Ibrahim Agboola Gambari, a professor of political science, was until two years ago the United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs. Prior to joining the secretariat in 1999, he was the longest serving Permanent Representative of Nigeria to the United Nations, attending ten consecutive sessions of the General Assembly and serving as Security Council President on two occasions. The conflict resolution expert was recently on Channels Television during which he speaks on various national issues, especially that bordering on the ongoing security challenges. The ex-UN envoy and member of the ongoing national conference who scores the Federal Government low on the handling of the situation, says prominent Nigerians with practical experience on peace keeping and conflict management, including Gen. Muhammadu Buhari, must be brought together to chart a way out of the present logjam. In his view, setting up committee after committee won’t solve the impasse, because the issue which borders on trust can only be handled in a ‘comprehensive, carefully calibrated and sustained manner.’ ABDULRAHMAN A. ABDULRAUF reports
Cause of conflict
When you practice politics of exclusion, you are likely to create a situation whereby you have the outsiders and you have the insiders. You have people who are committed to the status quo and you have the people who are committed to change and it is that dynamics that tend to cause the problem we face globally and even here at home.
Resolving Boko Haram conflict
I believe so and my response is that in order to resolve conflict such as Boko Harm , we need a comprehensive approach, a carefully calibrated approach that combines incentives and also sanctions, as well as sustained efforts. The basic problem as I see is that of lack of trust and confidence on the part of the Boko Haram and on the part of the authorities. We have to find a way of re-establishing trust and confidence without which we cannot move forward in a carefully calibrated , in a sustained and in a comprehensive manner.
Are we on the right track towards resolving this?
First of all, I am not as fully briefed as I would like to be because I am not in direct communications with the authorities, but I have of course noticed, as you said rightly that a committee has given its report. Now, the issue of Boko Haram could not be one committee after the other. We have to have at the local level people who are engaging, people whom they trust and that is of critical importance. However, I have listened to and read the recent presentation of the National Security Adviser which in my view was wrongly tagged soft approach.
There cannot be one approach whether it is soft or hard. It has to be as I mentioned, a comprehensive, carefully calibrated and sustained manner. So, it is very important not just to talk about committees and committees and one approach after the other, but really comprehensive approach that can last and be sustainable and led by people that the insurgents will have confidence in.
Why have you not your brought experience to bare?
It’s true, I only left the UN just over two years ago. My last posting as you rightly said was Dafur. I am here, but let me say here that it is not just about me. Successful mediation requires a team, successful negotiation requires facilitators. For example, you mentioned Miamar, in addition to being a representative of the United Nations Security Council and of the Secretary General, I had the neighbouring countries who were supportive-India,
China, all those who had influence on each of the parties were part of the process. I believe that all we need to do is to assemble people who are experienced, and it is not just about me but Nigerians who had served in peace keeping of the world , who had distinguished themselves. General Buhari (Muhammadu) was the first commander, for example in Darfur, people like that who had brought peace to other troubled lands, people who have exposure and experience in mediation, not just government committees, but people who we can assemble, have best practices and see how we can be supportive of the process.
Will you be willing to provide the leadership in this regard?
I am a Nigerian, I am here, I am available now in the National Conference. I am not looking for a job but I am looking for an opportunity and to really mobilise those whom I know have practical experience in mediation, practical experience in bringing peace and practical experience in identifying root causes of conflict so that we can bring this to bare to support ongoing effort, because obviously we have not brought the right formula yet.
How optimistic are you on possible resolution of this conflict?
All conflicts can be resolved, there are some that take longer time to resolve than others. You don’t get to resolve conflict unless you address the root causes of the conflict.
In Darfur for example, we discovered that the real root cause of the conflict was water or poor management of water resources between the nomadic people who happen to be Arabs and the sedentary farmers who happen to be non Arabs, but they are Darfurians. If you want to address that conflict, you have to concentrate on the issue of water and that’s when I was a joint representative, we had a conference on water for peace. You heard of land for peace in the middle east but this is water for peace. We discovered that resonated well because we are talking of development, reconstruction and things that really touch the lives of the people. Similarly, we feel in Nigeria you have to address the root cause of the probe. And in my view, Boko Haram is not a north eastern problem, it’s not just a nomadic problem and settlers., it’s a Nigerian problem of governance manifesting themselves in these various areas.
Practical things to do to arrest these ugly trends
First, let’s take Miamar again. We are sometimes consumed by our situation that we don’t put things in context. For example Miamar, for 40 years, they had been battling with insurgency with seventeen different armed groups, each of these actually had nationality base by ethnic nationalities in Miamar. Now, how did they do it?
This is very relevant to our case. First is to negotiate a ceasefire. We are not asking them to give us their arms, people still have their weapons. From there, we move on to the next stage which is to talk, and ask them what is troubling you? In most of the cases, you find out that what is troubling people is power sharing, wealth sharing and they want to feel they are part and parcel of governance of their country. First step, stop the fight. Let them keep their arms if they want, start talking and then design programmes that will begin address their real needs. Like in Dafur, its about power sharing, it’s about wealth sharing.
Aren’t you by this legitimising insurgents and their activities?
That’s why you need the whole idea of stick and carrot, like a carefully calibrated. A military solution can’t work, it doesn’t work anywhere. A purely military solution, It can’t work.
At the same time, a policy of just carrot and reward will not work. So, you need a kind of combination of stick and carrot and even more importantly, you have to identify who are these spoilers. In order word, when you stop fighting or cause fighting, once you go into discussion and negotiation, and you identify spoilers who don’t want negotiation at all….
Have you found such?
Oh..absolutely. These spoilers want to have the benefit of continuing with the fighting. In this group are those who have backers from outside who invite them to conferences, give them business class ticket and arms dealers who want to perpetuate the conflict because they want to sell their arms, and they are sometimes within the country, within the region and outside. And again, there are those spoilers who are been used from outside. The challenges that I am saying, from my experience is that many times if you have faceless parties, it is difficult to find who is a spoiler and who is not.
Secondly, you have two parties, the other believes I am not a spoiler, he is a spoiler, whereas both of them could be spoilers.
For example, in Cyprus the Greek Cyprus think the Turkish Cyprus are the spoilers and it’s vice versa. In Miamar at the beginning, the government believed the real spoilers were the Ochanchechi and those pro-democracy groups, and they in turn believed the government is the spoiler. So, you have to have objective criteria to know those for whom peace is not in their interest, people who cannot be accommodated, people whose feelings and approaches can only make the situation worse, and then you identify them and have appropriate sanctions against them. So, that is the approach; stop fighting, negotiate what are the demands and third, identify spoilers and four a combination of carrot, stick and rewards and punishment for those determined to continue the conflict.
What makes this conflict not different from others?
What is conflict or violent conflict? First, conflict is normal because you have the defendants of status quo those who are benefitting and those who want change. That is the dynamic that can lead to conflict. Conflict can be functional or dysfunctional. Conflict can lead to accommodation and then you have a new arrangement to deal with everybody so that you have a win-win situation.
Religion being involved
It rather makes it more intractable. Let me take you back, at the end of the world war, most of the conflicts were between countries. After the end of the cold war, with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the push for democracy everywhere, many countries that we are witnessing everywhere became intra-states rather than inter-state which makes it even more complicated to address. Now , we are going to the third phase where most of the conflicts in the world are sectarian , tribal, ethnic and religious. This now becomes more difficult to resolve because it is about the question of identity; who are you, who is the friend and who is the enemy?
It therefore means that those who are put in positions to resolve conflict, I am talking now like a professor or scholar, have to be skilled in how to arrange a win-win situation, have to develop the sense that there is enough commonality to stop fighting so that we can move to the next stage of addressing issues of reconciliation, issues for development issues of power sharing and issues of wealth sharing.
Dealing with this identity problem in Nigeria
The way to go about it is creating a new and common identity and we have done it in the past. Northern Nigeria was one of the three regions in the past and the leaders of the pre-and post independent Nigeria talked about the North as one North one people . But you know they were not one people at all, because you had and still have the Muslims, the Christians, the Yourbas the Kanuris , the Nupes and of course the Hausa Fulanis. But the leadership managed to practice the politics of inclusion. Look at the first cabinet of Ahmadu Bello, it’s very instructive.
You had Michael Audu Buba, Michael Christian , Audu Hausa and Buba is a Fulani word, Saa’du Alanamu from Ilorin, and they used to make a joke that Na Ahmadu Baban premier, Allah Namu ko Allah na ku, you had Peter Achimugu. They called the Premier Mai Irin Irin Motani(One that has all kinds of people). The Saadauna was a symbol of unity, he stressed what unites rather than what divides. The South West under Awolowo, the Yorubas under him, people forgot that they are homogenous, the Ibadans, the Ijebus, Ijeshas and Egbas.
They fought wars among themselves before but Awolowo managed to create a commonality based on development, that the west was the first to have television and liberty stadium , western region development corporation, a new identity which submerged these differences. Incidentally, in spite of this, Awolowo and his Action Group were never supported by the Ijeshas who used to go for the NCNC, and even Ibadan the capital. But somehow, there was free education which ensured the creation of a community of peoples.
Is it possible in today’s Nigeria?
In my view, may be because I am basically an optimist, otherwise I wouldn’t have gone on all these peacemaking roles in the world. I don’t believe that conflicts are inherently unsolvable.
It may take longer, but I think is still possible. But it depends on the leadership we get in this country, people who will not see themselves as representing the community from which they come, but as leaders who will want to redefine Nigeria, define the basis of association, define the identity such that the greater number will come for the greater good of the community. But time is running out because as we move from election to election, people talk 2015, 2019. In between, what are we doing?
Is governance abandoned just as we prepare for election as if it will never end? We go from election to election without really addressing the needs of the people and without addressing those things that can unite us. As I speak, my ancestors were Hausa Fulanis, the flag bearers of Sheu Usman Danfodio, and my brother is currently the Emir of Ilorin, but my identity is not just principally that.
I am also a Yoruba speaking, my mother is Yoruba. How do we build and identify these agents of change, these people who have multiple identities or dual cultures? We have a lot in common that we can build on, but it requires a lot of commitment and a lot of thinking in leadership.
On Savanah centre
On the Savannah centre which I set up, the niche that we want to have is that whereas you have many NGOs, we have think tanks that concentrate on development, we have those that concentrate on democracy, we have those concentrating on peace and security.
Our argument is that there is a nexus that you cannot separate each of these efforts. There cannot be development without peace, there cannot be durable peace without sustainable development. And as two secretary generals of the UN argued, there will neither be peace nor development without respect for human rights, without democracy. So, it is that nexus that we want to bring and we want to make available the skills and a team on conflict management, conflict prevent and post-conflict peace building, even before conflict ends, to give people hope.
Influencing issues around governance
Tremendous opportunity has been handed to me as a member of the ongoing delegate conference and one of the key issues coming up is not just about restructuring of the federation, is not just about whether we should have parliamentary system as opposed to presidential system because some people feel the presidential system is too expensive, but the issue of governance, the issue of exclusion, the issue of corruption, the issue of resource management.