August 12, 2019

Presidents are known to have their private lives. So, it is a common place to see pictures of a President playing golf, playing with a pet, singing in a concert. But almost everyone will admit that seeing a President sitting alone, not at dinner, picking his teeth with a toothpick is very odd.  It will be odd even for a private citizen. It should be expected that many would cringe upon seeing the President of Nigeria relaxing on a chair and picking his teeth so dutifully. There are many angles to view the picture and come to the same negative conclusions. First, the picture was taken in a private place and pictures of the President taken in such places are not placed in the public domain without scrutiny. So what this means is that a staff or family member of the President took that picture. It either means that there is no control over the private pictures of the President or that those in charge of such matters are so tasteless and careless they did not understand how the picture would be viewed. Secondly, the picture is very poor. It lacks context and perspective. It shows the President sitting alone. So, it implies the President was without his family, nor friends, nor staff. The person viewing the picture cannot see anything that the President was doing or looking at. The picture seems to show the viewer what the President does when he is alone - he enjoys himself with some dry beer,  meat and spends time picking his teeth. And he likes to do it alone. Where are his family? Where are his domestic staff? Where are his friends? The picture suggests that he has none of those. On the bigger question of the image of the President as a leader, the picture hurts him badly. It shows him as one who indulges in complacency, someone who eats and enjoys himself while the country is beset with countless problems. It does not show the President as a focused thinker concerned about the problems of the country. Instead, it shows him as a lazy fellow who has no problems in the world. Overall, the picture is a personal disaster for the president and quite a disappointment for the citizens of Nigeria. The moral of all this is that pictures matter. Appearances matters. The way the leader is perceived goes a long way in shaping the mood of the people.

The Shiites, under the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN), led by El-Zakzaky, have been strategic of late. Their protest in Abuja three weeks ago was strategically successful. It brought pressure very close to the seat of power on Abuja. It showed that they possessed the key asset for social disruption; people in infinite supply, who they can put in the street at anytime, and they are not afraid to die. You can kill five hundred of them in Zaria, and hide it. But if you kill one hundred in Abuja, the location of the offices of foreign embassies, the world will take notice. And the world did when last year the Nigerian government brought in the army and there was much killing. That had serious repercussion diplomatically for Nigeria and it endangered well-established military cooperation between Nigeria and its foreign partners. That was a risk no President would like to take twice. So, three weeks ago, when the Shiites hit the street again, the government was careful not to bring in soldiers. And the police did a poor job of it, losing a Deputy Commissioner of Police in what was a friendly fire. The government finally got the message - that it had to change its approach. The successful protest in Abuja and the consequential change of attitude by the Federal Government forced a gap between the Federal Government and the Kaduna State Government on how to deal with the Shiites. While Governor El Rufai of Kaduna wanted to maintain the extremely repressive stance, President Buhari knew he had to think of his own legacy. In the court trial that followed in Kaduna shortly after the riot, the Federal Government, represented by the Department of State Service (DSS), were willing to leave the outcome of the proceedings up to the court. Even though, it was the State High Court, where the Governor could have exerted influence, the pattern of instigating the Federal Government and trusting it to do the job failed. That was why on the 6th of August ruling, the court granted El-Zakzaky leave to travel overseas for medical treatment. It was after the court ruling was made that the Kaduna State Government realized that the Federal Government had changed its stance. That was when Governor El Rufai tried to undo the order. In an usual development, the Governor tried to impose fresh conditions to that imposed by court on El-Zakzaky. In other words, the Governor of Kaduna State tried to modify a court order. The Kaduna State government came up with fresh conditions which include the confirmation of his appointment with the hospital by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; an undertaking by the defendants to produce two prominent and reliable persons as sureties, one being a first-class Chief/Emir of national repute and the other a prominent person within Kaduna State, who shall undertake to produce the defendants whenever they are needed. While the Kaduna State government respects the court’s ruling on medical leave, it disagrees with the premises on which it is based. But the state government had an uphill task in the absence of the support of the Federal Government. The agencies holding El-Zakzaky, and which was to carry out the order of the court were all agencies of the Federal Government. They take their orders from the President, not the Governor. It was therefore possible for them to ignore the rather obnoxious condition being imposed by the Kaduna State Government. El-Zakzaky left Nigeria on 12th of August 2019 for a court approved medical treatment in India. Though accompanied by Nigerian Government officials, once in India, much of his fate will be subject to Indian laws and International law. There is no doubt that the situation has changed for El-Zakzaky. There is one bad loser in this macabre game of  power - the Governor of Kaduna State.

It is wrong, unlawful and unacceptable for any government agency to target a single artist for moral purity of a whole nation in the manner the Nigerian authorities have been targeting Tekno. In what is a clearly calculated and highly personalized threat, the Director General, National Council for Arts and Culture, a parastatal of the Federal Ministry of Information and Culture, Mr. Segun Runsewe, threatened that Tekno would be made a scapegoat “to teach others a serious lesson.” According to him, the NCAC is committed to exposing proponents of such kind of offensive sights and videos in Nigeria, while security agencies will be briefed to place Tekno on their watch list, “because his conduct is a threat to national security.” As reported by Punch, Runsewe said he got hundreds of telephone calls and SMS from Nigerians, both at home and in the Diaspora, who queried why such immorality would be allowed in the country. He stated, “We commend the police for arresting Tekno for the shameful misconduct. The same person, who was granted bail on health grounds has gone ahead to release the controversial video. We are now warning him to desist from this shameful conduct, which is not part of our culture. “No single person is bigger than Nigeria; whether he likes it or not, we are going to use him as a scapegoat to send strong signals that this government does not tolerate nonsense and immorality, but discipline, which is our moral principle. “Since the offensive Tekno scam video came to the limelight, I have received hundreds of telephone calls and SMS from Nigerians at home and others in the United Kingdom, United States, Canada and other parts of the world querying why such anomalies would be tolerated in Nigeria." There is no doubt that the words of Mr. Runsewe are irresponsible, overreaching, overbearing, menacing and filled with hatred. Tekno is a young artist trying to make it in the entertainment industry. He has a Producer and Directors whom he works under their directives. To focus on him and make him the target of government rage is highly unusual and totally unacceptable. There ought to have been better ways to deal with the problem than singling him out for special persecution and naming him a "scapegoat". Indeed going by the English dictionary, the word 'scapegoat' is defined as: "a person who is blamed for the wrongdoings, mistakes, or faults of others, especially for reasons of expediency. synonyms: whipping boy, victim" Only an irresponsible official will punish a person for the wrong done by others. It is also scandalous to place on the head of this one boy the entire weight of the moral decadence of an entire nation. There is no doubt that Mr. Runsewe is somewhat of a megalomaniac, which must be why he saw Tekno as a threat to national security. DPA is ready to fight for Tekno against the onslaught of any vindictive or vengeful official. Indeed, we are considering a protest to call for the resignation of Runsewe for scapegoatism. In the pictures below, Mr. Runsewe is seen threatening to make a scapegoat of Tekno.

Those who refuse to follow reason and logic in their understanding of the crimes of Sowore will be surprised to know that his party has expelled him. But Rambo is not surprised at all. Early this year, Sowore flew the flag of the AAC, one of the political parties registered in Nigeria, as its presidential candidate in the general elections. After losing the election , Sowore planned to change the government by revolution instead of by the ballot box. The question is whether Sowore informed his party or not of his new plans to bring about change in government. If he did not inform them then he had undermined the party and his oath of loyalty to his party. When you represent a political party, you swear to abide by the party's constitution. Planning a revolution for the purpose of changing the government is a serious violation of his party constitution. Of course, some will still not get it. But the leaders of AAC got the message and they had to distance themselves from Sowore before their party could be dragged into terrorism and treason allegations. If you like, accuse Rambo of not liking Sowore.  But remember that Rambo is not a member of Sowore's party that has now expelled him. Expulsion, not suspension.

The Nigerian Air Force (NAF) on Saturday said it killed scores of Islamic State West African Province(ISWAP) fighters in Dusula, Sambisa Forest, Borno State. In a press statement, the NAF Director of Public Relations and Information, Air Commodore Ibikunle Daramola,  said; "A series of Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance missions led to “the identification of the command centre with its solar panels, communications equipment and other facilities”. He said, “In a renewed offensive aimed at further eliminating the remnants of the Boko Haram and ISWAP terrorists in the North-East, the Air Task Force destroyed a Boko Haram command and control centre at Dusula in Sambisa Forest. “The operation was executed after a  series of ISR missions led to the identification of the centre with its solar panels, communications equipment and other facilities. “The three Alpha jets dispatched by the ATF engaged the location in multiple passes, recording accurate hits on the target area. The structures housing the command centre were destroyed by the strikes while several of the terrorists were neutralised. "The few surviving terrorists, who were seen attempting to flee the area, were taken out by follow-on attacks. The NAF, operating in concert with surface forces, will sustain its operations against the terrorists in the North-East.” We chose to publish the NAF statement in full in order to better analyze it. Yes, it is true that there can be no war without propaganda and in the war against Boko Haram, the insurgents have been winning the propaganda war by a wide margin. In war, there is a strategic value to information. Whoever controls the information nearly always controls the outcome of war. Nigeria has neglected the information sector of the war far too long. To control the morale of troops and the political support for war, you need to have a robust information control and management division. Nigeria has always lacked this. The problem with the focus on information management during war is that those in charge  can afford to totally mislead the people. So, it is always necessary to check against information manipulation by those in charge of war. The above statement from NAF is a good effort to fill a yawning gap. Nigeria armed forces must start telling us about the war. But the statements coming from them must be carefully and professionally done so they will not be easily seen to be false or exaggerated like the above statement. In a properly presented statement of this nature, there will be indication as to the airbases or airfields from which the flights were launched. Usually, airbases are heavily defended. So, there is no fear that disclosing such information would endanger the planes or personnel. What made the statement obviously a propaganda is the emphasis that the mission was for "eliminating the remnants of the Boko Haram and ISWAP terrorists in the North-East". It is an attempt to suggest that the bulk of the terrorists have been destroyed and that we are dealing with only remnants. But you only attacked one particular target area. Unless you know the other locations where the enemy is, it is hard to tell the overall impact of these air strikes. The intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) process used is flawed or totally nonexistent. What houses are being struck again two weeks after similar houses were said to have been similarly destroyed. Who else lives in that forest? A simple google map survey will show all the houses in Sambisa. The NAF ought to have a much better surveillance system than what was described here. The coordination between air and land power is totally absent in the report. You make such airstrikes to prevent the enemy from launching against a particular land target or to soften a target for your advancing land forces. So, normally this sort of statement ought to show such coordination. But it is absent in the report. What target were the enemy fighters advancing against when they were attacked? Did our forces then take the position the enemy was forced to abandon in retreat or are the enemies free to return to occupy that position? This is a territorial war for us. So, what territorial gains are expected yo follow this successful air strikes? From more indications, it seems that the NAF is way too behind.