Warri: Hopes and impediments
By
Mercifully, the long-raging crisis in the Warri area of Delta state appears to have receded. This is most welcome and it is only appropriate that we salute the respective contributors to the present peace in the area. This point noted, it is important that we move on to the logical next step, namely the consolidation of the new-found peace. To do this we will first have to probe into the basic nature of the antagonisms in the first place.
To be fair to the Warri people (and this writer knows of the natural tendency of commentators to isolate situations like the present one in Warri as if it is patently distinct in itself) conflict is a natural part of human life. Where different people built with different mind-sets and established in different traditions are "forced" to live together, their differences invariably show up. Conflicts occur when these differences are not well managed.
Very unfortunately for Warri, the conflicts that have occurred in this area have over time not been very well-managed. They could have been entirely avoided. They were not. When they showed signs of springing up even in the first grumblings, there was no systematic and comprehensive enquiry. And when the first blows were struck, many of us thought it would soon blow away. How unwise we are!
With the extent that the crisis has degenerated to presently, it may bespeak the point to be pointing fingers at the other. That would not solve the problem today and so would not be the path of wisdom. With the level of aggravation on ground (and this writer just made two trips to the area), we clearly must be commit to doing only that which is helpful to the eventual resolution of the overall crisis. The onus clearly then is for all of us who are genuinely concerned to close ranks and begin to work for genuine, lasting peace in the area. That we counsel not to point fingers does not mean that fingers have not and would not continue to be pointed. And we also must quickly make the point that there is nothing wrong with those who are pointing fingers. It is a legitimate response. They have been aggravated and are necessarily expressing themselves. Indeed, as psychologists would tell us, talking about hurts the way we deeply feel them, may very well be half of the resolution that is required. We must thus ensure that everyone that has a grievance, opinion or point of view to express is not muzzled. This is a further imperative in today’s democracy.
However there are limits to open-ended expression. Sometimes they go on so long that people tend to forget where they began from. They could also in other circumstances befuddle the truth rather than expose it for the real resolution to follow. The challenge then for us is how to manage the intricacies of expression and resolution. People must talk. But solutions must also be found. It would thus be most important that we work with a most comprehensive paradigm that can help us make the required progress.
In this, the first point this writer believes should be an identification of the principal combatants on all sides of the current divide and a genuine attempt, no vendetta intended, to find out from them what their motivations for war are. Wars are fought by people who feel very hard that they have to fight. What are the true-propelling circumstances for the present crisis? What do the combatants, and by extension the groups on whose behalf they are fighting, truly want? Is there any truth in the theory that the upper echelon amidst the combatants presently hold their peoples to ransom and are stretching the wars, not at the behest of their people, but for their own personal gain?
Second, is the question of the roles of the natural (traditional and political) leaders of the different and contending ethnic nationalities in the area in justifiably or unjustifiably fanning the embers of the war. Is there any truth in the claim or have they permitted themselves to swim with the tide because it was not pragmatic to do otherwise in the current circumstance?
Third, there is the question of outside influences and the employment of mercenaries. Should it be confirmed that there really have been mercenary inputs in the crisis, does it not have further security implications for the nation; giving what havoc mercenaries have presently wrought in the West African sub-region? What about the associated claim that the Federal Government and the rest of the nation have been largely indifferent to resolving this crisis because a disunited oil-rich Warri, and by extension the Niger-Delta sub-region is easier to milk?
Fourth, is the question of victims of the crisis this far who have had houses burnt, lost relatives, and suffer under incalculable emotions hurts. What is the state of their minds today? Would they be compensated? How far would such compensation go and from whom would it come? Have they not presently contemplated what they would have personally do as soon as they can to right their wrongs? What can dissuade them?
For all that any one would say, Warri today is a deep open boil. By the day, investments are shutting down and investors relocating. Who would rebuild the city? Who would sort out its issue? Some intricate steps would have to be taken. First, the present policy of swamping the area with troops as means of deterring further war is good and well intentioned. It however suffers drawbacks in the structure and nature of the armed forces and society that we have today.
March 2004