By Emma Amaize, Regional Editor, South-South, Sam Oyadongha (Yenagoa), Jimitota Onoyume (Warri), Emma Una (Calabar), Chioma Onuegbu (Uyo), Davies Iheamnachor (Port Harcourt), and Ochuko Akuopha (Asaba)

NIGERIANS, yesterday, rebuffed the plan of the Heads of State of the Economic Community of West African States, ECOWAS, to deploy soldiers in Niger Republic to oust the military junta.

A coterie of military officers led by General Abdourhamane Tchiani, on July 26, toppled the elected President of Niger, Mohamed Bazoum, and held him and his family members, hostage at the Presidential Palace in Niamey since then.

ECOWAS at an extraordinary meeting of the Heads of States, Thursday, in Abuja, ordered its standby force to restore constitutional order in Niger Republic.

The resolution read in part: “Direct the committee of the Chief of Defence Staff to activate the ECOWAS standby force with all its elements immediately.

“Order the deployment of the ECOWAS standby force to restore constitutional order in the Republic of Niger; Underscore its continued commitment to the restoration of constitutional order through peaceful means.”

Rule out military intervention—Ikpomwen, ex-provost marshal, Nigerian Army

Former Provost Marshal of the Nigerian Army, Brigadier-Gen Don Idada Ikpomwen, told Saturday Vanguard: “Niger is a sovereign nation; it is evidently clear that the recent military takeover in the country has the support of the Nigerian people. What has happened there is a welcomed revolution.

Nothing can be better than the law, system, or government that reflects the good and well-being of the people. The Nigerian Senate has, after due consideration of all relevant issues, said no to the use of military force to return the ousted former president to power.

“Our Constitution provides that we shall not deploy Nigerian Forces outside for a combat mission without the approval of Senate. One cannot perceive the urgency that would dictate otherwise.

“ECOWAS Treaty can not justify forceful intervention in Niger more so when Nigerians will endure such adventure. The UN non-intervention principle may have to be relaxed because of the recognition accorded democracy, but it still disallows forceful and dictatorial interventions. Aggressive military intervention in Niger would in the present circumstance be dictatorial.

A diplomatic approach is the only option. It may be pertinent to add that ‘democratically elected’ rulers embedded in corruption in the destruction of their people cannot hide under the global norm of democracy to sustain and perpetuate their misrule of destruction and pauperization of their people.
In the same vein, Western powers, driven by their selfish motives, must not encourage or support corrupt countries of the so-called under-developed countries.

It is a travesty–HM Ayemi-Botu

Reacting to the war plan, the paramount ruler of Seimbiri Kingdom, in Delta State, HM Charles Ayemi-Botu, said: “ECOWAS ordering deployment of soldiers to oust military junta in Niger is a charade and misnomer without fulfilling the conventionally approved norms of going to war as Russia is doing in Ukraine. First, the ECOWAS countries must get approval or clearance from their National Assembly and the United Nations Organisation before embarking on such hostility against a fellow sovereign nation. There are several intriguing questions for ECOWAS to clarify before any attempt to go on such a suicide mission. Is Niger the only country in ECOWAS that is under military rule and if not, then what about Guinea, Burkina Faso, and Mali? Then, why must Niger be an exceptional case?

“Who is financing the War and does ECOWAS has funds to finance the war? Is there no likelihood of support from the other three countries under military rule, and third, support from Russia, Libya, and other Muslim countries? Nigeria has a direct boundary with five of its states bounding Niger and those states would be veritable targets for Niger if ECOWAS goes on its restoration mission, and should be prepared to restore the other three countries too. President Tinubu and his fellow ECOWAS leaders are apparently crying more than the bereaved, one could as well see it as someone, who does not care about removing the log in his eye, but prefers to remove the dust in another person’s eye. Tinubu has a litany of woes and crises from the daily rise in petroleum products because of his removal of the subsidy, which is still sustained in the United Kingdom, United States, and other developed countries.

Frankly, removal of subsidy is a cankerworm to the entire citizenry of Nigeria. The unabated corruption, insurgency, and inability to pursue quick economic reforms leading to the depletion of the naira against the dollar, as well as the compounding foreign loans, are enough for the President to deal with. Since President Tinubu has vowed to toe the abysmal rule of his predecessor, Buhari, which he has eloquently shown, Nigerians should prepare for the worse to come,” the monarch said.

ECOWAS lacks the power to invade Niger —Ogwuche, SAN

A senior member of of the legal profession, Festus Ogwuche, SAN, stated, “ECOWAS lacks the capacity, both morally and legally, to make any military incursion into the territory of its member states.. To do that will amount to aggression, forbidden under International law.

There is no rule or principle, in the ECOWAS Treaty, Protocols, or Declaratory Principles allowing the regional body to invade another country in the name of preservation of democracy. Let us even keep the moral issues aside and go into the propriety or otherwise of such unilateral action.

We know the circumstances of the body’s intervention in Liberia, Cote d’Ivoire, and Guinea, which borders on serious issues of humanitarian concern – but tell me, when did the commitments to the preservation and promotion of democracy transmute to a right to use of force to restore democracy.

The ECOWAS fundamental political principles forbid such action in its totality. It completely forbids the use of force in any form, and humanitarian law attaches serious consequences to it as a function of the defined international criminal responsibility it fetches for perpetrators.

As a regional body, ECOWAS should not take such an action, but individuals involved directly, who should be ready to carry the burden of criminality it fetches under international law.”

Examine the issues appropriately–Saidu, IHRC president

The President of the International Human Rights Commission, Ecology, and Marine, Africa, Alhaji Musa Saidu, urged President Bola Tinubu, and other leaders of ECOWAS to investigate the circumstance that gave rise to the military takeover, saying it would guide the regional integration body on the right steps. He advised against hasty military action by ECOWAS leaders in the Niger Republic, warning that they should exhaust other measures first, as the Niger Republic is largely a poor country. Let them hear from the people and investigate the issues.

“There is wide poverty; hunger in the Niger Republic. The country is poor and landlocked. ECOWAS leaders should also consider the plight of the poor in the area as they take action. ECOWAS leaders should properly investigate the issues that gave rise to the situation in Niger Republic. It is also a lesson to African leaders to fix poverty, and insecurity in their own countries.”

Military deployment in order–Ikimi, lawyer

Human rights activist and lawyer, Oghenejabor Ikimi, told Saturday Vanguard, “I think the order for the deployment of ECOWAS soldiers to oust the military junta in Niger and restore constitutional order is a welcome development where diplomacy fails.

It is a sign that ECOWAS as a sub-regional body can now bark and bite at the same time. I think ECOWAS is aware of the urgent need to curtail the military coup pandemic that is bedeviling the sub-Saharan and Sahel Region and the need to halt same before it spread to their respective countries.

Nigeria will not shoulder much of the burden as opined in many quarters because it is a sub-regional affair backed by the AU, EU, US, France, and Great Britain.

This is not the ECOMOG of yesteryears hastily put in place solely by Nigeria. ECOMOG was more of a Nigerian affair than a regional affair. Military intervention would be the last option where diplomacy fails. With the recent rebuff of Nigerian, ECOWAS,, and US separate delegations by the Niger military junta, I think military intervention to restore constitutional order in Niger would be inevitable, and the Nigerian Senate may see the need to reconsider its earlier stand.

“However, ECOWAS must also fight institutional coups taking place in many member- countries by distancing themselves from dictators. These inactions and omissions no doubt are the reasons for a coup in our sub-region. They should not encourage military coup,” he said.

Nigerians stand by their Senate–Mudiaga-Odje, constitutional lawyer

Constitutional lawyer, Dr. Akpo Mudiaga Odje, asserted: “Indeed, the Senate under our Constitution has the undiluted power to approve the deployment of Nigerian troops on an external mission, as in the Republic of Niger case. However, it declined to so approve and recommended a diplomatic approach. By ECOWAS approval of military intervention in Niger, Nigeria being the chair thereof, will wittingly and/or unwittingly shoulder herculean responsibilities in that regard.

Under the 1999 Constitution, Mr. President can still deploy troops with other ECOWAS countries to Niger, but Mr. President must get authorization from the Senate seven days after such deployment.

The Senate must approve same, not later than 14 days after the President has so deployed our troops on that Niger mission To my mind, Mr. President is in a thorough quagmire. As Chair of ECOWAS, we owe them a duty to follow suit in their collective aspiration to restore constitutional democracy in West Africa, nay Africa. It is a must for all, especially Nigeria, which is the power base of that region nay Africa. Nigeria, therefore, must join ECOWAS in both the conception and implementation of her military template to restore democracy in Niger. Mr. President can apply after seven days to the Senate to ratify and /or allow his deployment of Nigerian troops on this laudable ECOWAS mantra. Above all, Mr. President can also provide substantial funding and logistics for the ruthless implementation of the commendable ECOWAS decision.

Hostilities not good for Nigeria–Omare, ex-IYC president

Former president of Ijaw Youth Council, IYC, and lawyer, Eric Omare, said; “From a legal perspective, the President of Nigeria cannot deploy the armed forces for combat operations in Nigeria without the approval of the National Assembly sitting in a joint session. Since the Senate has rejected the initial request, it already hamstrung Nigeria in deploying its armed forces from a constitutional perspective.

“However, from a diplomatic angle, I would suggest that they should explore other means of conflict resolution, outside use of force, but with the overriding aim to restore constitutional governance to Niger. I suggest this option because of the realities on the ground.

Our immediate problem as a country is to restore some stability to our economy. Therefore, going to war in Niger and spending our limited resources would only worsen our present economic situation and this would be counterproductive bearing in mind the fact that the first principle of International relations of any nation is domestic interest.”

Disregard military option —Ekwok, ex-PFN chair

Immediate past chair of the Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria, PFN, Cross-River State, and lecturer, Mass Communication, University of Calabar, Cross River State, Dr. Lawrence Ekwok, stated, “I am concerned about Nigeria. How can a man leave his own house, which is under fire to try to fight another man contending the commonwealth of their family with his brother, is that normal? How can someone whose position is in the contest, and some persons even accusing him of occupying a seat illegitimately lead the battle to restore a legitimate regime reportedly installed illegitimately?

Nigeria should just end with a diplomatic approach and forget about the military options because the matter is deeper and more complicated than it seems. Nigeria may regret this in the end if it insists on a military option. How many other countries in ECOWAS have a real capacity for real military force to support Nigeria in the fight? Remember that some countries in ECOWAS are not supporting the military move for obvious reasons, which makes it even more challenging- going to war with a divided house.”

No to military action—Onuesoke, PDP chieftain

Former Delta State governorship aspirant and chieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Chief Sunny Onuesoke, said: “I think morally, politically and continentally, Nigeria’s President, who heads ECOWAS, is not competent enough to order military action against the junta. I was expecting ECOWAS to go on diplomatic negotiation. Second, some of these countries that are coming out to say they are civilian countries in West Africa, what is the credibility of the elections that brought them to power? They are questionable elections. For me, I do not support military action. I think we should embark on diplomacy even if it takes 180 days for a transitional government.

Has Tinubu been able to fight Boko Haram and insurgency in Nigeria? Has he been able to fight kidnapping in Nigeria? Somebody is telling me he wants to fight the Niger Republic when nearly 100 days in office, kidnappers, bandits, and gunmen are still terrorizing the whole place. I do not think it’s right to confront the Niger Republic with military action. It will not work.”

Avoid military action—Emiaso, retired customary court president

Retired President of the Delta State Area Customary Court, Miakpo Emiaso, said: “I do not think that ECOWAS or Tinubu’s Nigeria has what it takes to engage in any military action in Niger. My advice is that Nigeria should steer clear of any military activity in Niger.

l do not think Nigeria has the resources to do it and even if they have the resources, they won’t succeed in what they set out to do. They will not achieve the objective.The Tinubu administration has already made many mistakes regarding the situation.

In the first place, do not forget that the coup in Niger is not a coup against the government of the ousted President. The coup in Niger is a coup against France, and that is why you see that the other francophone West African countries around Niger are supporting the coup plotters because the French government has been villainous towards their colonial regions.

Therefore, the coup is against France and its colonial policies not against the President. Therefore, if you go with a military agenda, you are going to fight against not just Niger but against other former French colonies. On principle, we do not have a strong ground on this issue. Tinubu should not put the lives of Nigerians on the line because you want to protect an individual whose administrative machinery was not doing his country any good. Military action in Niger will have very far-reaching consequences on Nigeria.

Once you start a military activity in Niger, the people of Niger will run into Nigeria and we will have a complex problem of displaced people which the country is ill-equipped to handle. If they find their way into Nigeria, it will create more problems for us and put a lot of stress on our food supply and our local security situation; more bandits will flow into the country. That military action is just not an option. Do not just go there.”

I support Niger coupists–Hon Umoh, ex-Akwa Ibom speaker

A former member of the House of Representatives in Akwa Ibom State, Hon. Peter Umoh, said the Nigerian 10th Senate acted well by rejecting President Tinubu’s proposal for military intervention to restore democratic rule in Niger Republic. Umoh who was also a former Speaker of Akwa -Ibom State House of Assembly, however, said he supported the military takeover in Niger if the reason was to free Niger from the colonial tutelage of France. His words: “My view is that the Senate has acted well and under the feelings of Nigerians, particularly Nigerians, whose states, and communities border with the Niger Republic.

It is important that when a situation arises as it has happened in Niger Republic, the ECOWAS community/authority should not rush into the last line of action that it has the power to do so. It is important that each of the countries that make up ECOWAS should find time to consult with the Legislature, traditional rulers, and eminent personalities in those member countries.

Whatever decisions the President takes, can influence negatively or positively on the lives of the Nigerian citizens. Therefore, the Senate has acted within the mood of Nigerians, because Nigerians won’t support any military intervention. Personally, as a historian, I support the military takeover if the reason is to free Niger from the Colonial Tutelage of France and to abrogate the agreement that so bound Niger and other Francophone countries. Elected Presidents of these countries are incapable of exercising the courage to look at France eyeball- to eyeball to tell them enough is enough.

Therefore, if the military can do that, I support them. We are Africans and our first line of protection should be the interest of Africa. The whites protect their own interest. If France is of the view that the military takeover of the Niger Republic is bad, let France publish publicly the agreement it signed with Francophone countries to control their minerals. Let France publish the content of that agreement so that any reasonable man and woman in the 21st century can see and judge whether that is fair.”

Not a good decision–Imeabe, president, S-South youths

The President of South-South Youths Initiative, Mr. Saviour Imeabe, said: “It is not a good decision Nigeria is facing security challenges worse than what is happening in Niger. I think at the moment, President Tinubu should think about solving Nigeria’s problems.”

Vanguard