Despite mounting calls for Governor Dikko Umaru Radda to engage in talks with bandits, Francis Sardauna argues that such negotiations would be misguided, given the criminals’ ongoing atrocities and the proven failure of previous peace deals
For over 10 years, banditry and kidnapping have ravaged communities across Katsina State, leaving a trail of devastation and agony. The crisis has not only claimed hundreds of lives and displaced thousands of residents, but it has also crippled economic and social activities in some parts of the state.
Farming, education, and social cohesion have suffered immensely, while kidnapping for ransom has become a lucrative business for the marauding criminals, thus entrenching a flourishing war economy in eight frontline local governments in the state.
Humanitarian Crisis and Failed Efforts
The humanitarian catastrophe that has negatively affected the frontline local governments of Batsari, Jibia, Kankara, Safana, Dandume, Sabuwa, Danmusa, and Faskari has not been pleasant for the state, despite restless efforts by previous governments to tame the scourge.
In spite of these ongoing atrocities, calls for negotiation — popularly known in the Hausa language as Sulhu — were largely absent until recently when Governor Dikko Umaru Radda and security agencies’ relentless efforts forced the criminals onto the defensive.
Skepticism Over New Negotiation Calls
It is not surprising that this sudden push for negotiations has been met with skepticism, with many perceiving it as a desperate move by the bandits facing imminent defeat, rather than a genuine effort for peace in communities ravaged by their activities.
The skepticism about this move is understandable, given that previous dialogue efforts, such as the amnesty programme championed by the former Governor of the state, Aminu Bello Masari, failed to achieve meaningful disarmament and allowed the cycle of violence to persist.
Masari, who signed separate peace deals with the daredevils on January 15, 2017, and September 9, 2019, after visiting their enclaves in the fringes of Rugu forest, later regretted his rapprochement with them, which many described as an unproductive exercise.
Regret and the Consequences
“The armed bandits have betrayed our trust in them following a peace agreement earlier negotiated with them in our quest to find lasting peace in our state. I will never negotiate with them again,” Masari said at an event during his second tenure.
The invariably failed approach by Masari in dealing with the seemingly intractable insecurity in the state during his eight-year administration has not only allowed banditry to fester but has also made it assume the more dangerous status of a hydra-headed monster.
While his negotiation approach could have been desirable for some security analysts, its failure has proven that it was not only ineffective but also emboldened the criminals to carry out their heinous crimes with even more baffling audacity.
The Challenge of ‘Leaderless’ Terror Groups
Moreover, bandits, unlike other terrorists in the country who claimed to be prosecuting a holy religious war, have no clear-cut ideology and no known central leader despite their age-long inhuman activities. Thus, each terror group has its own leader.
This remains an unresolved challenge. So, who is the government trying to negotiate with again? Nothing but criminal elements devoid of ideological beliefs. Therefore, negotiation with one or more of these terror groups does not apply to all terror groups who have displaced farmers from their ancestral homes.
For instance, this played out in 2017 when bandits who were against the peace deals between some of their members and former Governor Masari killed those who participated in it. Negotiating with top bandits also encourages leaders of smaller groups to scale up their heinous activities to gain attention from the government for either financial gains or show of force.
Kidnap, Rustling, and Arms Trade
These criminal elements also believe they stand a better chance of getting more money through kidnap-for-ransom, cattle rustling, levies on rural communities, and gun running. So, it is very cumbersome for them to sustain or heed agreements with the government.
It is pertinent, therefore, to state that those who are calling on Governor Dikko Umaru Radda to follow Masari’s footsteps of negotiating with the bandits are enemies of the state in disguise and lack remorse for the downtrodden who are severely affected by the scourge of banditry.
Radda’s Stance Against Negotiation
But Radda, in different fora, warned the self-acclaimed harbingers of peace that his government will not negotiate with the hoodlums, “but any of the bandits who genuinely denounce banditry and surrender their weapons will be supported by the state government.”
He added, “Some people are saying that the only way to solve this problem is through negotiations. I told the National Security Adviser (NSA) that in Katsina, I would not negotiate with bandits because we have done it under the previous administration and it didn’t yield positive results.”
It is on record that Radda’s predecessor ended up giving the bandits taxpayers’ money, and they equipped themselves, acquired more weapons, and relaunched their attacks on innocent citizens of the state. Therefore, such a grievous mistake should not be repeated.
Federal Government’s Alleged Interference
Sadly, some forces from the seat of power in Abuja were allegedly trying to prevail on Governor Radda to change his early decision on the criminals against the right course of allowing the full wrath of the law to be applied to these bandits, as has been demonstrated by the governor.
“Our governor has made his point clear that his government will not negotiate with criminals, but there are some people in Abuja who are trying to force him to accept it because of what is happening in Kaduna,” a credible government source said.
He accused the federal government of sabotaging the ongoing war against banditry in the state by negotiating with the bandits behind the state government’s back through security agencies.
Faulty Peace Deals and Dubious Surrenders
He voiced dissatisfaction with a recent peace agreement made by the Nigerian Army with Bandits’ Leaders Abu Radde, Umar Black, and others who were hitherto terrorising communities in the Batsari local government area of the state.
“Similar agreements have been made before, but none have succeeded. This one will not either. The federal government was wrong to go ahead without the state’s involvement,” he added.
Although military sources reported that the development came after intense operations by the combined forces of Operation Fasan Yanma, the government source said the secret move will not yield any result.
He also questioned the significance of the arms surrendered by the bandits, noting, “Four AK-47 rifles from a group with hundreds of guns? It’s hardly a meaningful gesture.”
The Danger of Repeating Past Mistakes
With this military initiative reportedly supported by the federal government, there are indications that Governor Radda may reconsider his stance of not negotiating with the bandits, arguably for political and economic gains from the federal government to continue to thrive in the state.
Unless those clamouring for Radda to negotiate with the hoodlums are planning to feather their own nests, they should not gloss over or downplay the atrocities being committed by these criminal elements and must allow security personnel to flush them out of the state.
Rather than engage in such a wild goose chase, the dialogue agitators should look inward and try to identify the remote and immediate causes of banditry so that they can retrace their steps and help the government deal with the menace decisively and comprehensively for sustainable peace.
A Call for Sustainable Solutions
Notably, engaging the bandits in a peace deal will never yield significant positive outcomes in the state because past experiences have demonstrated that the daredevils exploited the first and second negotiations under Ex-governor Masari as a means to buy time, regroup, and strengthen their nefarious activities.
This is because they view the negotiations as a sign of weakness by the government, which emboldens them to continue their devilish acts. Thus, dialogue can only be meaningful if bandits are genuinely remorseful, voluntarily seek reconciliation, and victims are actively involved in shaping the process.
Without the trust and participation of the victims and affected communities, any peace initiative by either the security agencies or the government risks being superficial and unsustainable in Katsina State.
Leave a comment