Analysis: The Perils Of Negotiating With Terrorists

There are a few knotty areas that need addressing in the wake of President Muhammadu Buhari’s recent revelation that negotiations with the dreaded Islamic sect, Boko Haram, has begun.

One is forced to respond to headlines from the last few days where The Vanguard wrote “We Need France’s Assistance To Defeat Boko Haram – Buhari”, “We’re Already Negotiating With B’Haram, Says Buhari” from The Guardian and “We’ve Defeated Boko Haram – Military” by The Sun.

One is moved to react because these statements are slightly contradictory. Again, one reacts because no matter the case, a truce with terrorists is as impermissible as harboring looters in government.

Above all, it is skewed logic on every ground that there are recognized killers among us, but we have chosen the easy way out by negotiating as against going in for the kill.

Not to say we go for broke, ignoring every logical approach possible in this fight as we try to rescue the Chibok girls and rid society of Boko Haram. But having the slightest idea of our government broker a deal with these rebels is an indication of their invincibility. And, consequently, our failure as a nation.

Lest we forget or misconstrue, the lives of the over 200 Chibok girls are important. Their safe return home is exceedingly important as well, but we must remember that negotiating with terrorists is a no-no.

Bargaining with groups of this sort almost never ends well in many a case. And speaking of ending well, below are four highly likely challenges the negotiations may pose;

First, as Governor Abdullahi Ganduje of Kano says, we are faced with the dangers of dealing with a wrong faction who may have presented themselves as Boko Haram.

Secondly, the vicious circle will continue if one group of extremists is granted amnesty, with others coming forward and expecting same treatments upon seizing or holding a fraction of the populace to ransom.

Thirdly, it is wrong from every stance, especially because it is inconsistent with the songs we sang during the frenzied, nationwide campaign occasioned by the All Progressives Congress and the ‘change’ mantra.

Fourthly, with Boko Haram having signified its allegiance with ISIS, how much negotiating can the government possibly do in the coming years when critical issues arise (if they do arise)?

We must put in mind these contingencies because therein lie the challenges.

Summarily, even though negotiating with terrorists isn’t a laudable idea, it could be used as a last resort after every other intel and resource has been deployed in the ongoing war with no positive result in sight. That’s the bottom line of this discourse.