Playing With Fire

History teaches important lessons. If valued, it helps to draw lessons on incidents, to avoid future reoccurrence and reduce wastage of resources. The Niger Delta militancy of pre-2009 resulted in enormous human and material losses to the region and the country in general. In order to forestall the menace, the 2009 amnesty programme was initiated as some sort of ‘bribe’ to dissuade warring militants from violence.

However unsustainable the amnesty programme is, it has been able to uphold relative peace and security in the oil-rich region. Government has continued to pay for the many years of neglect and ill-practices of oil companies in the region through the payment of stipends to ex-militants. Some other unclear monetary measures are still in practice, all in a bid to maintain stability in the region and ensure continuous oil exploration, which has remained the nation’s economic mainstay.

Since 2009, there have been pockets of provocations by the ex-militant groups either on grounds of non-payment of stipends or preference for the leadership of the Presidential Amnesty Programme (PAP). The recent altercation is about government’s alleged plan to continue oil exploration in Ogoniland against the desires of a faction of the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP). A week ago, some communities in Delta state shut down the flow stations in their area on account of perceived neglect of host communities by oil companies. Yesterday, Niger Delta youths protested against the refusal of Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) to comply with the Senate resolution to pay them N6.9 billion for Water Hyacinth contracts – an empowerment scheme of the interventionist agency. The protesting youths vowed to destroy oil facilities in the region if they are not paid within 7 days.

Following rising issues of the post-2009 amnesty, it appears the government and oil companies are overestimating the efficacy of the amnesty deal in sustaining peace in the Niger Delta. A Stitch in Time argues that, government has to be proactive and tactical in managing the region. There is a limit to which the amnesty deal can dissuade ex-militant from picking up arms or destroying oil facilities.

With oil as the backbone of the  nation’s economy and an already existing economic challenges, what will be the fate of Nigeria should violent conflict erupt in Niger Delta? As always argued, the payment of stipends to ex-militants is not sustainable. Nigerian government has to critically review the 2009 amnesty deal, and substitute the monetary inducement by empowering the people to develop their communities. As a matter of importance, relevant stakeholders in the region, for what it’s worth, should desist from playing with fire and endeavour to keep to their own end of the bargain to avoid hostile situations.