 |
| Source: Rand Report 2008 |
According to a Rand report that made systematic examination
and comparison of 268 groups using terror tactics from 1968 to 2006, several
approaches have shown to be much more effective than reliance on military
responses alone at eliminating future attacks. This approach includes
criminal justice responses and other attempts to address the well-being
concerns of both combatants and the broader populace that might support
them.
The study revealed that 40 percent of the 268 groups were
eliminated through intelligence and policing methods; 43 percent ended their
violence as a result of peaceful political accommodation; 10 percent ceased
their violent activity because they had achieved their objectives (“victory”)
by violence; and only 7 percent were defeated militarily.
Military responses have often created more extensive violent
response and terrorism against the civilian population caught between two opposing
forces. Civilian deaths also become incentives for terror group recruitment and
revenge attacks. The wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan have instead
served as an effective recruiting device for new terrorists. In addition,
wars often create the conditions for additional violent conflicts over the new
resources and new political alignments created by an initial invasion or
occupation. The civil wars and criminal violence that erupted in both
Iraq and Afghanistan are examples of this phenomenon.
According
to Matthew Evangelista[1], “States
and societies have faced the threat of terrorism for centuries, but only
sometimes have they resorted to war to deal with it”. In order war words,war
should not always be the first option, even among the armed conflicts that
states declare “wars against terrorism,” many are something quite different:
wars against secessionist, anti-colonial, or insurgent forces opposing a
military occupation. The tactics employed by such forces may include terrorism,
sometimes provoked by the military actions and war crimes of their state
adversaries. But the tactics are part of a broader strategy that includes
combat among armed fighters on each side. Such wars should be considered
distinct from the random murder of innocent civilians that constitutes the most
common definition of terrorism as a form of politically motivated violence. If
states have a choice to address terrorist threats without resorting to war,
they are likely to be more successful, because they avoid the backlash that can
breed further terrorism.
In the Nigerian case of combating
extremism, military necessity cannot be underestimated to quell terrorism,
given the escalating incidence of terror attacks in the country. However,
over-reliance on the use of force on the government’s path appears to be a
shortcut to sustainable peace and security in the region. General Carter Ham,
Commander of the United States African Command (AFRICOM), has cautioned African
governments not to rely solely on the use of excessive military force to fight
the war against terror in Africa. He said that “though there is perhaps some
necessity for some military action, the solution lies in the non-military
solution and activities that would address the underline causes of the
dissatisfactions which include good governance” (Guardian Newspaper, February
01 2013).
Ultimately, the continuous use of military force seems preferable in
dousing the tension of extremism in Nigeria, but protracted military effort is
not going to eradicate the long-term problem as this is capable of leading the
Nigeria to yet another civil war. Violent extremism and insurgents thrive in an
environment charged with hopelessness and Nigerian government must begin to be
more responsive to the socio-economic well-being of the people, and further
engage systematic means of mediating disputes without recourse to the
protracted use of armed insurrection
WORKS
CITED
Evangelista M. (2011). ‘Coping
with 9/11: Alternatives to the War Paradigm’. Retrieved from: http://costsofwar.org/sites/default/files/articles/47/attachments/Evangelista%20Coping%20with%209-11.pdf’
Rand Report (2008). ‘How
terrorist groups end’ Retrieved from: http://www.rand.org/conte
nt/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG741-1.pdf
Onuorah, M. (2013, February 1). US General Cautions
African Government Against Over Reliance on
Military For War Against Terror. Guardian. Retrieved from http://ngrguardiannews.com
[1]Matthew Evangelista is a Professor of History and
Political Science in the Department of Government at Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA
No comments:
Post a Comment