2015 Nigerian Presidential Election Patterns

Summary

Beyond rhetoric and bombastic campaigns by the 2 main political parties in the election, the outcomes indicate a complicated and complex array of voting behaviour across the board. From available data 2 important charts are generated that bring to the fore the-not-so-easy picture and insight for pundits, observers and analysts.

2015 Nigerian Presidential Election Results

Questions

1. Is the election about personalities or shifting alliances in new brands?
2. Is the election about rejecting a tired party or seeking new parties with old faces?
3. Is the geography of voting choice really about old colonial divides or an emerging post-colonial geopolitical nuance? 
4. Is ethnic nationalism/politics on the final legs or is it a pragmatic fiction?
5. Does the parties performance really say anything useful on collective decision for change or sticking with business as usual?

2015 Nigerian Presidential Election Voting Proportions

Questions

1. Did the parties really pull out all the stops?
2. Did the incumbent party invest in her apparatchiks or the trickle-down effect failed?
3. Is average voting population of 44% not similar to apathetic European voting or does it say something about population resilience in parallel to absent governments and an uncertain state?
4. Nigerians are survivors waiting for governments (elected or selected) to prove their worth. So far they are still waiting for proof the elected are serious in humanity.
5. Is the expense on campaigns including 'final' assault on NE insurgency justified?
6. It seems that winning by any party will not be the beginning of victory.

Nigerians seem to be maturing as a collective through expensive projects called national elections. Though the road is thorny, deep and rugged; huge expectation was invested in participation, process and management.  It is too early to dismiss the snoring giant and still a long way for her to pick up from hibernation. Nevertheless hope abounds that beyond elections, governance will be policy-oriented and merit-based. It does offer more hope than in many parts of the world because any change will be tangible, visible and measurable.

Re: ASEAN Glass Half Full

Summary

The ongoing geopolitical reconfiguration of the world is unleashing new patterns and trends in on one hand re-defining of nation-state and recalibration of regional groups especially outside North America & Europe. While European Union led the way on implementation with nearly 2 decades experience, other continental regions are moving ahead at various paces devoid of reversal. South America is making giant leaps in seeking new accommodations which is open to suspicion nevertheless security and stability is evident.

Africa is an important geopolitical and geoeconomic destination. While the intellectual and operational capacity is never in doubt, implementation and acceleration of Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and now African Union (AU) is unsatisfactory. African political elite is still struggling with serious intellectual, temporal and imposed cultural conflicts. While solutions can be homegrown and or be appropriated from outside, Asia and South America regions offer important experiences, useful outcomes and dependable leaderships for Africa in the complexity of future challenges.

The video above offers useful insights from Professor Kishore Mahbubani, one of the most versatile Asian thinkers & geopolitical architect of rising Asia. Happy viewing! There are other insightful interview of his online and his path-defining books.

  

The Reality of Dawning Global Impossibilities

Introduction

The last few weeks has opened up unavoidable realities on the world which seem to have been latent and dormant in the mainstream media. The emerging dimension of these age-long long-denied experiences is their inevitability and the global nature of their impact. This article will attempt to summarise each event including its counter-productive certainty and geopolitical implication(s).

Israeli Election

Any serious observation of Israeli politics from the outside has an easy conclusion to reach. It is an exclusive strategy and operations, as well as a unique form of representative process. The configuration and development of the state over the years has spawned a unique set of criteria of citizenship, nationality and character. Managing the evolving criteria have matured and is moving into its expected trajectory.

The recent past elections concluded a phase of the national process .i.e. Israel is a state for individuals/group with specific criteria. There are serious problems with this position which is that the population of exclusivity is rather in decline. The population of those excluded is growing and despite exclusion are not totally excluded considering the pain and dehumanisation associated with it. There is no practical and pragmatic resolution on this intergenerational implementation.

At the international scene this position of Tel Aviv kicked off a fuss in Washington DC. The contradiction is the fact the latter has supported, funded, encouraged and shielded Tel Aviv for the last 4 decades. In a sense the fuss lacked clarity, is devoid of genuineness and cannot be interpreted as credible. It smacks of clash of belligerence. It testifies to the confusion of US internal politics and another indicator of its decline. Above all it places Tel Aviv as the top dog of the Sunni axis as Tehran consolidates so-called Middle East as the undisputable Persian Gulf hegemon.

Berlin/Brussels – Athens Fudge

In the latest round of European problem manifesting in Greece, resilience of Athens shined again. They are not down talk less of out, actually they are needed more than rejected. Athens made a strategic move of enacting social legislations as a dare to Berlin and even opposition parties voted in favour. All the talk of Grexit is cheap and subterfuge because Berlin/Brussels want to collected her money hence the tightening of screws but time is not on her side. Various elections are looming with potential consequences for ruling parties.

Greece will continue to limp along in Europe. Moscow cannot and will not invest in Greece as it is entrenched within US alliance of NATO, a strategic threat. Athens continued investment in costly defence procurements and there is no sign of its diminution. So what will Athens do? China is not in favour of a balkanised market of Europe so will remain patient as new round of election kick off. This is the fear in Berlin/Brussels as in the absence of killer blow of Athens; Athens will remain a lightning rod for discontent among voters. EU is not going anywhere, it is around to stay. Nevertheless with a depressing geopolitical economy at least in the west, extinction of the left, the right wing ascendancy will continue to surge in stagnation for a few years in the doldrums of regenerative ideas.

Only 1 option remain for both parties in the medium term. Concession or degree of concession must be made if Berlin/Brussels want to collect some money. Short of conflict Athens will seek stop gaps from various quarters for piecemeal dividends. The big strategy will be her exit of NATO with other prominent solutions, and then potential explorations of Moscow cum Ankara satisfaction may emerge for Athens. Of course Beijing will be waiting on the wings. 

Hot Knife of AIIB

Finally money talks! The last 2 decades since the end of USSR has seen United States proving without demand her global dominance and longevity. Emerging powers are challenged and molested for potential reception of conflict of which they demurred. The doyens of remora geopolitics in Europe and Asia continue to tow the line unquestionably until few weeks ago at the behest of Beijing.

The new global bank under Beijing auspices is causing major geopolitical earthquake in Washington DC. Apparently it seem like London especially stabbed her at the back to safeguard her national interest to secure founding member status in the bank of course with minor role. Poignantly the success of London encouraged other European capitals and satellites to jump aboard leaving US in isolation waving the flag of ‘standards’ and ‘transparency’. This concept of wealth accumulation by Beijing has finally driven a potent wedge in the western alliance, a hot knife in the less viscous butter of irrelevance and regressive self-reinforcement. Western alliance is moving towards a devaluation entity, a relic of historical books and emerging in a reconfigured form de-robed of erstwhile influence on the world stage.

This singular event testifies to the irreversible weakening of United States. She is on a quick descent maybe not as quick as her ascent. Mind you this is not an ideological move, rather a confirmation of foresight of where the new power is concentrating. This is a bitter pill for Washington DC, the degree of isolation is massive and the conclusion that at the instance of Beijing these satellites may seek rapprochements with Moscow for the love of money.  

Greek Hand on the European Chessboard

Introduction

The ongoing tussle between Athens and Brussels/Berlin has exposed serious fissures in the European Union architecture. However a deeper review of the process reveals complex relationships, internal inconsistencies and unpredictable outcomes for Greece as well as the EU. With apparent capitulation or concessions of Athens in the first round of the geopolitical bout, it is important to explore the strength of Greek position if any still exists and the potential for playing such cards in a cloud of isolation.

Democratic Confusion

All of a sudden Greece is on the world stage, asserted an analyst as if she ever went away. The new government in Athens elected for the first time since the end of World War 2 by a free electorate arrived with difficult prognosis. In a domestic landscape loaded with discredited bipartisan structure and collapsed economy, the people showed their hand and voted with their feet in full knowledge that the new government may not have many levers to pull. It is dangerous to pursue progress with limited resources and huge expectations. The problem was that Brussels/Berlin doesn’t want this kind of democratic outcome. The question facing the new government and most Greeks is thus; how will they get over the fiscal water boarding without external support and out-of-the-box tools?

Arguments of Weakness

The battle between Athens and formidable Brussels/Berlin is about power of which economy is part of the mix. Power projection by a hegemon at least in a proximate space in a specific time is absolute and intolerant of rivals or challengers.  While the new government in Athens articulated excellent proposal pre-election, it is difficult to perceive their current success based on their publicly exclaimed proposals. These include but are not limited to; sacrosanctity of Euro Zone membership, anathema to capital controls, ignorance of extra-EU fiscal/monetary assistance and sustaining previous economic agreements/arrangements. 

Such proposal shouldn’t and did not send panic down Brussels/Berlin spine. There is no risk in the short and medium terms rather pressure is gradually building on Athens. In a sense Athens pre-emptive strike of throwing away her main cards on the chessboard and mind you no ascendant power negotiates to relinquish to a (weak) rival. In any case Athens was isolated from the beginning by unnecessary self-imposition. As a small and weak country with a divided population, the new government need to come up with critical strategies for the next round to threaten and upset her opponents. A case has been made suggesting that Athens first round loss to Brussels/Berlin is a tactical victory to enable her zoom in on her rich, oligarchic tax evading/dodging elite. Time will tell but there is no time in shifting from earlier positions.

Renewal of Strategies of Strength

Athens must be shed of her so-called European mindset in handling the current crisis by considering solutions beyond EU. Iceland is a country of less than 1 million people that passed through the horrendous 2008 economic collapse, reformed and bounced back to economic growth and renewed economic development. The idea of seeking or negotiating change within the EU from a position of weakness is ridiculous. The absence of a powerful extra-western ally has hamstrung Athens a great deal. The suggestion of her proximity to Moscow is outlandish because behind Moscow’s polite response is distrust.

Therefore Athens should start making serious allies within various EU member states targeting parties with similar agenda in prospect of coming elections. They should also target public opinion is various European countries while they delay reaching far reaching agreements with Brussels/Berlins. Greek population is already down so a few more years of stagnation can be pragmatically maintained and sustained but no more. Only a referendum or new election can strengthen the hand and consolidate legitimacy.

As an EU border state, Greece is one of the first points of entry for illegal migrants from Asia and East Mediterranean. The current EU policy is no quite narrow for these countries so far they have weak governments and weak economies. So these illegal migrants are either held in custody and or they slip into the country with a majority trapped in Greece. Similar cases are obtained in Italy which has risen astronomically with EU participation in the destruction of Libya. So much for farsighted security policy!

Athens should seek common ground with Rome on the issue while she gradually provides legal papers to these migrants for onwards movement to other EU member states. This policy does at least 2 things; extra resources are freed and pressure/tension is reduced which potential takes the wind of the far right party’s sails. In addition pressure will gradually start to mount on other recipient EU member states of these illegal migrants from Greece whose government will surely pay attention to Athens concerns. 

A coordinated approach with Rome will bear fruits as almost all political parties in both countries will be in agreement of various degrees of displacing illegal migrants to locations beyond their national borders. On this point Athens isolation will be eliminated and far right parties will be struck out from the political scene in those countries. Compared to Italy, Greece is geographically cut-off or buffered away from the proximate environs of affluent Europe. Her neighbourhood is saddled with former communist countries, areas of decade-long poor economic performance and space of neglect & isolation. In this case the 1^st law of geography/spatial auto-correlation is exemplified.  

Conclusion

There is no favourable European solution to Greek economic problem. Athens attempt at negotiation with powerful EU capitals from a position of weakness is counter-productive. Without a serious external backer with capital gravitas, without threat of referendum or new elections, without freezing special attention to (too-big-to-fail) banks, without capital control, without critical anti-austerity support in EU member states and without a national central bank free to enact and implement independent monetary/fiscal policy; Athens will struggle for a long time to come.

Self-Destruction & Self-Elimination of the Last Bipolar Superpower

Introduction

While the world is grinding under heavyweight of complex problems including inserted perpetual wars, a fundamental phase reached a crucial juncture on the geopolitical timeline. 24 years after the collapse of USSR the so-called last superpower of an erstwhile bipolar world, United States, finally unravelled. Interestingly and in line with historical precedence, United States, through her institutions and her political actors overplayed their narrow sectoral benefits beyond the bounds of their national strategic interest. By subscribing to undermine their president and core national interest to favour a foreign power, United States political institutions finally destroyed the last vestige of US strategic continuity and progressive relevance in global affairs. 

Berlin – Yalta – Gorbachev

The sub-heading is a deliberate device to highlight historical sensibilities for a gone era and for a time whose history is now deemed fit for manipulation and abuse in many unfortunate western quarters. The ravages of murderous WW2 opened European space for new geopolitical realities of which against expectations one of the victims of that war to the tune of nearly 26 million turned into a victor in her annihilation of Nazi German Forces. USSR is the victor of WW2 of a very costly victory! 

The end of that war by default left 2 contesting global (ideological) forces standing; USSR and United States. United Kingdom under Winston Churchill was a regressive appendage of a new order, a subservient yesterday’s man regrettably lapping up the basis for unfurling future remora role to be assigned to her by ascendant Washington DC. Yalta established order which essentially guaranteed among other things the security concerns of Moscow, a victim of cross-continental attack by Berlin and earlier 1812 Napoleonic attack. 

The basis for geopolitical focus of Moscow was clear, to obtain a continental buffer against future attacks which Joseph Stalin spelt out as, “Germany is, as we say, a geographical concept...Let us define the western borders of Poland, and we shall be clearer on Germany”. Guaranteeing that western flank from central Europe was covered and finlandisation secured the northern flank.  On these agreements, USSR established a national security format that steadied for the next few decades.

Internal contradiction of ideology and inconsistencies in running a global geopolitical machine from Moscow overwhelmed and Mikhail Gorbachev signed off the Union in 1991 from a position of weakness rather than approximation of deliberate soft strategy. Hence the outset of a journey of uncontested hubris, deployment of ill-conceived full-spectrum dominance and dangerous consequences of unchallenged global power on a youthful republic, United States. 

United States has limited experience in global geopolitical management and sharing global power for over 4 decades proved insufficient. Remember that Byzantine and Ottoman Empires respectively stood for longer periods. For comprehensive treatment review Luttwark The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire and Mansell Constantinople: City of the World’s Desire 1453 – 1924.

Full-Spectrum Dominance

United States assumed global (super) power rather with internal and existential commitment to fear and contradictions of security concerns despite vivid absence of serious military, economic and cultural challenges from any part of the world. Apparently geopolitical and diplomatic offerings from Washington DC coalesced into a military/security paradigm that reduced the global space into chessboard of states deemed as templates for power projection especially in areas mistakenly allocated questionable tactical values. In parallel the domestic space was eliminated as a serious geography of value infusion rather turned into a staging post for global economic onslaught through weapons of economic warfare, interest rate evaporation and financialisation.  

It is interesting for the elites to present irrelevance of US mainland in her geopolitical calculus which is most vivid in the attacks of 11/09/2001 which not only exposed it but equally opened a justification for its exposure as inevitable. If the most military advanced country is exposed with justification by its political actors then which other (weak) state is safe? Attempts to explain away that incident through pre-emptive unprovoked attacks on innocent states disguised as endless & perpetual conflict enterprise remains puerile, fancy and devoid of empirical and intellectual rigour.  

In parallel in view of the new tradition of perpetual conflict, US domestic space offers a renewed function as reinforcement post for occasional power projection project validated through various military bases and warships stations around the world. Therefore the mainland is a dominated dilapidated space for the elite to levitate against with all the resources drawn from conflation of corporations and the state while the rest of the population only clutch on the imposed image of glory on decline. 

Loss of Compass

Washington DC misreading of history remains the single source of its near time incoherence and road to irrelevance. The zealous attention towards ascribing military solution to every geopolitical problem undermined her credibility across the board. The fixation to possess, control and dominate peoples & resources of Arab World with little dividend continue to dodge its status diametrically. A cursory review of states and locations in the sub-region only present chaos, bloodshed, instability, conflict and uncertainty. Sadly other geopolitical powers abandoned the conflicts for United States and she has miserably failed to assume full control for either victory or for defeat. 

Parallel fixation with diminution of Moscow continues to ebb and flow. Expiration of colour revolution as a strategy for military expansion of an (NATO) irrelevant security network only triggered a new one (SCO) by other concerned players. While correlation between possible humiliation of Russia and effort to do so is negative, the same regressive strategies are reinserted with the same results. The idea or strategy spurn that Russia’s geospatial security concern is open for grabs remains worrying. Ukraine crisis is another phase of a long practice of regressive diplomacy with zero-sum mindset and counter-productive result for distant sponsor and local client apparatchiks. 

Capitol Hill Implosion

United States’ Middle East policy has unravelled. The existential ambiguity between innovating an erstwhile policy towards a pragmatic dimension and equally managing unruly clients whose geopolitical raison d’etre leans on zero-sum diet is dangerous when their sponsor is weak, inchoate, unassertive and indecisive.  This is the emerging picture in US attempt on rapprochement with an assertive Iran with Israel and Saudi Arabia in the background. The last 2 are lesser powers.

With an inept political class and elite overdosed on Israel diet, the depth of the influence and weight of interlocking connections not only compromised internal policy development but inserts itself to disadvantage US core strategic interest. The fact that the legislative arm entered into an agreement with a foreign power against the decision and oversight of the executive branch only conclude the emergence of a new geopolitical virus. It displays chronic inflexibility to modify positions in a rapidly reconfiguring global geopolitics.

The idea and reality that United States internal affairs is deliberately led to be hostage of a foreign government by its own elected representatives is nothing short of consolidation of treason. While many blind pundits and regressive self-reinforcing analysts humour on the resilience of US-Israeli relations, US is finally emerging as the weak link and a weak player in the world. What happened to singular & unique US exceptionalism?

The process of fuzziness or subordination of strategic national interest below narrow counterproductive interest by US political class is a long one. With a long gestation, the outcome which has gradually taken root will inevitably express its liability in decades to come. What is the nationality of US elected representatives? There is element of certainty in terms of policy expectation from immediate future presidents and future advisers who will dregs of policy developments of the last 3 decades. Anticipating progressive, nuanced, creative and realistic reading & engagement with the world as template of US foreign policy in the near term is as pessimistic as it is irrational. 

An incoherent, disunited and unconsolidated capital cannot be a competent medium of astute diplomacy, a dependable partner in international relations and a reliable interlocutor in geopolitical reconfigurations. Beijing, Moscow, Brasilia, New Delhi and Tehran will be watching with interest and dry smile. This is the most important geopolitical outcome of the century no matter how much it is played down by western mainstream media.

Final Offensive – Nigeria’s End Game for Boko Haram?

Introduction
Recent past postponement of national elections by the Nigerian government was projected by Abuja as a ploy to defeat and destroy the threat posed by Boko Haram in the North East. A 6-week window is very tight to be taken seriously and maybe self-defeating for Abuja. However a number of geographic indicators may suggest contrary patterns which add to the complexity of this armed conflict. It may not necessarily be Nigeria’s conflict for a number of reasons which are explored below.

Theoretical Clarifications

The arrival of Boko Haram on the scene has thrown Nigerian elite and intelligentsia into confusion for a number of reasons. Most obvious is the sheer difficulty in putting a fitting label over time on the phenomenon.  Nevertheless there is an agreement that Boko Haram is a source of (strategic) instability with academic appreciation to its elimination. Different stakeholders have presented dynamic views over time as Boko Haram seem to have ‘settled’ down. Understanding this pattern of events requires an acknowledgement of the following;

• Boko Haram is not a standing army with conventional posture. Its operation is expressed via unconventional, asymmetrical and guerrilla warfare

• Comprehensive response to Boko Haram will be enhanced with huge intelligence operation

• Boko Haram has international remit and an outcome of a deliberate 'western' geopolitical investment with sustainable supply/reinforcement operation

• Boko Haram has a time line allocated to it by its sponsors/handlers

• Boko Haram exploits territorial trap or conditioning of its target (countries)

Complicated Threat

One of the most serious items overlooked by analysts in dissecting Boko Haram is the sheer ignorance of their or imposed motivations. Why will an armed group commence operation in a sparsely populated Savannah/arid vegetation zone with no access to the sea? Why is an armed group successfully navigating is operation in a location of small towns with depressed economies? There are no easy answers to both questions but an attempt will be made to delineate possible linkages between states weakness, Boko Haram ascendancy and its potential weakness/downfall. 

There is a natural assumption that Nigeria is the primary target of the armed rebellion. The spatial concentration of Boko Haram operations on the country’s NE periphery suggests another dimension. As aggregates, the North East proportion of population, economy and economic development is very low compared to Nigeria’s total. Few states and cities drive Nigeria’s economy and NE is not in the picture. Of course citizens’ right to life and property is sacrosanct and the state must protect them everywhere in the country. It is safe to suggest that apparent diminished contribution of the NE, its location and apparent sparseness of bordering communities of neighbouring countries present Boko Haram as a honey trap for Abuja’s attention. Then, why is Boko Haram successfully operating from an isolated space? I’ll return to it later.

It is the conclusion of this article that Nigeria is not the major threat of Boko Haram at least not in the current phase. Of course Nigeria has suffered most with highest civilian casualty which stems from Abuja's strategic weakness, maladministration and malfeasance. If various geographical and other variables are thrown into the mix, one is confronted with facts that deserve to be respected and reviewed accordingly with methodological clarity. If Lake Chad is used as proxy for Boko Haram’s base, this is used since the armed group is an international phenomenon targeting all littoral states, an informed picture is produced. See Map below. 

Boko Haram's Relative Proximity of Threat to National Capitals

There is no sign that Niger, Cameroun and Chad desire such distraction even with Paris imprimatur. Niger will be the least concerned for among other things she hosts a United State drone base in Niamey, few kilometres from Nigeria. Adding proximity to national capitals, proximity to strategic population concentrations and proximity to water resources helps to capture a unique picture. Only one national capital (Ndjamena Chad) falls within the range of serious/immediate threat of Boko Haram. See Chart below. Chad is the only country among the littoral states with commercial crude oil reserve in proximity exported through a pipeline via Cameroun. 

Relative Distance b/w Boko Haram activity space & Lake Chad Littoral State Capitals

Unsustainable Supply Chain

When geography is projected further, as stated earlier Boko Haram seem to be an entity on the limb of activities that still gains traction. From network analytical perspective, Boko Haram is operating in a contiguous area of weak (low density) economic interaction in 3 countries for reasons of de-priority of various governments, historical isolation and challenging climatic/vegetation conditions. This is Boko Haram activity space/catchment area is a No-Man’s Land.  See map below. It is also very clear that Boko Haram and or its strategy is not to be identified with the people. Popular support and public opinion is not its priority as is usually found with armed groups fighting for various causes aligned to universal ascribed values. 

Boko Haram's Catchment Area/Activity Space

With North Africa decimated and central Africa region seriously weakened, who is sustaining Boko Haram with sophisticated weapons, medical supplies, logistics support, communication/intelligence equipments, target selection strategies, transport carriers? One of the major aspects of media reporting from Nigeria side is the absence of captured equipments. Reports usually end with casualty figures, not of capture personnel and equipments.  Or is this information deliberately withheld by the armed forces? 

Boko Haram cannot operate in isolation with huge intellectual & technological support and massive real-time geographical strategical foundation. How do they choose or select targets? When and where do they attack and retreat after engagement? What is their modes of 'undetectable' transport? There are suggestions that Boko Haram’s operational space may be coterminous with possible commercial reserve of important minerals. No Africa state/government currently has the deep pocket, motivation, connections, resources and sophistication to sponsor Boko Haram in their preferred/allocated location. As an isolated group is an isolated space, only air drops will suffice to supplied coordinates at specific times/periods.  Evidence will surface later.

Boko Haram is in continued existence in the area due to resilience of its operatives, tangible rewards for the operatives and sustained support of its geopolitical sponsors including continued supply of sophisticated weapons, logistical support, equipments and provision of real-time (encrypted) communication/intelligence.

Territorial Trap

Hindsight is always handy. Over time is emerged that Boko Haram Nigeria’s operation is a phase for wider destabilisation of the region. While many analysts are fixated with national boundaries, Boko Haram’s strategy is a grand scheme where national boundaries are reconfigured into unique activity space (No-Man’s Land) to suite their operation. Another conundrum of Berlin Conference! See map below! This is the basis for transnational prong attacks at their own times of choice. For Boko Haram ideologues/strategists there are advantages. In the name of territorial integrity and sovereignty, cross border raids and retaliations against Boko Haram are diminished. It must be borne in mind that as a mobile professional force, pinpointing Boko Haram needs accurate intelligence. 

Boko Haram's Transnational Primary & Secondary Activity Spaces

Another advantage for Boko Haram is the mounting pressure on various national capitals to increase security footprint in response to threat levels far away from their capitals. All things being equal this will involve new investment, seeking new funding sources or foreign (military) aid, and employing new personnel to be trained in the art & theories of regressive counter-insurgency. 'Regressive' is used because within African context counter-insurgency strategies/policies are applied without consideration to unique national/domestic social, cultural, economic and historical links. They are applied across the board as score-settling mechanism for political and economic advantage by the ruling elite. 

 Nigeria Complexity and Ruse of Election

While Abuja moved against election date on Boko Haram ruse, there is no evidence that they’ll accomplish their goal. Boko Haram is not a standing army for starters and by the way though inexcusable, NE is ‘far away’. Thirdly, citizens feel diminished for the emergency nature of current policy and question its credibility at least in view of the dead and lost property.  Nevertheless it is obvious from the above that Abuja and most of Nigeria is not seriously threatened that even a non-response is a response, an infuriating one at Boko Haram. In a sense Boko Haram strategy is attention-seeking of which pragmatic ignorance over time by Abuja may reduce them to irrelevance over time. At what other cost?

Nigeria’s challenge is how to eliminate an armed group with no strategy for capturing/holding any of strategic assets, high values economic resources and strategic natural resources. The currency of mass murder by Boko Haram will last for a while and their raison d’ etre will gradually weaken and or their handler will wind down their operations. Recent reports of beheading alleged spies by Boko Haram may suggest encroaching pressure and potential internal rupture. Another important issue is the cost-benefit equilibrium for maintaining Boko Haram. Running it is an expensive project.

Even if circumstance favour current armed forces action, in isolation what will be termed success may involve destruction of rebel assets in high-visible locations and displacement of personnel to No-Man’s Land or to neighbouring countries especially Cameroun to Yaoundé’s displeasure & protest. Displaced Boko Haram personnel will cool off for a period of time; regain strength, energy and resources only to return again sometime after the election. Among the problem with this approach is how to collate the cost and justify its implementation to citizens in the background that for some elite it is a meal ticket.

Conclusion

Boko Haram phenomenon is a complex dimension of anti-state action. Data is suggesting that Nigeria may be a target with no serious threat but in the immediate phase a target of attention-seeking. Chad appears as the country most exposed to serious threat. Nevertheless there are possibilities that Nigeria’s election will come and go while Boko Haram’s existence may be part of a wider geopolitical calculation against the region. In any case it will dissolve by its sponsor’s designation when a credible result is confirmed. In the mean time, Nigeria’s approach may remain ambiguous and her standing in the region continues to shrink.