Iliyasu Gadu
Ilgad2009@gmail.com
08035355706 (Texts only)
Since independence in 1960, Nigeria has had defence and security arrangements with over a dozen countries and counting. These arrangements range from training, arms procurement and cooperation in assembly/manufacturing, intelligence sharing across the various fields and services of the military and security establishments.
Depending on the situation, some of the arrangements are discreet and some are open bilateral agreement helping to advance mutually beneficial interests between Nigeria and those countries.
In relatively recent times, as insecurity occasioned by the activities of insurgent groups of different descriptions have gripped the country, the Nigerian government has had to seek the assistance of foreign countries in tackling what has now become a scourge.
In this wise, at the beginning of the Tinubu administration, an agreement was reached with the government of Israel for provision and advise on securing the federal capital of Abuja and environs.
Not to be outdone, the Americans decided to butt in on the Nigerian security architecture in order to grab a piece of the action under the cover of preventing ‘’Christian genocide’’. They are now embedded in our various military establishments helping to train and provide technical advice to the Nigerian military on tackling insecurity in the country.
The latest of such arrangements was the recent Nigeria/Turkiye defense agreement under which the Turks will train Nigerian special forces and provide technical assistance to Nigeria on manufacturing and assembling military ordnance and equipment.
No doubt all three countries have the proven capacity to provide the assistance required by Nigeria in the war against insecurity ravaging the country. They not only have the cutting edge fit-for-purpose arms and equipment needed to prosecute the war, from their long term experience in fighting various insurgencies in their regions and around the world, they have chalked up enough expertise to impart in this regard.
As far as Turkiye is concerned most Nigerians may not know much about the country’s military capabilities aside from what is reported in the global mainstream media.
But to those who know, Turkiye probably has more experience and capabilities in fighting insurgency and terrorism than most countries. And this has to do with its history since Ottoman times and geo-political location in both Asia and Europe. At different times in its history Turkiye had to battle Armenian, Greek, Bulgarian, Serbian, Arab and Kurdish insurgent groups using all kinds of means to secure their independence. Indeed, at some point Turkiye had to endure decades of internal insurgency from communist groups, anarchists, Islamists fighting themselves ferociously as well as the central government.
But as positive as this may look, we must interrogate the military pact with Turkiye critically.
How has Turkiye handled its fight against insurgency and terrorism? What lessons can we draw from our knowledge of Turkiye in this regard? Is the agreement with Turkiye open ended or have we taken steps to ensure that the Turks stay within the necessary bounds of our defense and security interests? And very importantly considering that the Turks will be operating in our defense and security corridor along with the Israelis and the Americans, how can we ensure that the situation does not result in too many cooks spoiling the broth?
These questions are very pertinent in view of the fact all three countries, (US, Israel and Turkiye) have operated in Syria simultaneously and the result was not encouraging. In the Syrian theatre of operations all parties operated with different and often conflicting interests. While the Americans and Israelis worked against the Syrian government of Bashar Assad arming the rebels of Syrian army, insurgents and Islamist and the Kurdish separatists against the central authority, the Turks on the other hand were fighting both the Syrian government and the Kurdish separatists from establishing a toe hold in Syria to attack Turkiye in their long desire to establish a Kurdistan republic involving Kurds in Syria, Turkey and Iraq.
Turkiye’s role in the Syrian operations just like the Americans and Israelis was to say the least, unhelpful. This was considering that several thousands of lives lost and the utter destruction of Syria, the outcome was the installation of the Syrian rebels in government.
Now in Nigeria, the three countries are assembled again under similar circumstances. Will they deliver the needful as required by the Nigerian government and people? Will they coordinate their activities and not work at cross purposes against themselves and ultimately against Nigeria?
To the Turks specifically who have by the recent defense agreement, become Nigeria’s strategic partners, we can make a case that their engagement in the Middle East and in south eastern Europe is tempered by direct existential threats which requires a heavy dose of strategic pragmatism in a unfriendly neighbourhood.
But Nigeria being far removed from the neighbourhood of Turkiye, cannot be remotely considered as a threat to Turkish interest. And Turkiye has not set itself up to be a global hegemon so far as to seek to play the kind of role that others are playing or seeking to play around the world.
Indeed, Turkiye has a robust mutually beneficial relationship with Nigeria covering trade and commerce, education and infrastructural development. On the basis of that it is expected that in the coming years, that relationship is bound to grow with the opening of yet new vistas on both sides.
That is why it behoves on Turkiye to seek to make the deference in this defense pact with Nigeria. The Turks must seek to come good on this so as to secure a burgeoning defense partnership with Nigeria. It is indeed an opportunity for the Turks to show good faith and commitment in genuinely helping Nigeria to solve its most challenging existential issue.
If Turkiye with its proven capacity and experience in this area can genuinely assist in tackling the scourge of niggling insecurity now internally ravaging Nigeria, then they could make the difference which Nigerians would like to see. Already Nigerians have seen the positive hand of Turkiye in areas that both countries are presently engaged in. Many Nigerians have thus come to regard Turkiye positively. And if Turkiye demonstrates positive engagement in its recently signed defense arrangement with Nigeria with outcomes that lead to a drastic if not total reduction in the insurgency and insecurity in the country, then it would have etched itself as an eternal friend.
