By Alexander Ekemenah, Chief Analyst, NEXTMONEY
Summary
“God is always on the side of the big guns” is a saying that is common in military circles which preclude all elements of good lucks/fortunes. This saying is predicated on application of preponderant kinetic force to crush an enemy. What this saying actually means is that each country is entitled to and owes a responsibility to arm itself appropriately to be able to defend itself against a covetous enemy that seek to violate its territorial integrity or despoil its resources – or even crush the enemy outright. That is why no country could just wake one day to dare to challenge or launch a military attack on the United States, Russia, China, Britain or France because these countries have enough big guns to defend themselves and/or crush their challengers.
The acquisition of six A-29 Super Tucano combat aircrafts by Nigeria recently (July 2021) from the United States shows that Nigeria may not have had enough “big guns” prior to this time to prosecute the war against Boko Haram insurgency and banditry that are now growing into a Frankenstein monster. That may probably be why Nigeria has not won the war against the Janus-headed monstrosity of insecurity in recent times. But this also raise the question of what the Military High Command has been doing to all the annual budgetary allocations to the defense and security sector in the last two or three decades. The argument here would be that if the Nigerian Military High Command has judiciously applied all the allocated budgetary funds for procurement of necessary weapons over the decades, Nigeria would not have found itself running helter-skelter to purchase and procure Super Tucano aircrafts at this point in time. Nigeria would probably have been negotiating to buy other types of sophisticated weapons or aircrafts.
The acquisition of the Tucano aircrafts which seems to be the most advanced aircrafts in the Nigerian Air Force arsenal so far, however, does not in any way alter the balance of forces or power with the bandits or insurgents. It is yet to be seen how, indeed, the aircrafts would alter the balance of power in favour of the Nigerian State. This is because the bandits and insurgents are not in any way engaged with the Nigerian State in a direct war. They are rather engaged in a war of attrition or asymmetric (guerilla) warfare with the Nigerian State. They have no precise locations even though, for instance, Sambisa Forest is the main hideouts of the Boko Haram insurgents, the very Sambisa Forest that the Nigerian Army is sorely afraid to enter in pursuit of the insurgents ostensibly because it does not have enough “big guns” to carry out any form of operation against the insurgents there. The bandits and the Boko Haram insurgents have no precise locations. They move from place to place and this makes it extremely difficult for the Nigerian Military to track the movements of their foot-soldiers. The theatres of war are now predominantly scattered across the entire Northern part of the country – from Niger to Zamfara, Sokoto to Kebbi, from Kaduna to Katsina, from Borno to other places. Nigeria does not seem to have enough manpower to counter all these battle spaces at the same time. Tough luck!
The presence of the Tucano aircrafts in the Nigerian airspace does not also alter the balance of power between Nigeria and her neighbours, for instance, Chad and Cameroon, although it is very unlikely that any of her neighbours would be drawn into any major conflict with Nigeria in the near or remote future. Chad is reputed to have one of the most powerful armies in sub-Sahara Africa. Nigeria has no answer to that reputation, even when it is often regarded as the chief hegemon in the same region. But it shows the kind of defense and security posture that Nigeria has adopted in the face of increasing contemporary security challenges confronting it. The ugliness of the situation is that Nigeria is not even being threatened and attacked by external enemies but from within its own territory (with or without ideological support and physical assistance of external enemies).
While the battle against Boko Haram and the bandits is seen to be slowly shifting from ground to air warfare, the presence of the Tucano aircrafts in the Air Force stockpile does not confer air dominance or superiority in aerial warfare on Nigeria. Two combat aircrafts have already been shot down both by the Boko Haram insurgents and bandits in controversial circumstances this year alone – and not in a classic war situation. The Boko Haram insurgents and bandits that were able to shoot down the previous aircrafts are still probably capable of shooting down more aircrafts if they are determined and if they acquire more sophisticated anti-aircraft guns or missiles.
The acquisition of the Tucano aircrafts does not also serve as a factor of psychological warfare against the Boko Haram insurgents and the bandits. There is no evidence that they are afraid of the presence of the Tucano aircrafts as already demonstrated by the shooting down of two combat aircrafts although the Federal Government denied its jet been shot down in Borno State in April. They are not shivering. There is no evidence that the presence of the Tucano aircrafts would intimidate them and dissuade them from continuing to launch attacks on the Nigerian State and/or the Military. Boko Haram insurgency has been with Nigeria for twelve years now and there is no silver lining on the horizon that it is about to abate from its high intensity note. On the contrary, the insurgency is escalating more so with the merger between Boko Haram and Islamic State of West African Province in the last few months – even though Boko Haram leader, AbubakarShekau, had been allegedly killed.
On the other hand, the bandits are more emboldened by the fact that they have been having their ways with collection of ransom running into millions of Naira thus turning it into a very lucrative business franchise. Banditry has become an allurement of lucre and power. The bandits used the ransom so collected partly to buy more arms with which they are carrying out their criminal activities. There is no evidence available to show they are investing the ransom so collected in profitable economic ventures.
The Strategic Context
The acquisition of the Tucano came against the background of spate of air calamities this year alone. On July 19, 2021, a combat aircraft piloted by Ft Lt AbayomiDairo was shot down in Zamfara State. According to the BBC News, “Bandits in Nigeria have shot down an air force plane in a rare case of a military jet being brought down by a criminal gang in the country. There was shock in May in Nigeria when the Army chief, Lt Gen Ibrahim Attahiru, was killed in a plane crash alongside 10 other officers. Back in April another Alpha Jet crashed in Borno state – one of the areas where Boko Haram militants are most active. Reports that it was shot down by the jihadists have been denied by the military. Before that in February, a military aircraft in Abuja that was bound for Niger state to search for kidnapped schoolchildren there crashed – killing all seven people on board.”1
In the context of Nigeria’s internal security crisis, the increasing violence and death on daily basis, it seems God is abandoning Nigeria to its own fate essentially because Nigeria is placing the cart before the horse in its strategic policy options in confronting the growing internal security crisis. While always praying for an end to the violence and deaths (insecurity of lives and properties in general) there is no evidence to show that Nigeria is acting in proper context of evaluating the growing asymmetric threat to its very existence. Indeed, there is no evidence to show that the copious prayers so far has had any positive effect on the prosecution of the war against Boko Haram insurgency, banditry, kidnapping and other sundry criminalities. Blood is still being shed on daily basis.
Nigeria continues to act and conduct the war in the same old-fashioned ways that have not helped to end the insurgency. Nigeria is refusing to act, by omission or commission, in its strategic thinking and action, because of very petty political considerations, for strategic and technical ways to end the multifaceted wars that now face it. Thus the failure at the security plane is directly related to failure at the governance level in general in its inability to think and act strategically outside the proverbial “box”. There is no other excuse. Nigeria is boxed in its own self-created silo mentality.
At the security plane, the purchase and acquisition of the Tucano aircrafts showed the working of the brain wave of the Military High Command which can be argued, without fear of contradiction, to be of low frequency. First, it show that the hitherto existing stockpile of combat aircrafts in its arsenal has most probably become obsolete and incapable of confronting the growing menace, the audacity and sophistication of the Boko Haram insurgents and bandits. So the key question is: what has happened to its hitherto existing arsenal of combat aircrafts? Are they no more air-worthy? Who should be held responsible for the sordid state of affairs of the Nigerian Air Force and its arsenal of obsolete aircrafts?
In the context of modern aerial warfare, as stated earlier, Tucano jet fighter is not in any way air dominance or superiority plane no matter the propaganda to the contrary especially most of those miserable reportage in the media. This is because it is not manufactured to serve as an air dominance or superiority jet fighter of any known description. It is like a paper kite. The most generous appellation is that it can be regarded as sledge hammer meant to kill ants or flies. Tucano aircraft belong to the era of First World War or to be more generous to the era of Second World War – whether it was manufactured in the 90s or not.
The collective experience in the last twenty years or so shows clearly that Nigeria has no modern military or a modern air force to confront modern security challenges such as those represented by Boko Haram insurgency and banditry of the Northern Nigerian typology. Nigerian military, unfortunately, is still rooted and shackled in analogue mode of combat in confronting its avowed enemy (whether internal or external) – akin to the Nigerian Civil War of 1967-70. The Nigerian military is exclusively structured to function at the level of First or Second Generation Warfare.
In the ranking of Global Firepower for the past ten years, if not more than that, Nigeria is always to be found at the bottom of the ranking list. According to GFP, for 2021, Nigeria is ranked 35 of 140 out of the countries considered for the annual GFP review. It holds a PwrIndx* score of 0.6241 (a score of 0.0000 is considered ‘perfect’). This entry last updated on 03/03/2021.2 It is no wonder that Nigeria has been experiencing difficulties in defeating Boko Haram which function at the level of Fourth Generation Warfare essentially characterized by its asymmetric typology. Part of the explanations of this sordid state of affairs (locked down in a gridlock) is that Nigerian Military is not structured to fight asymmetric warfare and has been extremely slow in adapting to the exigent reality of security contemporary threat spectrum and adopting appropriate new methodologies required for defeating these modern security challenges.
It is really an awkward situation. While one may not question GFP’s PwrIndx metrics for classifying the countries, it is very doubtful whether Nigerian Air Force in this context can really be compared with or near any modern air force with its current arsenal of aircrafts. This type of assertion may evoke sense of injured feelings especially in the top-hierarchy of the Nigerian Air Force and its media acolytes. But if we go by the performance record of the NAF so far especially in the context of the war against Boko Haram insurgency and recently too, banditry in the North western part of the country, such an assertion may not be further from truth no matter how bitter this may taste on the palate. NAF’s arsenal of combat aircrafts analogous to a collection of paper kites fluttering in the air that can easily be blown of the sky by a storm. NAF’s combat aircrafts cannot stand anywhere near any modern air force!
The Role of Superweapons in War
From ancient times to the present, wars are won and lost by a combination of factors and conjuncture (alignment) of forces. In any war, it is not only the training and discipline of the soldiers or the strategies and tactics of the war commanders that matter. It is not also only political motives and accompanied propaganda. Victory in war also depends on the types of weapons deployed to the battle fields.
For instance, in the 1967 and 1973 wars, Israel rose up with Valkyryan fury/Promethean fire to shatter the combined military forces of Egypt, Jordan and Syria, even though using basic and brutal kinetic force but adapting to new realities of modern warfare. In the June 1967’s Six Day War (codenamed Operation Focus), Israeli forces smashed through the defenses mounted by Egypt, Syria and Jordan.
Israeli surprise air attacks on Egyptian air force bases resulted in the loss of nearly the entire Egyptian Air Force with just few Israeli losses, giving Israel the advantage of air dominance in the Middle East. Egypt lost all its 30 Tu-16 Soviet-built bombers, 27 out of 40 Il-28 bombers, 12 Su-17 fighter bombers, over 90 MiG-21s, 20 MiG-19s, 25 MiG-17 fighter jets, and around 32 assorted transport planes and helicopters. In addition, Egyptian radars and SAM missiles were also attacked and destroyed. The Israelis lost 19 planes, including two destroyed in air-to-air combat and 13 downed by anti-aircraft artillery guns.
Israeli aircrafts were mainly of French origin (which include Dassault Mirage combat jets) while its armoured units were mostly of British and American origin. During the war, Israel was afraid of the sophisticated Soviet-made Tu-16 “Badger” medium bombers capable of inflicting heavy damage on Israeli military and civilian centres. But Israel destroyed the entire stock.
The Egyptian forces consisted of seven divisions: four armoured, two infantry, and one mechanized infantry. Overall, Egypt had around 100,000 troops and 900–950 tanks in the Sinai, backed by 1,100 APCs and 1,000 artillery pieces. This arrangement was thought to be based on the Soviet doctrine, where mobile armour units at strategic depth provide a dynamic defense while infantry units engage in defensive battles.
Israeli forces concentrated on the border with Egypt included six armoured brigades, one infantry brigade, one mechanized infantry brigade, three paratrooper brigades, giving a total of around 70,000 men and 700 tanks, who were organized in three armoured divisions. They had massed on the border the night before the war, camouflaging themselves and observing radio silence before being ordered to advance.
In the Yom Kippur War, or the October War, of 1973 (the Fourth Arab–Israeli War) Egypt and Syria had launched a surprise attack on Israel like the Israeli did in the Six Day War of 1967. The war lasted only about two weeks, from 6th to 25th October. The majority of combat between the two sides took place in the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights – both of which were occupied by Israel in 1967 – with some fighting in African Egypt and northern Israel. The war had started on 6 October 1973, on the Jewish holy day of Yom Kippur, which had occurred simultaneously with the Islamic holy month of Ramadan in that year
However, Israel mobilized most of its forces three days later and halted the Egyptian offensive, resulting in a military stalemate. The Syrians coordinated their attack on the Golan Heights to coincide with the Egyptian offensive and initially made threatening gains into Israeli-held territory. After three days of heavy fighting, Israeli forces pushed the Syrians back to the pre-war ceasefire lines. The Israeli military then launched a four-day-long counter-offensive deep into Syria. Within a week, Israeli artillery began to shell the outskirts of the Syrian capital of Damascus, and Egyptian president Anwar Sadat began to worry about the deteriorating integrity of the Arab coalition’s leadership.
The climax of the war was reached on October 24, when the Israelis improved their positions considerably and had the Egyptian Third Army and Suez City completely encircled, bringing the Israeli Defense Force within 100 kilometres (62 miles) of the Egyptian capital of Cairo. The Doomsday for the Arabs and particularly the Egyptians had arrived. Israel was poised to seal the fates of the Arabs, once and for all.
Some historians like Andrew McGregor claimed that the success of the first strike negated the need for a second planned strike. Egypt acknowledged the loss of five aircraft during the attack. Kenneth Pollack wrote that 18 Egyptian aircraft were shot down, and that these losses prompted the cancellation of the second planned wave. In one notable engagement during this period, a pair of Israeli F-4 Phantom II challenged 28 Egyptian MiGs over Sharm el-Sheikh and within half an hour, shot down seven or eight MiGs with no losses. One of the Egyptian pilots killed was Captain Atif Sadat, President Sadat’s half-brother.
Simultaneously, 14 Egyptian Tupolev Tu-16 bombers attacked Israeli targets in the Sinai with Kelt Missiles, while another two Egyptian Tupolevs fired two Kelt missiles at a radar station in central Israel. One missile was shot down by a patrolling Israeli Mirage fighter, and the second fell into the sea.
In general, the Yom Kippur War recorded one of the greatest tank battles in modern history of warfare. Israel decimated the combined armoured forces of the Arab coalition forces.
In the Falklands War of 1982, British military crushed Argentine Forces within 74 days, even though there were high casualties (Argentina lost 649 soldiers, British 255 and 3 Falkland Islanders) like the sinking of the HMS Sheffield and Argentine flag warship, General Belgrano.
The whole British task force comprised 127 ships: 43 Royal Navy vessels, 22 Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships and 62 merchant ships which include nuclear-powered HMS Conqueror Churchill-class submarine, Churchill-class submarine aircraft carriers HMS Invincible and HMS Hermes, ocean liners SS Canberra and Queen Elizabeth 2. The British Royal Air Force had 42 aircrafts (28 Sea Harrier jump jets and 14 Harrier R.3s) available for air combat operations, against approximately 122 serviceable jet fighters, of which about 50 were used as air superiority fighters and the remainder as strike aircrafts on the part of Argentine Air Force. By mid-April, the British Royal Air Force had set up the airbase of RAF Ascension Island, co-located with Wideawake Airfield on the mid-Atlantic British overseas territory of Ascension Island which included a sizeable force of Avro Vulcan B Mk 2 bombers, Handley Page Victor K Mk 2 refueling aircraft, and McDonnell Phantom FGR Mk 2 fighters to protect them.
HMS Conqueror submarine sank ARA General Belgrano, an Argentine flag warship on May 23, 1982, with 323 casualties. But two days later, the Argentine retaliated by sinking HMS Sheffield, a Type 42 destroyer, with an Exocet missile strike fired from the Argentine 2nd Naval Air Fighter/Attack Squadron, killing 22 crew members. The missile was fired from a Super Entendard French-made fighter jet. The British also lost HMS Ardent, HMS Antelope, and MV Atlantic Conveyor to Exocet missile attacks. Also lost was HMS Coventry. Meanwhile, the Argentines lost 22 aircraft in the attacks.
The Argentine attempted on 30 May to attack HMS Invincible with two Super Étendards, one carrying Argentina’s last remaining Exocet, escorted by four A-4C Skyhawk each armed with two 500lb bombs. Two of the attacking Skyhawks were shot down by Sea Dart missiles fired by HMS Exeter with HMS Avenger (F185) claiming to have shot down the Exocet missile with her 4.5″ gun. If the Argentines have sunk the aircraft carrier HMS Invincible, it would have led to breaking the British naval backbone in the war in Falkland Island.
In the 1990 and 2003 Iraqi Wars, it took only less than a month or thereabout for the United States military to smash the hitherto feared Republican Army of Iraq. In a coordinated ground attacks and air strikes, the US and Allied Forces sliced through Iraqi military like a knife cutting through bread or butter.
In the 1990 War, the United States led a coalition of forces in opposition to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, consisting of forces from 39 countries: Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, Honduras, Hungary, Italy, Kuwait, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Syria, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States. It was the largest coalition since World War II. US Army General Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. was the commander of the coalition forces in the Persian Gulf area. Although they did not contribute any forces, Japan and Germany made financial contributions totaling $10 billion and $6.6 billion respectively. US troops represented 73% of the coalition’s 956,600 troops in Iraq.
In this war, Iraq’s Russian-made T-72M tank was the common battle tank used during the war. But this was no match for American M1-Abram tank which smashed the Iraqi tanks to pieces.
The 2003 invasion of Iraq began on 19 March 2003 (air) and 20 March 2003 (ground) and lasted just over one month, including 26 days of major combat operations, in which a combined force of troops from the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland invaded Iraq. This early stage of the war formally ended on 1 May 2003 when US President George W. Bush declared the “end of major combat operations”.
The U.S.-led coalition sent 177,194 troops into Iraq during the initial invasion phase, which lasted from 19 March to 1 May 2003. About 130,000 arrived from the U.S. alone, with about 45,000 British soldiers, 2,000 Australian soldiers, and 194 Polish soldiers. 36 other countries were involved in its aftermath. In preparation for the invasion, 100,000 U.S. troops assembled in Kuwait by 18 February. The coalition forces also received support from the Pershmerga in Iraqi Kurdistan.
In these wars, special types of ammunitions, armoured tanks, combat aircrafts, warships, nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, even submarines featured prominently in waging and deciding the fate of these wars.
In the Nigerian case, there have been no show-cased special weapons used at any point in time in the fight against Boko Haram insurgency, for instance. The Nigerian Government till date has never revealed to the public exactly where and how the Boko Haram insurgents, bandits and kidnappers got their sophisticated weapons from. Additionally, the Nigerian Military could not even deploy smart technologies except as assisted by foreign powers as reported in the media. There has been no celebrated case of deployment of smart technologies to track, ambush, and decimate the insurgents at any point in time.
These are some of the strategic failures borne out of faulty military doctrine, selfish political biases or general considerations, ill-thought strategies and tactics, obduracy of field commanders, etc. There is no evidence or guarantee that the acquisition of the Super Tucano combat aircrafts is about to address and reverse these strategic failures arising out of fundamental shortcomings of the past and present time. There is no assurance to this effect – except we are to believe the mounted propaganda by the Federal Government that served as the rationale for the acquisition of the aircrafts.
A Gloomy Picture
The Super Tucano aircrafts were being purchased and acquired at a time when the international community (scholars and strategic think tanks) has been painting a very gloomy picture of the extant security situation in the country. There is a growing worry that Nigeria may have arrived at a very messy situation or slippery slope where it is difficult to save oneself from self-destruction.
To the “patriotic” Nigerians such a doomsday forecast should be ignored probably because this community may not be wishing Nigeria well at the end of the day. But it is interesting to review such a forecast to see, in an objective manner, whether there is ever a substance to such forecast.
The London-based Economic Intelligence Unit (EIU) is the latest international think-tank that recently painted a dark picture of the security landscape in the country. The EIU report, dated July 20, 2021, notes that the country’s security situation in many parts of the country is in a state of continuous deterioration.
The EIU report states that it “expects the president, Muhammadu Buhari, to remain in power until his second (and final) term expires in 2023, but the security situation in many parts of Nigeria is in a state of continuous deterioration.
“The president will be under immense pressure to stabilize Nigeria, but myriad security threats will prove unmanageable, with the military and police overstretched and unable to tackle simultaneous security crises.
“Emergencies will be triaged, with military resources deployed to whichever is considered the most pressing. There will be unceasing conflict in the north-east, particularly in Borno state, between the military and two Islamist terrorist groups, Boko Haram and the Islamic State of West African Province, which will consolidate forces to some extent after the death of Boko Haram’s leader in mid-2021.
“The government will be unable to regain full dominion over the north-east, and more recently Boko Haram has expanded into central Nigeria, not far from the capital, Abuja.
“Although central Nigeria – an agricultural heart-land – has for several years been affected by violent conflict between farmers and herdsmen over land and water resources, it is newer territory for Boko Haram.
“Our belief is that Nigeria’s federal government will nonetheless be able to assert control over “core” regions, such as Abuja, and other areas of economic or political importance, at the expense of “periphery” regions that have been mired in conflict for many years.
“This system is resilient enough to keep the government in power, but will leave many parts of Nigeria highly dysfunctional. Security challenges will be pronounced in numerous areas of the country, with unrest in the south-east attributed to Biafran secessionist groups and a broader surge in kidnappings by organised criminal networks.
“Banditry and violent crime will remain pervasive, and other areas of Nigeria could begin to resemble the north-east as, in essence, “no-go” zones. Neglect of the periphery could eventually reach an implosion-point for overall stability, but we do not expect this within the 2021-25 forecast period”, the report concludes.
There are three critical issues involved in the above report. The first is the silent but growing concern about regime survival. This also has two aspects. The first aspect is the health of the President. Given his health status, the Federal Government or the ruling clique is sparing no effort to ensure the health safety of President Muhammadu Buhari till and beyond 2023. This is because his sudden demise can upset the entire apple cart that has been carefully constructed over the last six years in terms of the political dominance or hegemony of the North against the rest of the country. The second aspect is also the interest of the North to maintain political power beyond 2023. Thus this regime survival is not just for the tenure of President Muhammadu Buhari but also beyond 2023 to ensure the continual dominance of the North over the rest of the country. One can argue that this concern is legitimate to the extent of the depth of strategic fear that once power slips through their fingers now, it may take a long time before it can be restored.
The second issue is also tied to regime survival mentioned above. Nigeria is standing at the edge of collapse having been deemed to have failed as argued by other international scholars such as John Campbell and Robert Rotberg in their recent articles published in May 2021. The growing insecurity in the country is slowly or fast (depending on individual perception) eroding the capacity of the State to maintain its hegemony. More and more groups are coming out to defy the authority of the State. Thus, the situation goes beyond the regime survival of the Buhari-led administration. It goes to the core of the continual existence and sustainability of the Nigerian State in its current geopolitical structures. Nigeria is the acknowledged poverty capital of the world. There has been no fundamental improvement on the economic status of the country since 2015 when Buhari administration came on board. The World Bank in its latest report on Nigeria (Nigerian Development Update) has indicated that Nigeria stands losing a decade of economic gains under the Buhari-led administration. This is another way of saying that Nigeria has not made substantial economic gains under this administration despite the loud proclamations to the contrary. Poverty coupled with growing unemployment has nexus with insecurity as both feed each other with their spiral effects on the society as a whole.
Third is the fact that it is not just the military and the police including other security agencies are overstretched to tackle simultaneously security crises. Rather they are challenged in their individual or collective core competence by the multifaceted nature of insecurity in the country. That is why the interrogation and appreciation of security challenges as contained in the National Security Strategy of 2014 and 2019 failed to meet the expectations of overcoming the security challenges facing the nation till date. Indeed, the 2019 National Security Strategy was dead on arrival (upon its announcement) consequent upon febrile disagreements and mutual recriminations between the Office of the National Security Adviser and the Defense Headquarters (Service Chiefs). The security agencies are compromised in their moral legitimacy to fight crime and insecurity first by allowing themselves to fall under the spell of selfish political considerations or pressure to which they are subjected by the ruling clique and secondly by their overt discriminatory methodological approach along the lines of ethnic, political and religious considerations.
What do we mean by this? For instance, up till date, no kidnapper, no bandit, and no insurgent has ever been arrested and prosecuted diligently by the State to serve as deterrence to other category of criminals. On the other hand, the State pursue with vengeance the so-called “secessionists” or “separatists” “#EndSars protesters” “who want to divide the country” and “who want to remove the President from power” who in turn are mostly from the Southern part of the country, thus introducing geopolitical considerations into the security crises confronting the country. The Nigerian State launched ferocious attacks on IPOB in the South East with Operation Python Dance I and II leading to hundreds of deaths of innocent citizens. (But the insurgents, terrorists, bandits, kidnappers, herdsmen killers mostly from the North are not a threat to the Nigerian State because they are not about to “divide the country” or “remove the President from power” according to the theoretical understanding of President Muhammadu Buhari who offered this line of thinking in his Arise TV interview on June 10, 2021.)
The picturesque of the Nigerian State is painted clearly for all to see that it is compromised in its stand against crimes for being hedgy or discriminatory in its approach because of vested political interests. The State reveals its fundamental weakness in its evident refusal to embark on wholesale cleansing process of the Augean Stable by reforming the security and intelligence-gathering services and by diligent prosecution of all categories of criminals threatening the fabric that holds the entire social superstructures together. The State has not conveyed its ability to go beyond petty political, ethnic, religious biases or considerations in fighting crime and/or general insecurity. The Nigerian State is unwittingly telling the public that anybody can get away with crimes except those that directly challenge its authority or hold on power.
The entire security agencies are suffocated under this type of stupefying political atmosphere and thus inevitably prevented from professionally and impartially discharging their individual statutory responsibilities and duties except otherwise dictated by vested political considerations. How can the security agencies be seen to be impartial when its top-echelon leadership of command and control is exclusively dominated by people from virtually the same ethnic and religious origin in a multiethnic and multi-religious country like Nigeria?
The conclusion that can be drawn from this scenario is that the Nigerian State deliberately set out to screw up the security situation in the country by its partiality in its profile of lop-sided appointments to the top-echelon leadership of the security agencies in the country. The resultant effect of this is not just the escalation of insecurity across the broad spectrum of threats and risks within an environment of vulnerability, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity, but also a laid-back attitude of abject prayerful posture by the public to be delivered from serpentinism of a ruling clique that has demonstrated its partiality beyond all reasonable doubts.
Both the security agencies themselves and the public are the victims of this phenomenal serpentinism that has come to characterize the Nigerian State which it wittingly or unwittingly inflicted or foisted on itself.
Internal Security Conflagration
To many observers of the unfolding developments in the Nigerian polity, the advent of the Fourth Republic in 1999 blew off the lid covering subterranean resentments that have been brewing under military rule for many decades. However, even if the military had not handed over power to civilians in 1999, the internal security crisis in form of regional separatist movements, insurgency of the Boko Haram typology, and other forms of ethnic-based unrest would still have blown open as a matter of inevitability.
Thus Boko Haram, for instance, did not come as a strategic surprise at all if we look critically at the backgrounds and trajectory of failure of governance over the decades whether under military rule or civilian rule in that region of the country.
Specifically, one can cite the Odi Massacre of November 1999 just barely five months after the military handed over power to the civilian administration headed by Chief Olusegun Obasanjo as the beginning of major conflicts in the country. The Odi massacre, which was an attack carried out on November 20, 1999, on a defenseless people by the Nigerian military on the predominantly Ijaw town of Odi in Bayelsa State. The Niger Delta conflict was in its incipient stage at this point in time and the attack was like an over-kill for offences committed in the midst of social upheaval that has erupted in the region over disputes about oil wealth allocations, environmental degradation by oil pollution, etc.
The tragic incident was sparked off when twelve policemen were killed by a gang of angry youths near Odi. In retaliation, the military decided to invade the village with every building in the town except a bank, an Anglican church and a health center was burned to the ground. The Nigerian State did not arrest any of the offenders, through the military or the police, for prosecution. Thus the attack was an extra-judicial execution of people never given the opportunity to defend themselves in court of law. They were never given the opportunity for fair hearing. Rule of law was violated and turned upside down with flagrant impunity.
An ominous danger was looming on the horizon. By suppressing the upheaval in Odi, the Nigerian State erroneously thought that was the end of the matter, not knowing that the incident has just signaled more rebellions to erupt in other places.
In early October 2001, another tragedy happened. Tiv and Junkun ethnic groups in Benue and Taraba States have been at loggerhead for some time. Unfortunately, soldiers drafted to the conflict area, to restore law and order, were caught in the midst of the affray between the two warring ethnic groups. About 19 soldiers were killed in the conflict between the two groups. Their mutilated and decomposing bodies were found in Zaki-Biam village on October 12.
In revenge and with full vengeance, the military responded by mobilizing troops from 23rd Armoured Brigade to the village on October 22. According to media report then, the soldiers called a meeting in Gbeji village centre, rounded up all able bodied men and shot them at point blank range while the victims were completely unarmed and defenseless. According to New York-based Human Rights Watch, eye-witnesses reported that “some of the victims’ bodies were then set ablaze. Further killings took place as soldiers invaded the villages of Vasae, AnyiinIorja, Ugba, Sankera and Zaki-Biam, all located in the two local government areas of Logo and Zaki-Biam. In the following two days, there was widespread destruction of property and buildings in these villages, after terrified residents had abandoned their homes.” About 100 people or more were alleged to have been cold-bloodedly murdered by the Nigerian Army.
Then in late 2005, hell broke loose in Niger Delta when militancy now took the centre stage of national life. The life-wire of the Nigerian economy came under high-intensity threat. Militants formed various groups which launched attacks on the Nigerian State including the multinational oil corporations operating in the region.
Four years later, i.e. in July 2009, Boko Haram insurgency unleashed itself on the Nigerian State. It is twelve years now in July 2021. Boko Haram is still waxing strong and there is no evidence anywhere nor prediction or forecast from any quarter as to when it is likely to abate. It is mainly because of Boko Haram insurgency that the Federal Government scrambled to go to the United States to buy new set of combat jets presumably superior to the existing arsenal of combat jets.
Banditry and kidnapping for ransom (both have now coalesced to form a hydra-headed monster) have also joined the fray not to talk of attacks from herdsmen who have always been suspected to be of Fulani origin (whether of indigenous or foreign origin). Recently too, matches and drumbeats of separatist movements and/or secession can now be heard loud and clear on the streets of Southwestern and Southeastern parts of the country.
In the Southeast part of the country, there were media reports that helicopter gunships were deployed against IPOB agitators resulting in high casualties. President Muhammadu Buhari threatened fire and brimstones against the IPOB agitators but had been very circumspect in his belligerent pronouncements as regard the Southwest.
The big questions are: how does the acquisition of these Super Tucano combat jets going to alter the balance of forces in the country? Against whom would they be deployed?
EMB-314 (A-29) Super Tucano
In explaining the rationale for the purchase of the combat aircrafts by Nigeria, high-falutin grammars were blown from both sides of the mouth especially by the United States that said the A-29 Super Tucanos were sold to Nigeria to strengthen the country’s fight against terrorism.
According to the US’ Chargé d’Affaires Kathleen FitzGibbon said that the Light Attack aircraft (manufactured and packaged for sale by the American Sierra Nevada Corporation/Embraer Defense and Security represented a historic level of cooperation achieved between the U.S. and Nigerian militaries. “Beyond the new hardware that you see on this runway, this program has brought our two militaries closer in formal training, professional development, air base construction, logistics planning, and negotiations. We are proud to partner with Nigeria in its ‘whole of government’ approach to end violent extremism and ensure a more stable, prosperous country for all Nigerians,” FitzGibbon said.3
A statement issued by the American Diplomatic Mission to Nigeria stated that “The Super Tucano is a dual-pilot turboprop aircraft built as a workhorse combat air platform, equipped for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) and for precision air-to-ground strike missions. The next six aircraft are scheduled for delivery later this year.4
“The Super Tucano platform for Nigeria is the United States’ largest Foreign Military Sales program in Sub-Saharan Africa, valued at almost $500 million. This program follows the Department of Defense’s “Total Package Approach” model and includes spare parts for several years of operation, contract logistics support, munitions, and a multi-year construction project to improve Kainji’s infrastructure.5
“Through this program, the U.S. Air Force’s 81st Fighter Squadron at Moody Air Force Base, Georgia, trained Nigerian pilots and maintenance crews to U.S. standards. Training also emphasizes the Law of Armed Conflict and Civilian Casualty Mitigation, which are fundamental principles of the Nigerian military’s professional education and training.6
“With the A-29 Super Tucano purchase, the Nigerian Air Force also has become a founding member of the U.S. Air Force’s “Combined Light Attack Experiment,” which is developing Light Attack global best-practice tactics and doctrine for the 21st century.”7
The six fighter planes bring to 32 the number of platforms procured by the President Muhammadu Buhari-led administration. They include 10 Super Mushshak aircraft, five Mi-35M helicopter gunships, two Bell 412 helicopters, four Agusta 109 Power attack helicopters, two Mi-171E helicopter, three JF-17 Thunder fighter aircraft, which were delivered and inducted in May 2021. The aircraft ranges from fighter planes to training and support platforms. The expectation by defense and military authorities are that the attack aircrafts would change the tide in the war against insurgency and bring it to an end.8
The aircraft “is armed with two wing-mounted 12.7mm machine guns with a rate of fire of 1,100 rounds a minute and is capable of carrying general-purpose bombs and guided air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles.9
“A-29s are turboprop planes armed with one 20mm cannon below the fuselage able to shoot 650 rounds per minute, one 12.7mm machine gun (FN Herstal) under each wing and up to four 7.62mm Dillion Aero M134 Miniguns able to shoot up to 3,000 rounds per minute”, a military source said.10
Super Tucanos are also equipped with “70mm rockets, air-to-air missiles such as the AIM-9L Sidewinder, air-to-ground weapons such as the AGM-65 Maverick and precision-guided bombs. It can also use laser rangefinder and laser-guided weapons. The aircraft is used by air forces of 15 countries.11
“There are plenty of countries that have an extremist threat – the Middle East and South and Central Africa. SOCOM (Special Operations Command) is asking for this for Nigeria, Somalia and Libya. It is a perfect platform for where we are fighting,” US Rep, Michael Waltz, (R) Fla told Warrior, a military publication.12
The US-trained pilots with the Afghan Air Force had launched air strikes against the Taliban with A-29 Super Tucano aircraft, a platform which seems well-suited for the air force’s intended mission scope. Its integrated weapons and laser-firing technology enable the platform to both lay down suppressive fire in support of advancing infantry and pinpoint targets for precision strikes. This mission envelope seems to enable a wide sphere of operational possibilities, to include counterinsurgency and great power challenges. “The pilot is protected with Kevlar armour and provided with a zero/zero ejection seat. The clamshell canopy, hinged at the front and rear and electrically activated, is fitted with a de-icing system and features a windshield capable of withstanding, at 300k, the impact of a 4lb (1.81kg) bird. A Northrop Grumman onboard oxygen generation system (OBOGS) is installed.13
“They have long loiter time and can stay close to the fight. They are interoperable in a very close-knit way with operations on the ground,” Waltz said.14
The publication listed war situations in which A-29s could change the equation when it comes to counterinsurgency. “First and foremost, they can save lives. If overhead fire support is able to identify and attack pockets of enemy fighters, fewer ground troops have to enter into enemy fire. Also, an overhead asset of this kind can be an intelligence node able to send targeting information and data regarding troop movements.15
“When it comes to actual close-in counterinsurgency combat, fighters often obscure themselves in defilade or in buildings, requiring a need for precision strikes. The air-ground Maverick precision weapon can use laser rangefinder and other kinds of advanced targeting technologies – providing what could be called an indispensable element of attack support”.16
Naturally, advancing ground forces can benefit from air support while advancing on enemies for direct targeting or suppressive fire to enable forces to maneuver”, it said.17
The A-29 Super Tucano is the gold standard for light attack, combat and reconnaissance aircraft. Built in the U.S. by Sierra Nevada Corporation and its partner, Embraer Defense & Security, the A-29 has been selected by 15 Air Forces worldwide including Afghanistan and Lebanon. The A-29 is a versatile and powerful turboprop aircraft and is known for its rugged and durable design, which allows it to perform operations from unimproved runways and at forward operating bases in austere environments and rugged terrain. The A-29 is the only light attack aircraft in the world with a U.S. Air Force Military Type Certificate. About Embraer Defense & Security Embraer Defense & Security is the leading aerospace and defense industry in Latin America.18
In addition to the A-29 Super Tucano light attack and advanced trainer and the multi-mission C-390 Millennium military airlift, it provides a full line of integrated solutions and applications such as Command and Control Center (C4I), radars, ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance & Reconnaissance) and space. This also includes integrated systems for information, communications, border monitoring and surveillance as well as aircraft for authorities’ transportation and special missions. With a growing presence on the global market, Embraer Defense & Security products and solutions are present in more than 60 countries.19
The EMB-314 Super Tucano, also known as A-29, is an enhanced version of the EMB-312 Tucano trainer aircraft, features faster speed and higher altitude capabilities. EMB-314 Super Tucano is an enhanced version of the EMB-312 Tucano trainer aircraft that features faster speed and higher altitude capabilities. The prototype of the Super Tucano first flew in 1992. Both Tucano and Super Tucano have been developed and built by Embraer of Brazil. In addition to basic and advanced pilot training, the main missions of the aircraft are border patrol and counter-insurgency operations. The flight envelope of the aircraft is 7g and -3.5g. Its small size, small visual and radar signatures, together with high speed and agility, give the aircraft high-survivability. Additional survivability features include armour protection and critical systems redundancy.20
The aircraft is fitted with two central mission computers. The integrated weapon system includes software for weapon aiming, weapon management, mission planning and mission rehearsal. Onboard recording is used for post mission analysis. There are five hard points for carrying weapons, and the aircraft is capable of holding a maximum external load of 1,500kg. The aircraft is armed with two wing-mounted 12.7mm machine guns with a rate of fire of 1,100 rounds a minute and is capable of carrying general-purpose bombs and guided air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles. Brazilian AF aircraft are armed with the MAA-1 Piranha short-range infrared guided air-to-air missile from Orbita. The two-seat AT-29 is fitted with a forward-looking infrared AN/AAQ-22 SAFIRE turret on the underside of the fuselage. The SAFIRE thermal imaging system supplied by FLIR Systems is for targeting, navigation and target tracking. The system allows the aircraft to carry out night surveillance and attack missions.21
In July 2012, Embraer and Boeing signed a cooperation agreement to add new weapons integration capacity on the A-29 Super Tucano to satisfy the requirements of the US Air Force LAS programme. Savis, Bradar and Rockwell Collins entered into an agreement with Embraer to improve the defense applications of the aircraft in April 2017. The radar technology will be integrated into the Rockwell Collins FireStorm system to improve fire precision of the aircraft.22
EMB-314 can fly at the rate of 24m/s. The maximum and cruise speed of the aircraft are 530km/h and 593km/h respectively. The range and service ceiling of the Super Tucano are 4,820km and 10,670m respectively. Its maximum endurance is six hours and 30 minutes. The aircraft weighs 3,020kg and has a maximum take-off weight of 5,200kg.23
What is the philosophical predicate behind the acquisition of the Super Tucano aircrafts? Or put differently: what is the military doctrine behind the acquisition? Was it for its own sake i.e. to wallow in the phantasmagoria of having Super Tucano aircrafts in its Air Force arsenal? Are the insurgents, bandits, kidnappers, even herdsmen killers such an avowed enemy of the Nigerian State, threats to its sovereign existence that they must be crushed with Super Tucano aircrafts, bombed to death from the air? How is the Nigerian State or the Military High Command so sure that these Super Tucano aircrafts will not soon become obsolete in the next few years in the face of indubitable fact that the battle space is constantly evolving in face of advancing technology and in view of the fact that even the superpowers are periodically retiring certain categories of combat aircrafts and consigning them to the museum? Is the Nigerian State afraid of its own future in view of the barrage of current security threats and risks to its existence? Why is it afraid?
On the other hand, in reviewing the rationales put forward by the Nigerian Government for buying the aircrafts and the US Government for agreeing to sell the aircrafts to Nigeria, it can be argued without fear of contradiction that Nigeria could not have probably asked to buy more than a Super Tucano aircraft category because this is probably what lies within its capacity or competence to maintain as an “advanced” aircraft. Thus, Nigeria could not have asked to buy F-14 Tomcat, F-15 Eagle, F-16 Falcon, F-18 Hornet air superiority fighter jets (or their retrofitted variants and their European equivalents) or FB-111 Nighthawk stealth bomber.
Furthermore, Nigeria cannot ask for either F-22 Raptor or F-35 Lightning II Stealth fighter jets that belong to Fifth Generation air dominance fighter jets – two of the most technically advanced fighter jets in the world that are feared even by Russia and China – not to talk of existing arsenal of long-range strategic bombers such as US Lancer strategic bomber, B-1 Spirit, or B-52 Stratofortress. Nigeria could not have asked for European Eurofighter Typhoon Stealth fighter jet or their Russian or Chinese equivalents. There is already movement into the realm or domain of Sixth Generation combat aircrafts.
Nobody in its right mind would want to sell such advanced fighter jets to Nigeria because it is pointless doing so (even when there is money for such aircrafts) in turn because of the national notoriety for incompetence and corruption including poor maintenance culture. Never mind the fact that several other Third World countries have Super Tucano in their air force arsenals.
Frogs in the Sea
As it is in the air, so it is probably in the sea. The Nigerian military weakness, even though Global Firepower placed it as number 35 out of 140 in the world, is also manifested at the naval domain. Indeed, it cut across the three services not to talk of the security and intelligence gathering organizations.
Nigeria has the notorious reputation of one of the most porous sea coast or coastal region in the world in terms of piracy but without adequate naval warships that serve as enough deterrence to pirates. Nigeria has constantly been operating with the assistance of certain Western powers – without which it would have been impossible to secure the nation’s sea coasts.
The manifestation of this is often the bilateral or multilateral naval cooperation between Nigeria and the Western powers.
Foreign navies are always on a friendly visit to Nigeria and most possibly not the other way round.
A few examples of such foreign naval visits will suffice here. For instance, United Kingdom’s state-of-the-art royal Navy ship, HMS Lancaster, a Type 23 Duke frigate, visited Nigeria on October 28, 2015, reiterating its commitment to assisting Nigeria defeat the dreaded Boko Haram sect, whose activities have claimed thousands of lives, and rendered many more Nigerians homeless in several internally displaced persons (IDPs) camps across the country.24
According to the British High Commission in Nigeria Britain was more than ever prepared to assist Nigeria defeat Boko Haram stressing that HMS Lancaster’s visit “shows continuing UK commitment to Nigeria, and to supporting Nigerian military as they deal with security threats at land and at sea.” The British High Commissioner to Nigeria, Paul T Arkwright, was quoted as saying that “The visit of HMS Lancaster is a signal of our commitment to Nigeria and Nigeria’s military forces as they face security challenges. “The U.K. government is firmly committed to supporting President Buhari’s government and prioritizes across the board, in particular when it comes to scarcity.”25
Briefing journalists on board, the ship’s Captain, Commander Peter Laughton MBE said “HMS Lancaster is currently conducting an Atlantic Patrol Task to provide ongoing protection and reassurance to British regional interests and is maintaining the continuous Royal Naval Presence in the Atlantic. During such tasks Royal Navy ships call at ports to interact with Navies of our partners, foster relationships and to improve maritime security”26
As the fifth largest economy in the world, the UK has responsibilities towards it allies. But Britain also has global ambitions, namely to protect the seaways underpinning the country’s prosperity. The Royal Navy plays a crucial role in fostering these enduring alliances with other nations”27
HMS LANCASTER was built on the Clyde by Yarrow Shipbuilders and was launched by Her Majesty The Queen, on May 24, 1990. She was commissioned into the Royal Navy on May 1, 1992. She is the sixth Royal Navy ship to bear the name. The previous LANCASTER had been launched for the US Navy in 1918 as a 1,100 tonne destroyer named USS PHILIP. In 1940 she was transferred to the Royal Navy and gained battle honours for Atlantic and Arctic Convoys, plus North Sea patrols.28
The ship has been given the honour to be the first ship to deploy in the Royal Navy’s new uniform. The new uniform brings to an end 70 years of the old-style light blue shirt and dark blue trousers. The Ship’s Company has really taken to the new uniform: it’s more comfortable, looks smarter, and provides sailors with more protection. The additional pockets also make life easier when carrying the necessary tools.29
In another first HMS LANCASTER is the first ship to deploy with the Royal Navy’s newest helicopter, the Wildcat. Replacing the Lynx helicopter, the Wildcat has many improvements, making it a significantly more capable aircraft. It has a redesigned tail rotor system improving the strength and stealth of the aircraft whilst the aircrew benefit from the improved state-of-the-art cockpit with high tech communications, crash worthy-armoured seats and full 360-degree colour surveillance radar. The Wildcat, like its predecessor can be used in a variety of roles including anti-ship and anti-submarine protection, casualty evacuation, battlefield reconnaissance and as a general utility helicopter.30
The Royal Navy maintains a permanent presence in the South Atlantic and West Africa to provide ongoing protection and reassurance, conduct Defence engagement, and conduct maritime security patrols. The commitment consists of two warships; either a destroyer or frigate accompanied by a Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessel. The UK has a responsibility to its citizens and its allies to endeavor to safeguard the high seas. This is why the Royal Navy protects home and international waters – making sure the global trade that Britain and the world depend on can proceed without a hitch.31
Also on March 11, 2018, for the first time in the 108 years existence of the Royal Canadian Navy, two of its warships: HMCS Summerside and HMCS Kingston, visited Nigeria, with a view to establishing a relationship that will enhance the Nigerian Navy’s efficiency in the Gulf of Guinea. The warships, HMCS Kingston and HMCS Summerside, which are first class coastal defence vessels of the Royal Canadian Navy, have served in the Canadian Forces since 1996 and 1999 respectively. They have 75 crew members led by the Commander, Royal Canadian Navy, Vice Adm. Ron Llyod.32
Speaking during a visit to the Flag Officer, Commanding Western Naval Command, FOC, Rear Admiral Sylvanus Abbah, Llyod stated that the visit would provide an opportunity for the two navies to synergise. He further stated that during the one-week stay in Nigeria, the warships would participate in Obagame Express, a maritime exercise conducted by the United States of America Forces that is designed to enhance cooperation among participating nations, in order to improve maritime safety and security in the Gulf of Guinea. Lloyd said: “This visit is aimed at fostering the existing bilateral relationships and to boost capacity of military personnel in Nigeria. We are looking into supporting our Excellency (High Commissioner) with respect to Canadian relationship in Nigeria and we are proud to have two Canadian ships: HMCS Summer Side and HMCS Kingston that will operate in the exercise.”33
Also in his remark, the Canadian High Commissioner to Nigeria, Mr Christopher Thornley reinstated his country’s commitment to work with the Nigerian Navy as part of the bilateral relationship. He said: “Our bilateral relationship is going on and this is a step in the right direction to see military cooperation as part of multilateral exercise Operation Obagame.”34
Responding, an elated FOC, Rear Admiral Sylvanus Abbah who described the visit as a privilege since it was the first time, said “Canadian Royal Navy came into existence since 1910 and has participated in the first , second world wars and other wars , including United Nations Peace Keeping wars. You have the experience and with your strategic location at the Atlantic to the Pacific and northward into the Arctic Ocean, we hope to tap from your wealth of experience.35
“Since we have many of our training institutions, together, we will fashion out what to do in terms of exchanging our military to train in both countries “, Abbah stated.36
However, after nearly five years in the making, the Nigerian navy ship, NNS Andoni, was launched with a colourful event. At 31m (100ft) long, this is no giant of the seas, but the fact that it was designed and built in Nigeria, by Nigerian engineers, is a great source of pride. “We are all happy and elated,” said Commodore S.I. Alade, one of Nigeria’s senior naval officers. “This is the first time this kind of thing is happening in Nigeria and even in the sub region.”37
Moments after stepping on board NNS Andoni, sailor FL Badmus said: “I feel on top of the world. I’m proud to have been picked by the naval authorities to serve on this ship. We hope this is the beginning of very good things to come and we thank God for it.”38
The warship was named after the Andoni people of south-eastern Nigeria – and several chiefs travelled to Lagos to witness the launch -including his Royal Highness NL AyuwuIraron Ede-Obolo II, wearing a top hat, a sequin-adorned velvet gown and a brightly coloured necklace. The ceremony also featured multi-faith prayers, with an imam asking God to “protect and preserve this ship from the dangers of the day and the violence of the enemy”, and a Christian praying: “May she sails with success like the Ark of Noah.”39
President Goodluck Jonathan, who was the guest of honour said “This is the beginning of the transformation… and I believe in another 10 to 15 years, we can be thinking about starting a project to take Nigerians into the air,” President Jonathan said.40
The NNS Andoni could be key in the fight against militants operating near Nigeria’s oil fields as well as the growing threat of piracy in the Gulf of Guinea. Piracy in Nigerian waters is on the increase and incidents are happening over a wider area, according to the International Maritime Bureau. There were 10 piracy attacks off the 780km (485 miles) of Nigeria’s coastline during the first quarter this year – the same number reported for the whole of 2011. “While the number of reported incidents in Nigeria is still less than Somalia… the level of violence against crew is dangerously high,” according to a recent IMB report.41
The NNS Andoni is equipped with an advanced radar system and firepower. “With a speed of up to 25 knots (46km/h), this can quickly go to intercept the pirates,” said Commanding Officer Adepegba standing on the bridge pointing out the ship’s three machine guns and the automatic grenade launcher.42
The Nigerian navy reportedly wants to acquire 49 more vessels over the next 10 years. But how many will be home built? Orders are already in – for three from a French shipbuilder, and six from Singapore.43
NNS Thunder was donated by the US – but its monthly fuel bill is huge. NNS Thunder, a veteran of the Vietnam War, arrived at the beginning of the year, a gift from the US. Eyebrows were raised when it was announced that the monthly fuel bill of the 45-year-old ship would be $1m (£650,000).44
When this year’s navy’s $450m budget was discussed at the House of Assembly in January, one senator described the donated ships as hand-outs that could become liabilities rather than assets. There were also calls for corruption to be plugged. “Corruption has sucked the blood out of our system. So we have to depend on hand-outs,” one senator lamented.45
President Jonathan recently approved the acquisition of two large patrol vessels from China Shipbuilding and Offshore International, a mainly state-owned company. In an effort to boost local industry, one of the Chinese vessels is meant to be 70% built in Nigeria.46
NNS Andoni was dwarfed when a 105m-long frigate steamed past during the ceremony – with all the officers cheering on deck. NSS Andoni’s fuel bill will certainly be lower than NNS Thunder.47
After parading on the deck, the naval officers took photos of each other with mobile phones – clearly delighted with the new ship. “It’s a great day. It’s taken over five years but it’s worth it,” said a smiling Kelechi, one of the engineers. “We came up with the design, the expertise and about 60% of the materials were locally sourced. The engines, generators and navigation equipment came from outside.”48
Nigeria is one of Africa’s biggest oil producers, but this has not so much helped as hampered the development of local industries because the country has relied so heavily on imported goods. Sailors hope NNS Andoni will mark a bright new future for Nigeria’s navy.49
As he launched NNS Andoni, President Jonathan lamented the decline of industries that had been strong not long after independence in 1960.”We had Nigerian Airways, the Nigerian shipping line and a number of investments that were doing well. But because there was no indigenous touch, all these died,” the president said. “We are told that some countries that were on par with us are now building aircraft, choppers and other things,” he said, adding that Nigeria had for a long time not embraced technology. The president suggested sending the brightest students of engineering to the best universities in the world. “Then let them come back and work in Nigeria because we cannot continue to be importing. We have a very large market and even what we consume alone is enough to support an industry.”50
“We have this market, we must use it,” President Jonathan said – before laying the keel to mark the start of work on the second “Made in Nigeria” warship.51
After sixty years of independence, Nigeria has no submarine. It has no aircraft carrier, etc. Worst of all, it was right under the very nose of the Nigerian Navy that Niger Delta militancy erupted in late 2005 to wreak havoc on the Nigerian oil industry for almost a decade before presidential amnesty programme succeeded in calming the turbulent tidal wave of the militancy.
It is rather difficult to understand how many people come to gullibly believed in the puerile or even fraudulent arguments canvassed for the “royal visits” of foreign warships over the years, that these warships form part of the national security framework to help combat Boko Haram, for instance. But none of such things has ever happened as Boko Haram, in this case, continue to wax strong almost on daily. The fact remains that Nigeria has never really have serious maritime security threats.
Nigeria is a nation in travail of its own making caused by monumental failure of governance at all levels, a failure that has now come to spread its effects across all sectors of the society, across all geopolitical zones of the country and worst of all, across all security spectrum.
Conclusion
The US has largely been ambivalent towards Nigeria in recent years especially from the time of Goodluck Jonathan-led administration till the present time. The ambivalence has even gone from bad to worse under the present administration in the country.
Thus it is rather difficult to understand why the US Government suddenly decided to agree to sell these Tucano aircrafts to Nigeria (except to put money into the pocket of the manufacturer of the aircrafts) against the background of hostile criticisms of the Nigerian Government in recent years over human rights concerns, and also given the fact that these aircrafts cannot be found anywhere in the US Air Force arsenal including other major Western powers. One is also hard-pressed to understand geopolitical considerations, if there is any, for selling the aircrafts to Nigeria.
It is, however, evident that the criminal neglect to modernize and professionalize the defense and security sector, including media reports of various massive corruption within the top-echelon military and police hierarchy that have so far gone uninvestigated and unpunished despite counter-claims to the contrary have now come to haunt the nation with an amputated military that hobbles on crutches to the warfront of insurgency and banditry with bare hands to confront deadly enemies of the nation. The result of such a scenario is unavoidably predictable: inability to defeat the insurgency and banditry with hundreds of deaths of the nation’s soldiers. The chickens have come home to roost!
There are two conclusions that can be drawn from the whole gamut of experience that Nigeria has been forced to go through in the last two decades or since the advent of the Fourth Republic in 1999. The first is that once a country falls into the embrace of insecurity, the type Nigeria is now facing, it is often difficult to get out of it. It requires enormous sacrifices on the part of the Federal Government and the citizens to overcome it. The second is that Nigeria has shown empirically and graphically too that it is incapable of fighting crimes and general insecurity with the ways the national security agencies are structured. They are recipe for escalation of crimes and insecurity.
Correctly interpreted, the conclusions cannot escape any objective analyst that the Nigerian State is caught in an epochal Catch-22 dilemma, stuck at a bifurcated or forked road, stuck between the repugnant past of failed doctrines on the one hand and the promises of a better future on the other hand, of a state inadequately armed to confront its sundry enemies, not knowing where to go or how to proceed. Nigeria, with the largest concentration of black people on the surface of the earth, is almost torn to pieces by insecurity, poverty and ethnic and religious divisiveness.
In short, acquisition of fighter jets, of Super Tucano types, is ill-thought out. They do not alter the balance of forces in any significant way.