. Take for example, when a former president of the United States of America J.W. Bush (SR) once dispatched troops to Somalia to save lives of the starving Somalians, the United States ended up becoming engaged in the battle of which the war lord was to be recognized in Somalia. So rather than save lives they lost American lives and instead, killed thousands of Somalians. America becomes Somalia’s chief warlord. ³⁶

            The Rwandan genocide has shown the darkness of the human heart of western insensitivity to Africa. USA already aware of the building to the genocide in Rwandaprevailed on the rest of the world and the United Nations to look the other way to avoid the shame of Somalia.Almost a million lives were lost in Rwanda, yet successive American presidents stood in- between and held hands with Yaser Arafat and successive Israeli Prime Ministers in the Middle East crisis.³⁷

Great Britain and Africa.

            The primary thing that brought Britain and Africa was imperialism. Long after the so called termination of colonialism, the real friendly lies have not been enacted; entangled in the UNO many problems, she (Britain) has not paid sufficient attention to African’s development programmes except where her interest is considered uppermost. The commonwealth, an umbrella organization where all former British colonies meet suffers the same weakness like the UNO and is reluctant tointerfere in the internal affairs and often powerless to settle disputes even between members. ³⁸ Every member is always very careful to preserve national interest and hardly is any member prepared to place the common good first.

            Besides, though formed to provide or promote defence and cooperation, the lack of power to enforce decisions, divided loyalty, differences in foreign policies and lack  of charter, do not allow it to govern its operations.

            Yes,  to some extent, the United Kingdom has said it has helped Nigeria in the fight against  Boko Haram and find those abducted girls and has also increased humanitarian  support to reach those in need, besides the fact that she has  continued to provide  intelligence and increased  military support. More is expected of her than any other advanced country because Nigeria was her colonial child and she is still benefitting from this relationship.

France and the rest of Africa.

            France, a former colonial  master  and political ‘heavy-weight’ among the European Union  has always  made efforts at solving African problems    especially those countries  that priorly belonged to her as colonial children.This can be seen from below: On January 11, 2013, France launched airstrikes against jihadist’s positions northern Mali as part of Operation Server. This operation that ended in 2014 involved 4,000 French soldiers who eventually helped Mali to push the Al Qaeda-linked rebels out from the north of the country.³⁹ 

            In Chad, French  troops have also played some role since late 1986 as part of Operation  Epervier.At N’Djamena, Chad’s capital a contingent of 800 French soldiers helped provide Chadian  authorities with aeriel  surveillance on the advance of Sudanese government-supported rebels, acting as a crucial force multiplier for  Chadian dictator Idris Deby during battles in the capital in 2006 and 2008. As part of global mission to tackle militancy  across Africa, France launched Operation Barckhane in 2014 as a continuation of Operation Epervier  and  Operation Servel, which had its  headquarters at N’Djamena and about 1,200 troops were stationed at Chad.⁴⁰

                    France also helped restore democracy in Irony Coast. After gaining independence in 1960, the two countries had positive relations that were worsened under President Laurent Gbagbo from  2002. A civil war split Ivory Coast in halves and the French intervened in Operation Unicorn. Peace was largely brokered by 2007 but the country remained effectively divided and French soldiers  continued to stay in the country. In 2011 violence again flared as Gbagbo refused to hand over power to his democratically elected successor, Alassane Quattara. French  troops  again played a key role in removing Gbagbo from power. ⁴¹

            Concerning  Nigeria, France came on board in what was a grand plan to eliminate Boko Haram. French President Francois Hollande and President Muhammadu Buhari agreed to strengthen military cooperation to crush Boko Haram. After the meeting,President Mohammadu Buhari  said the European Union (EU) and others  had  pledged 916 Million Euros ($1.035billion) to help rebuild Nigeria from the impacts of the Islamic militant group, which among other things had  displaced more than 2 Million people in the  country especially the northeast.⁴²

            Again, leaders met in Abuja on a Saturday following a summit also attended by the Heads  of State from Cameroon, Niger, Chad and Benin, and representatives of the USA, UK and EU. In that meeting a major goal was to help orchestrate the safe return of more than 200 Nigerian school girls abducted in April 2014.  President Hollande specifically said, “on the issue of Boko Haram, when there is a threat to a country in African there is a threat to France.”  He also said France will share intelligence, help with counter insurgency training and provide equipment to those fighting the group.⁴³

                     But much is left to be seen and desired as France is mentioned in several other deals around Africa.  First and foremost, France was the First country to recognize  the failed breakaway  of Azawad in Mali. It was France that airdropped weapons to the so called Libyan rebels only that 85% of the weapons were deliberately allowed to fall in the hand s of  Tuaregs and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).These two events were to be the steroid that grew Boko Haram into a monster.⁴⁴

It has also  been argued that Boko Haram have  made inroads with new financiers who are from Borno and boarding areas of Cameroon’s extreme North region who are Kanuri like Yusuf, Shekau and most Boko Haram Member. These financiers provide Boko Haram with weapons and a route to negotiate with the Cameroon government in kidnapping for ransom operations. That Boko Haram was paid N500million ($3.15million) to free seven French hostages kidnapped in February 2013. The insurgent group kidnapped the French hostages in Cameroon on February 19 near Wasa National Park in Northern Cameroon, which borders North-Eastern Nigeria.  Apart from the money the insurgent were paid, Cameroon authorities also  released  some Boko Haram suspects  in detention  as part of the deal. This  was due largely  because the sect  had threatened in a video released on YouTube in march, to kill the hostages unless Nigeria and Cameroon released some of its members in custody. Nigeria’s  Boko Haram was paid more than $12 million  before releasing a French Roman Catholic priest, Georges Vandebeusch  kidnapped in November, 2013.⁴⁵

Similarly  the Cameroonian authorities  paid Boko Haram insurgents  at least $400,000 in ransom in order to secure the release of Francoise Agnes Mouskouri, wife of Vice Prime Minister Amadou Ali.  The New York Times found that France once paid up to $28 million in ransom to a Al Qaeda affiliate in West Africa, as well as indicating  a willingness  to cooperate  with and fund Jihadists. France has denied both incidents  in which French citizens were  returned unharmed. We ask, did they just want to avoid the harm of their citizens? Otherwise why didn’t  they cooperate  with countries concerned  to rescue  their citizens?

Currently, oil from Lake Chad in being drilled by the republic of Chad   and  transferred  to a stationary FPSO- Floating, Production, Storage and Offloading Vessel, which can store  over 2 million  barrels of oil and processed oil shipped through tankers to the international refiners’ at the Port of Le Havre in France.⁴⁶

            We are yet to be satisfied concerning the activities of France on their relationship with  Boko Haram. We feel France has not felt sorry for the harm they caused on the African soil by wiping out the large Muslim states of the Western Sudan,  as well as Dahomey and kingdoms in Madagascar.⁴⁷ And by using force  as they did during the colonial  era to take  away our oil, by being authoritarian, undemocratic, disruptive and exploitative in character. France it must be noted has created new lines of division such as Anglophone versus Francophone in Africa,  that has proved  difficult to obliterate and  an international economic relationship of inter-African economic units.⁴⁸ Is this a new  brand  of colonialism?

The Boko Haram Saga.  

            Boko Haram simply means “Western education is evil or sin.” Their aim is to impose its own version of Islamic Law in  Nigeria. It is a fact that Boko Haram are an appendage of Al Qaeda a similar dissident Islamic group that killed almost 3,000 people on September 11, 200. Boko Haram has killed more than 20,000 in seven years and have caused a damage of at least and $9 million according to government estimates. After driven out of their large expenses of territory, the group has resorted to suicide bombings and massacres in remote villages. Their violence has spilled over to Nigeria’s neighbours including Chad, Niger and Cameroom.⁴⁹ Both Al Qaeda and Boko Haram are resulting from the failure of UNOnuclear non-proliferation  treaty signed by 190 nations including  France, England, Russia, China and USA.

Matters Arising from Boko Haram Activities

Just like the emergence of Al Qaeda terrorist activities in other parts of the world  Boko Haram though not  a decent way of taking up grievances against  the government  and people of Nigeria, it is a pointer to the fact that, corruption has eaten deep into  the socio-political and economic life of Nigeria  as a nation. This is an indication that all is not well. The prevailing situation of economic injustice in Nigeria has been largely blamed on rampant corruption, especially among public office holders. All these has been buttressed by recent shocking revelations of colossal amounts of public funds that were literally stolen by highly placed government officials including even former Head of state. His holiness the Pope once wrote as follows:

Africa’s economic problems are compounded by the dishonesty of corrupt government leaders who, in connivance with domestic or foreign private interests, divert national resource for their own profit or foreign private interests, divert national resources for their own profit and transfer public funds to private accounts in foreign banks.⁵⁰

                    No wonder therefore that the present prime Minister of Britain David Cameron called Nigeria “Fantastically corrupt.”⁵¹

            Again, like the adamantbehavior of the world leaders namely USA, China, Britain, France and Russia, our leaders should know that their concern which is always preferred to the concern of other Nigerians will not pave way for success but more undemocratic agitations will emerge. Boko Haram is just one  numerous other groups contending  the peace and security  of this nation include kidnapping gangs, cattle rustlers armed robbers, hostage takers that  demand large sums of money for the release of their victims  and so no. Again, the Catholic Secretariat of Nigeria informs:

The situation of formed is that a few highly place Nigerians have cornered the lion’s share of the nation’s resources as their own private possession, even where, they clearly have no need for all the wealth that they have accumulated. At the same time, a vast majority of Nigerians are victims of poverty and destitution.Unemployment has reached it highest  level ever.More people  are out of job… the result is that  a growing  number  of men and women of working age are unable  to earn money with which to feed themselves  and their families, pay their house rent, send their children to school and pay their medical bills. ⁵²

Hagher sees a gloomy picture and states that, “The African leader… is getting richer and more comfortable while the disorder, violence, crime, wars and death become more acute.”⁵³ But the pertinent question is: What do we do?

Reclaiming the Lost Past and Protecting the Future.

             We need to understand that a wrong had been committed either by the leaders or the followers or both as long as Africa and Nigeria is concerned. Human morality and human essence reveals that corruption, environmental decay, human rights violation, death, and starvation man due to poverty, human aggression and violence are unacceptable wherever they exist.

            A God- centered leadership and followership as part of the reclamation would require all leaders and followers to operate within the matrix of concern on issues of greatly peace and freedom. A God centered leadership and followership by all citizens will rule out the possibility of religious acrimony and social conflict on the basis of ethnicity, political difference and a plurality of other differential.

            Our religions education should be that of religious harmony and tolerance to achieve the highest possible good by adjusting our difference in line with the demand of the creator, God. Modes of worship may differ from one religion to another, symbols and ceremonies of worship may differ but religious have one thing in common – to live to do according to the will of God Almighty creator and controller of the universe. We are accountable to him.

            Then, this will guide and direct us to harmonized and protect our common humanity. Hagher succinctly affirms this that, “A politician’s faith, his belief in the after life, in the final judgment of his creator and in the moral code and ethics of his religion will influence his actions  and the choice of options available to  him.” ⁵⁴ This applies also to a ruler or the executive, the legislator and the judge. The common man on the street applies his religious understanding of followership and legitimately supports the God – centered leader with his positive leadership style.

            Then a God – centered education which neither is anti- God in content, practice or intent nor discourages directly or indirectly due reverence to God, religious education and the Godworshipping habits of students, ⁵⁵ must be taught.The loss of our past has shown  that families no longer  see it fashionable to teach the growing child  the fear of God but let them loose to roam our streets and the unintended orientation  is taught rather than the intended wisdom.

            In the final analysis, the benefits of restoring God to the lives of our future generation make it our only hope us a people firmly resolved to live in unity and harmony as one indivisible and indissoluble sovereign nation under God as was declared categorically in the preamble of our present constitution.⁵⁶

Conclusion

            This conclusion of the paper will look like of appeal or advice to the Boko Haram insurgent group. Their understanding of Western education or civilization as evil or sin has created doubts in the truth of their pursuit.The Tiv people of Central Nigeria would say “Ka wea venda Kpev, u karen kwar na ga” (a person who does not eat He-goat meat does not share its meat to others). Boko Haram hasforgotten thatall the war or militaryequipment’s they use including communication gadgets are product of western education and scientific development.Yet,they  deny the relevance of such orientation. This is a pointer to the fact that they are contradicting themselves.  They should embraceWestern education to promote good life and not destructive ambition. Afterall, most of them are trained in western style and cannot turn to tell us that western education is bad.

            Above all, the dynamism of every world-view permits the uploading of what is essential to be accepted or rejected, not the two put together.These aspects they consider to be bad should be improved upon by their thorough and investigative   educational and scientific research   to solve practical task, butnot to destroy, which is worse than what they consider worse. Ibu Sina Abu-Ali (Avicenna) an Islamic faithful in his philosophy preserved both the materialist and idealist tendencies of Aristotle, deviating on some questions from Aristotelians towards Neo-Platonism. Similarly, Ibn Rushd Mohammed or Ibn Roshd (Averroes) and Arab philosopher and scientist who lived in Spain without breaking with the Muslim religion developed the Materialist elements of Aristotle’s philosophy. You do not change things or processes by destroying; you can only change something positively if you want yourself considered on inventor not a destructor.This last advice in for all Nigerians.  The change should begin with you and me for the better even when things appear not to favour us.