On the Tragedy of the Shiites -By Lawan Maina

The unfortunate skirmish between the Nigerian Army and a Shi’a sect in Zaria reminds one of a very apt aphorism about repeating history if one does not learn from it. It is awfully disconcerting, the parallels between the now defunct Operation Flush’s violent encounter with Boko Haram in 2009 (the precursor to the present seemingly intractable insurgency) and the recent manner in which the Nigerian Army engaged in an apparently systematic killing, maiming and detention of the Shiite sect members and the dismantling of its buildings in Zaria.

I just read the following from the movement’s media head, “The sporadic killings took place at three different locations that include the residence of the revered leader of the Movement at Gyallesu, the Husainiyya Bakiyatullah at the GRA and the Darur Rahma located along Zaria-Jos road where many armless people were killed. The killing was so brutal at Gyallesu that even those injured in the shooting were identified and killed in cold blood by the soldiers.” There has to come a time in a nation’s life when it has to depart from a tradition of making risky, impetuous, utterly hare-brained and totally avoidable blunders like this one.

This is however not excusing the actions of the Shiites who denied the Chief of Army Staff passage by blocking a public road, a favourite pastime of theirs. Reports indicate that they even went as far as attacking his convoy in a failed attempt on his life. If true, their actions were not only criminal, but irresponsible, imprudent, and they may have harboured death wishes. It has to be the height of delusion to attack the Nigerian Army chief and not expect a reprisal of some sort. Isn’t this still the Nigeria of the Odi and Zaki Biam bloodbaths?

The Nigerian Army should only respond to specific and peculiar threats to national security and should have avoided turning its guns on civilians, no matter the magnitude of their provocation.

Nevertheless, the issue here is the uneven and heavy handed manner of the response from a Nigerian Army presently engaged with a bloodthirsty and obstinate enemy in the North-East. Creating a new monster should not be a priority at the moment. Simply put, we cannot afford another insurgency. Moreover, knowing El-Zakzaky’s group’s proclivity for disobedience, provocative actions, and the intentional flouting of laws – actions which, according to The Guardian, have led to incessant clashes with the police – the Army’s reaction could have been better considered and executed. There was absolutely no need for the killings or the demolitions that took place. This show of rage would be rightly construed by any neutral observer as an irresponsible use of excessive force on civilians by a rampaging military. The shameless PDP is already capitalising on this incident to accuse President Buhari of turning Nigeria into a police state.

The Nigerian Army should only respond to specific and peculiar threats to national security and should have avoided turning its guns on civilians, no matter the magnitude of their provocation. Its actions impinged on the fundamental human rights of citizens, thus betraying its constitutional role as their defender. The same Nigerian constitution protects the rights of citizens to association and peaceful procession and any abuse of such rights could have been handled by the appropriate security forces. As expected, there has been a sequence of condemnations from both domestic and international organisations – Amnesty International has called for urgent investigations and for justice, while Chidi Odinkalu of the NHRC described it as a massacre. Even the PDP’s unofficial mouthpiece, Femi Fani-Kayode, rightly described it as condemnable and dangerous. Iran, as expected, summoned Nigeria’s charge d’affaires to protest the incident. All these amount to an avoidable dent on this administration’s human rights record and could turn out to be an unfortunate and unnecessary foreign affairs dispute.

Those celebrating this crackdown fail to consider that they may be victims of a similar brutality in the future. Isn’t it therefore better and also a lot easier to empathise with these recent victims and call for a reform of the Nigerian Army before they turn their guns on us too?

Unsurprisingly, the reaction from other Nigerian Muslims to this tragedy of the Shiites, especially on social media, can only be described, unfortunately, as chirpy, even celebratory. A cursory search of Twitter or Facebook for comments by Nigerian Sunnis will bring up reactions ranging from ‘serves them right’ to even ‘more should have been killed’. This is expected since many see Shi’ism as an aberration and imagine it as inextricably embroiled in a conflict for the soul of Islam with Sunnis. This is notwithstanding the fact that many commentators see this modern-day Shia-Sunni conflict as more political than religious; or the fact that Sunnis and Shias have coexisted peacefully for over a thousand years with much intermarriage, especially in the Middle East; or that out of the 1.6 billion Muslims on earth roughly 20 percent are Shias – a significant minority. This is two times the population of Nigeria. All these show the impracticability of a path of endless conflict unless our aspiration is for a great Sunni–Shia Islamic world war as postulated by countless Islamophobes.

Violent rhetoric cannot be a substitute for peaceful proselytism, especially not by adherents of a faith that Islamophobes such as Richard Dawkins and Ali Sina have called the ‘greatest force of evil in the world today’ and ‘humanity’s diseased limb.’ Those celebrating this crackdown fail to consider that they may be victims of a similar brutality in the future. Isn’t it therefore better and also a lot easier to empathise with these recent victims and call for a reform of the Nigerian Army before they turn their guns on us too?

Lawan Maina can be reached at lawanmaina@gmail.com