Fighters of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta AFP/Getty Images
A looming threat to stability
Published: 01 October, 2009
The amnesty for militants in the Niger Delta coincided with a ceasefire from insurgent group Mend. But as the two offers expire there are fears of an upsurge in violence in the run-up to the 2011 elections
President Umaru Yar’Adua’s offer of amnesty for militants in Nigeria’s restive Niger Delta expires on October 4, and with the principal insurgent group, the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta – Mend – saying that it will not support the programme, prospects for stability in the region are not strong.
The amnesty itself has not produced the results that the federal government would have hoped. Many of the weapons that have been handed in are of poor quality and in bad condition, and do not represent the number or sophistication of arms that the militants are known to have, according to Jonas Horner, an analyst at the Eurasia Group. There are reports, from several sources, that the government and police have artificially inflated the figures using captured and obsolete weapons from their own stocks.
The 60-day amnesty period coincided with a three month Mend ceasefire, which was extended for 30 days on September 15th, and the release on July 19th of one of the organisation’s nominal leaders, Henry Okah, who had been arrested in 2008. While Mr Okah has called for an extension of the ceasefire and negotiations with the federal government, analysts say that Mend is by no means a homogenous group with a single leader, such as Mr Okah, who can unilaterally dictate policy.
Neither is it clear that the group’s principal motivation remains political. Analysts note a certain fluidity in the roles of insurgents in the region. Today’s ideologue can quite rapidly become tomorrow’s criminal in the delta, and the main revenue streams of criminality – oil bunkering and kidnapping – are compelling for all of the region’s actors, whether they are civilian government, military or insurgent.
The government’s offer of incomes and training for participants in the amnesty programme is less compelling, and potentially a less secure source of income. There is still little clarity over the terms of such a settlement, and promises made to and by insurgent leaders over individual compensation seem to vary wildly.
At least one protest by amnesty participants has turned into a full scale riot in Bayelsa state. Questions over the sustainability of such a programme – for how long would it continue, and who would continue to fund it – resonate.
“At the end of the day, when you look at the federal structure, it’s the state governments that are going to be left to deal with the hundreds and hundreds of young men who are giving up their arms,” says Rolake Akinola, an analyst at Control Risks. “They need to have some sort of development policy for them, because otherwise what you end up with is a vicious cycle, where you end up with a further deepening of the disillusionment, and that just feeds into another cycle of unrest.”
