In a recent interview with MUHAMMED LAWAL, retired Colonel Hassan Stan-Labo, a security expert, discusses various issues, including the implications of allowing non-state actors to brandish weapons in the country.
You recently highlighted the importance of the Federal Government releasing the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu. Could you explain your reasoning behind this?
The matter involving Nnamdi Kanu is primarily political, necessitating a political solution. It revolves around the Biafra agitation, a pursuit well within his fundamental rights of association, speech, and movement. He, along with many other pro-Biafra advocates, feels uneasy within the Nigerian union and seeks to secede. Should this be considered a crime against the Nigerian state? The situation escalated into the armed agitation we witness today with the Indigenous People of Biafra because the Federal Government ignored their concerns for an extended period instead of engaging in a dialogue with them.
Compounding the issue, the government embarked on a crackdown and imprisoned their leaders, exemplified by Nnamdi Kanu’s case. I believe that the continued imprisonment of Kanu reinforces his heroic status among his people and strengthens his relevance in the struggle for a Biafran state. I strongly recommend a shift from the kinetic approach in addressing the Kanu/IPOB matter. Can we adopt a carrot-and-stick diplomacy, release Kanu in the broader national interest, and initiate talks with IPOB and the Ndigbo community to seek a lasting peace? In doing so, rational voices will prevail, and compelling arguments will hold sway.
Do you not think that engaging in discussions with leaders of armed groups suggests that the country’s security forces are no longer capable of countering these armed groups?
It’s essential to distinguish, on one hand, armed agitation for self-rule from armed banditry and terrorism. While the former possesses a political context and only escalated due to inadequate government handling, banditry is driven by criminal intent, and terrorism involves insurgency tendencies. Armed agitators can be persuaded to disarm and come to the discussion table in the national interest. If they resist, then the state can employ its full force to compel them. However, armed bandits and terrorists should never be negotiated with. The state must exert its maximum power to eliminate or remove them from Nigerian territory.
Regrettably, over the past eight years, we have observed a seeming incapacity of state authority to decisively address banditry and terrorism primarily due to a lack of political determination. With the current leadership in place and the evident willingness to act at the political-strategic level, we hope that our military will perform effectively this time. It’s crucial to acknowledge that poor leadership during the previous eight years, as evident in the previous administration’s lackadaisical approach to pressing state matters, partly contributed to the military’s inadequate performance on certain occasions.
Do you believe that the new Chief of Army Staff, Lieutenant General Taoreed Lagbaja, possesses the capabilities to overcome Nigeria’s security challenges?
The current COAS is a highly skilled professional with significant experience. He is part of the elite Special Forces Airborne Corps, boasting substantial operational exposure and command proficiency. Since assuming his role, we have seen him proactively adjust Command Field postings in alignment with the C-in-C’s directive to address the security situation on the ground. With the expected synergy among the service chiefs, he has the qualities required. This synergy should be characterized by effective collaboration, cooperation, and coordination at all levels.
What is your perspective on reintegrating repentant Boko Haram members and former militants into society? Do you not think this action could be counterproductive?
Any attempt to reintegrate ‘repentant’ militants, whether they are bandits or Boko Haram members, into society must be approached with great caution. Some in the past have returned to their communities with intentions of seeking vengeance against those they perceived as exposing them. In attrition warfare like this, the execution should focus on eliminating the belligerent force on the battlefield without the added complexity of handling Prisoners of War.
This process must be executed swiftly before they lay down their arms and surrender to you. If they manage to surrender, you’re then obligated, as a professional, to treat them as PWs according to the principles of International Law on War. This is where our soldiers often face challenges. We must conduct this war with a deliberate strategy of eliminating the enemy; otherwise, we may unintentionally mobilize an enemy reserve force that will confront us in the future. They pledge loyalty and profess repentance only when cornered.
Why weren’t attempts made to engage with the troops for a truce if their repentance was genuine? Presently, we have a few thousand repentant ex-militants undergoing routine processing and the DDR (Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration) program before reintegration. They are provided for by the nation, while their victims in IDP camps struggle for essentials. This raises questions about fairness.
What do you make of individuals who openly carry firearms in public without facing arrest?
The security threat posed by non-state actors openly carrying automatic weapons and challenging the state’s monopoly on these firearms is concerning. No one can freely brandish automatic small arms in Nigeria without some form of state support. This situation complicates the fight against banditry and terrorism in Nigeria because some non-state actors are acting under the influence of powerful backers. Both national and sub-national leadership have been complicit in their actions, showing less commitment to the national goal of defeating these belligerents. The situation in Southern Kaduna carries the intent of vindictive genocide, as evident in the former governor of Kaduna State’s viral video confession.
Do you believe that society is facing a threat due to the actions of these non-state actors?
Certainly, when these non-state actors enjoy support from influential entities, they exhibit significant audacity. Did you witness the DSS pursuing Asari Dokubo? Yet, they pursued Godwin Emefiele for possessing a locally-fabricated Dane gun. Such occurrences severely tarnish the image of this administration, placing Nigerian society under significant threat. However, as we know, no one has an exclusive right to violence. This situation may lead to the proliferation of armed thugs or private armies as a counterforce.
As a prominent figure, do you consider Asari Dokubo’s public display of weapons appropriate?
Asari Dokubo’s public display of automated weapons is inappropriate and infringes on the nation’s laws. It challenges the state’s monopoly on the exclusive possession of automatic weapons.
What actions do you think should be taken regarding him?
He should be arrested for unlawful possession of the firearm. An interrogation and investigation into the source of the weapon should follow. Subsequently, he should be arraigned before an appropriate court for prosecution on relevant charges.
Do you believe Lieutenant General Lagbaja made a prudent decision by dismissing amnesty for bandits?
Yes, the COAS made a sound decision by rejecting amnesty for bandits and terrorists. Negotiating with these groups is not appropriate. Instead, their actions should face swift and decisive consequences. Amnesty cannot be justified for them, as they lack any valid reasons for the criminality they engage in. Comparing them to the Niger Delta militants, who had legitimate concerns over the degradation of their land by oil companies, underscores the distinction.
What new strategies can be embraced to end insurgency in the country?
Several measures should be taken: halt the proliferation of small arms more effectively, foster community cooperation within the areas of responsibility, enhance the non-kinetic approach in operations, be more assertive in dealing with bandits and terrorists, cautiously consider state governors’ information in the field, as some may be complicit. Also, enhance the response time for emergency calls. For a long-term solution, the service chiefs should formulate a comprehensive national security sector reform document, addressing funding, manpower, logistics, equipment, training, intelligence, welfare, and motivation.
Arms-bearing youths often create chaos during elections. How can this be prevented in the upcoming governorship elections in Bayelsa, Kogi, and Imo this year?
Since these elections fall outside the regular schedule, security agencies can deploy in full force to be prepared for unforeseen circumstances. However, the challenge lies in our tendency to create laws but neglect prosecuting offenders. Few individuals have been prosecuted for violating electoral laws. Without effective sanctions as a deterrent, lawbreakers become more emboldened.
What advice do you have for politicians who sponsor these youths as political thugs?
Politicians should cease sponsoring youths as thugs. It’s essential to emphasize that everyone has the right to contest elections, and the process must be transparent. Continuous sponsorship of thuggery during elections undermines the electoral process. The state government should engage these jobless youths by providing vocational training and skills acquisition opportunities.
Millions of arms and ammunition are in the wrong hands in the country. How can the Federal Government best recover them to ensure national safety?
A comprehensive strategy for mopping up illicit small arms should involve revitalizing border control protocols for better effectiveness, offering monetary compensation to those surrendering their arms, conducting weapon surrender exercises for ex-militants, imposing severe sanctions for illegal firearm possession, and reviewing the ECOWAS protocol on Free Trade and Movement to assess its impact on national security interests.
