The rather combative riposte by the Defence Headquarters (DHQ) to the feckless charges by former President Olusegun Obasanjo, wherein he accused the military of playing cannon fodder to the Jonathan administration after INEC hinged the postponement of the general elections on the unpreparedness of the military to provide security, once again advertises in dramatic fashion, the shameful politicization of the military; and this certainly cannot be in the national interest. In a reaction ornamented with bile, vitriol and insultive grandiloquence, the DHQ called Obasanjo an embarrassment to the same military, he served and rose to the rank of Lt. General, becoming military head of state in 1976. OBJ later served eight years as civilian president; the only Nigerian to have served his country twice as president. OBJ is an accomplished soldier and statesman by any standard; and for the DHQ to rubbish his reputation is an unbelievable shame that neither edifies the army, nor the nation. It stands condemned in the strongest terms, and must never repeat itself.
“Much as the military desires to respect the old General and his views, it has become necessary to point out that his conduct and unguarded utterances of late, has fallen short of the standard of discipline expected of an individual who has had the privilege of service in the military and risen to the status of a General. The behaviour of retired General (Chief) Obasanjo has been so unbecoming and continues to constitute a serious embarrassment to the military before all who have reasonably and rightly adjudged the essence of military background in terms of the high value and standard it tends to contribute to statesmanship. We feel constrained to remind the old General that the world has moved beyond that parochial and self-adulating reasoning and mindset which he seems stuck to. Indeed, he needs to be told that by virtue of their better training, exposure, education, assessment and environment, the military personnel of today are already far beyond his level in their appreciation of democracy and it’s indispensability for the stable and prosperous society which Nigerians cherish,” noted the statement.
The language is callous and appalling, and too crude to be associated with the exalted office of DHQ. It sullies the image of those in leadership positions in the Nigerian military and casts aspersion on the image of the country before the international community. Such intemperate language betrays the image and credibility crisis confounding the military. It is very disgraceful and a pathetic embarrassment to the Nigerian military from where Obasanjo derived his career antecedents. For, after all is considered, the DHQ’s vituperative outbursts may have served its political purpose but the acerbic response neither served Nigeria’s purpose, nor that of discipline and professionalism, which the Nigerian military stands in dire need of, at the present moment. It is a sad betrayal of democracy, which demands a completely professional and totally apolitical disposition from the military institution. This was one more public embarrassment that Nigeria can do without.
It bears reiteration that the strength of a nation is in the professionalism of its armed forces. As the one institution that unites the country, the military’s aura of impartiality must be insulated from the contaminating putrid wind that is blowing, as the struggle among various political interests vying for control rages and partisans are being recruited across the political spectrum. The military is an important arm of the state and its integrity must be protected. Keeping to its professionalism and maintaining an apolitical pillar are the sources of its veneration by the society.
But recent developments have tended to call into question the military’s neutrality while causing general anxiety among the public. Getting the DHQ involved in the Buhari certificate controversy, exchanging words with ex-president Obasanjo and its ascribed role in the electoral fiasco, culminating in the postponement, are divisive and injurious to the military as an institution. Notwithstanding the situation, as the ethos of modern democracies demand, the military cannot tell the nation what it cannot do; rather it should only state its needs to execute directives given to it by the state. Which is what makes the excuse that the elections were postponed because of security agencies’ claim of inability to provide the said security, all the more puzzling!
Given these dangerous antecedents, it was only natural for citizens, including former president Obasanjo to be suspicious and wonder what is becoming of their men and women in uniform, given that the army had become the butt of criticisms, over its increasing involvement in the electoral process. In fact, it is now justifiably perceived that the military has once again assumed the commanding posts and agenda setting role for Nigeria’s democracy in ways that are unwholesome for the polity.
The Nigerian military must not be allowed to return to the era before the return to civil rule in 1999 when it was over-politicized to the extent that it became practically impossible to ensure its subordination to civil authority; to maintain its corporate integrity, cohesion and professionalism due to fractured esprit de corps; to ensure it enjoys social legitimacy from the people through cordial civil-military relations; and to ensure the institution retains its national character.
Certainly, the damage has been done, but it must be stated in no ambiguous terms that even as melodramatic as election times are, there are often red lines never to be crossed. The army’s decision to malign and disavow one of their own was clearly in bad taste. The DHQ response to Obasanjo was disgraceful and unacceptable. The lesson here is simply that the military has been diminished in value and their commitment to the electoral process rendered hollow. If the military acts with patriotism at this critical period of Nigeria’s political history, it can write its name in gold and save the country the odium of failure. Should they choose to do otherwise; the judgment of history will be very unflattering.
