FAYOSE, FULANI ATTACKS: A POLITICAL VIEW.

Fulani herdsman men attacks on villages and communities who serve as temporary hosts for communities is not a new trend at all. The nomadic group have overtime gained international notoriety for its  attacks, At some point the activities of these herdsmen where according to a global terror statistics accused of causing more deaths than the notorious ISIS. One will however wonder why such a group with such tyrannic traits have not being vastly reported on the pages of our tabloids and other information channels ( sensationalism) and like Vector rightly puts it 'when the hash tag is trendy we all seem to be interested and we are all guilty' Fulani herdsmen attacks gained prominence in terms of reportage attached to their activities in 2015 following the beginning or swearing in of PMB as president of the federal republic.

Nefarious reasons have been given for this sudden turn in media attention. Some have attached it to the same media sensationalism... why not? if PMB is the grand patron of the herdsmen association of Nigeria(mind the informality attached to the nomenclature of the association) and was once said to have visited the Olubadan in that capacity to plea, warn or threaten (depending on which source you read and which you believe) him on the attacks against Fulani men and their herds in the early 2000s. This will definitely make for a good read since the name of the president is attached. But will all media houses be equally guilty of sensationalism in reportage at the same time and on the same issue? I very much doubt it... hence others believe it is the consistency and devastation in the wakes of the attacks and those involved that brought them to limelight. Some also argue that it is the sophistication of weapons used that brought about the said media attention as the attacks of old where used by locally made cutlasses and swords but today we see fulani herdsmen employ state of the art weapons of war in carrying out their attacks. (i remember at some point i called them boko haram who have modified their tactics and camouflage as herdsmen to reign further havoc on Nigeria). Believe any of the three and you are spot on but i will prefer to settle for the last two.

Killings upon killings upon killings, from Benue to Plateau to Ekiti to Enugu e.t.c and in our usual characteristics according to Terry da rap man( pardon my references to these guys i just feel they in one way or another connect to our reality.) Terry said 'all our government ever does so well is condemn the violence' add to that, the government is always spot on when it comes to commiserating with the aggrieved and that is where it ends. (HERE GOVERNANCE IS A FUNCTION OF SHOWMANSHIP and not of dedicated purpose to alleviate the sufferings of the masses).

In comes the man Ayodele Fayose. He perhaps, was the only one, or probably the only one thus far reported to have taken any meaningful action to protect his people other than condemn. He threatened and negotiated( although, it is admissible to note that some of his threats were way over board and could be threatening to national integration but at least the man did something). And something he did do was to promulgate a law passed by the Ekiti house of assembly termed the Ekiti grazing bill. Oshoko even went further to inaugurate the grazing marshalls to track and punish offenders of the law as it concerns grazing. But as is with anything Nigerian, a solution is always the beginning of another problem if not bigger problem(and this time it may be the beginning of an endless political experiment in Ekiti).

Accusations have been made by the herdsmen association concerning indiscriminate arrest and slaughter of cows by Fayose's marshals with threats issued concerning the safety of lives and property of people's of the state. Fayose in his usual personae has issued a counter warning and even driving a whole new dynamics to the matter 'STATE OF EMERGENCY' In his claims he accused the APC led federal government of silently supporting the tensions in the state so s to declare a state of emergency disposing him from office. ( whether or not this is true is solely dependent on your rationality and understanding of the dynamics in the state as there is no physical proof to ascertain if this claim is true or false). With all these claims raised and fingers pointing from different directions and with the polity heated up... Our very dear Federal government has elected to adopt the 'sidon look' stance. Sidon look as Fayose spills himself with hot oil which he set on fire by himself. Sidon look and intercede at the crucial stage when things get out of hand thus becoming the messiah (only that this time they are going to be saving only themselves).

One will ask why the FG will be so interested in controlling an economically and politically insignificant state like Ekiti. I laugh in Swahili because, economically insignificant YES but politically insignificant NO and that is because of Fayose himself. In a bid to silence the opposition the APC led FG has tried to intimidate institutions and personalities viewed as threats to their rule. Dasuki, Metuh and FFK all come to mind, Fayose cannot be touched just because of the power of immunity covering him. Fayose is a pest, a menace and a bone in the throat of the APC. What better way to cough him out than using the very legal excuse of anarchy thus declaring a state of emergency... After all it has once worked as a tool for removing Fayose from office before so why can it not be tried again. Like i said earlier, a viable solution to deal with Fayose but a very bad action in terms of politics and governance in Ekiti. ( just check the period between 2006 and 2011 and see what am talking about.) 

And while some people may choose to dismiss the logic behind this point, centering their argument on the fact that herdsmen attack is not peculiar to Fayose's Ekiti alone neither is it unique to PDP controlled territories, however they may be forced to align with my position that some of the dynamics seen in the Ekiti situation are unique to Ekiti and having witnessed the successive attempts made to crucify and murder the image of Fayose, this position may not be far from the truth. Ekiti will be the worse for it if indeed Fayose's fear on this demonic political orchestration is right and comes to pass. Ekiti must resist as this is not only the battle of one man but of all Ekiti's and of all yorubas and lovers of democracy.

PAX

Ayodele Kelvin

kevinayodele99@gmail.com