Adopting a win-win solution to the Niger Delta crisis

It is a matter for grave concern that the militant group, the Niger Delta Avengers has continued its sabotage activities despite the olive branch offered by the federal government in a genuine desire to find a peaceful solution to the sabotage of oil installations and the general insecurity pervading the region. For now, there is […]

It is a matter for grave concern that the militant group, the Niger Delta Avengers has continued its sabotage activities despite the olive branch offered by the federal government in a genuine desire to find a peaceful solution to the sabotage of oil installations and the general insecurity pervading the region.
For now, there is still a glimmer of hope that the federal government is not in a hurry to back out of the dialogue pledge. It is safe to conclude that the President Buhari Administration is genuinely committed to peaceful resolution of the Niger Delta uprising.
But the President’s critics will readily argue that the President’s gun boat predilection is scarcely helped by the hordes of hardliners around him whose brinksmanship constitute the greatest threat to peace, stability and national unity. In fact, the concern is that such hardliners are dangerously close to adding another theatre of full blown war to the Boko Haram insurgency in north east Nigeria.
To be sure, the militants are within their rights to agitate for a better deal from Nigeria if only in the light of the enormous contribution of the region to national development. I am not persuaded by the argument that their case lacks merit simply because their kinsman, President Goodluck Jonathan, ought to have met all their needs. That is like begging the question. If Jonathan had met all those needs, there would not have been agitation for change and Buhari would not have come to power. There is a sense in which the Niger Delta militants are simply asking to be included in the dividends of change. I think that that will be considered a legitimate demand. But their method is not legitimate.
I am not convinced that the method the militants have adopted is capable of serving the long term interests of the Niger Delta. In the short run, it could force every stakeholder group to the discussion table since, in spite of pretenses; our immediate survival is inextricably bound with peace in the region. On the other hand, the long term devastation of the Niger Delta will haunt generations unborn through diseases, loss of agricultural land, a traumatized people and the loss of loved ones. Besides, there is no cast-iron guarantee that the violence will ultimately lead to the realization of the raison d’être of the agitators as the federal government could also decide to call their bluff and go for broke.  Rather than this grim posture, it is my view that, the militants should take advantage of the suspension of military activities in the Niger Delta by laying down their arms for the dialogue table. They have made their point. And that point has been heard. They need to listen to and boost the moral standing of President Buhari who has graciously acceded to dialogue and Ibe Kachikwu, who by his focused development-oriented intervention, is emerging as the champion of Niger Delta renaissance.
Before returning to the method, let us consider the demands of the militants which, based on a recent release, can be paraphrased as follows: Immediate implementation of the report of the 2014 national conference report; Ending the skewed ownership of oil blocks by ensuring that Niger Delta indigenes own 60 percent of the blocks; Adequate funding of and continuation of the Niger Delta Amnesty Program and unconditional release of the leader of the Igbo Peoples of Biafra movement, Mr. Nnamdi Kanu.
For sure, these are very sticky matters as they touch on issues over which the President has maintained a very rigid posture. For instance, he has repeated severally that he will not touch the report of the national conference. Only recently, he virtually tied the hands of the trial judge in the Nnamdi Kanu case by literally asserting that the suspect was guilty. But does that mean that all hope is lost? I do not think so. My optimism is rooted in three distinct considerations.
First, recent events show that Buhari is not incurably rigid. For instance, who would have believed that, confronted with convincing argument, he would accede to deregulation of the pump price of fuel after maintaining an unbending opposition to talk of any fuel price increase? For another, he maintained that the naira was undervalued and pledged naira-dollar parity on assumption of office. But coming face to face with the evidence, he baulked, accepting an initiative by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) that, some have argued, amounts to a clear euphemism for devaluation. He literally dismissed any negotiation with the militants and sent in armoured tanks and jet fighters to crush them. However, presented with other scenarios, he lowered his guard and allowed for negotiations. 
The second ground for optimism is that, the President, conscious of his statutory responsibilities, is already meeting some of the demands of the militants. Time and again, he has asserted that the he was not going to abandon the amnesty program.
A third reason for optimism lies in the fact that Buhari cannot conceivably ignore the consensus that is building around the issue of political restructuring. For, to ignore the calls could jeopardize the survival of the nation he has fought so hard to preserve all his life. Being a wise general, the President can ill-afford to dissipate scarce resources (especially military arsenal) on too many points of conflict at a time of grave economic distress instead of pooling together all available resources and creating a national consensus to facilitate the prosecution of his change agenda.
Mbakogu, a public affairs analyst, wrote this piece from Abuja.