Elder statesman, Prof Yusufu Turaki has called on the federal government to be courageous enough to end the Christian genocide in Nigeria, adding that no one can deny the shedding of innocent blood.

In an interview with Sunday Sun, the Professor of Theology and Social Ethic, and also a Middle Belt leader, traced the history of genocide in the north, highlighting that various narratives have been created to hide the real identities of the culprits.

According to him, the terrible condition caused by the marauding terrorists and bandits increased since President Muhammadu Buhari?s regime.

What is your view on the alleged genocide against Christians in Nigeria?

Before I start to answer your questions, I would like to make the following remarks: In the first place, I would like to have a minute of silence in memory of both the innocent Christians and Muslims who have been brutally killed for no justifiable reason, apart from the sheer barbaric inhumanity and criminality at its highest order, which was acted against the loving citizens of this country.

My heartfelt condolences go to all the bereaved Nigerians. May God bring an end to this sad episode of our national history.

Secondly, I would like to acknowledge the efforts of the federal government and the security agencies in trying to curb the spate of incessant killings and massacres of innocent and good Nigerian citizens, despite the fact that the apparatus and the government machineries, and institutions have been grossly compromised by evil and wicked Nigerians, who occupy very high positions of authority in Nigeria.

Thirdly, I do understand the precarious position of the current government that has inherited this perplexing matter of prevalent and pervasive insecurity, which has plagued Nigeria since the 1980s to date. All Nigerians need to come together and seriously take effective and lasting measures that can save the battered and dampened soul of the nation from self-destruction and ruin.

Then to your question. Is genocide against Christians, an allegation? This assertion seems to convey the idea that this matter in Nigeria, as of today, is something that is only claimed to be the case, as if there is no valid proof. Can we truly and faithfully say as Nigerians that this matter of genocide in Nigeria can be placed under disbelief and scepticism?

To answer this question, I would like to include another Nigerian group that stands also, just like the Christians, whose case is more pathetic and needs redemption is the plight of Muslim and non-Muslim Hausa of Hausaland. Their terrible condition due to the marauding acts of terrorism and banditry is of the increase since President Buhari?s Regime. The veracity and truth about this genocidal question, is currently being reduced by some Nigerians, to either tautologies or mere contradictions, but as it is against the historical and current dynamic social factors on ground. There are massive evidential proofs of massive killings and destruction of human life and property currently going on in the Northern states: Regions such as, the Middle Belt, Hausaland and Kanuriland. I believe very strongly that the government and the security agencies have better and proven statistical records of the acts of carnage and genocide against both Muslims and Christians in the North.

As Nigerians seem to hold various views and opinions about the question of genocide, let me quote the standard and correct definition from the Oxford Dictionary. Genocide is: ?The deliberate and systematic killing or persecution of a large number of people from a particular national or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.? The synonyms of genocide are among many: racial killing, massacre, wholesale slaughter, wholesale killing, mass slaughter, indiscriminate killing, mass murder, mass destruction, annihilation, extermination, elimination, liquidation, eradication, decimation, butchery, bloodbath, bloodletting, pogrom, ethnic cleansing, slaying, etc.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has a template definition of genocide. Take that template and use it to measure the historical and current activities of Boko Haram, ISWAP, Fulani militias, bandits and kidnappers, and many other Jihadic groups and non-state actors in the North. This exercise will definitely confirm without any reasonable doubt, that genocide in Nigeria is a serious matter of concern by any well-meaning Nigerian. We do not have to be political or diplomatic, as regards this weighty matter.

Based upon the historical social factors gleaned from Nigerian and international journalists, various researches, Nigerian newspapers and mass media (excluding the social media), the social and dynamic factors on ground, are evidentially proven to be genocidal covering the length and breadth of the Northern states of and even beyond, except, if one has a parochial, or unsubstantiated, or insular definition, which are usually proffered to please others, or for the sake of self-defence.

When did this alleged genocide start?

Historically, religiously, ethnically and sociologically, it might not have started full-blown, as we are seeing it today, but incrementally and gradually over the years. Let us take a historical memory line. What we call Northern Nigeria historically consisted of three broad regions: Hausaland, Bornuland/Kanuriland and Middle Belt. In history, particularly, the Hausa (fatake/traders) and Fulani (pastoralists) moved into the Middle Belt and lived peacefully with the ethnic groups of the Middle Belt.

In 1804, Usman Dan Fodio staged a Jihad against the Hausa on account of Islamic interpretations and overthrew the Hausa Sarauta system and imposed the Muslim Fulani rule over the entire Hausaland, until the arrival of the British Colonialism on the 1st of January 1900.

In the Middle Belt, the Hausa and Fulani Enclaves/Zangos aligned with the jihad, which created the Muslim pockets that dotted across the Middle Belt. These Muslim Enclaves carried out jihads characterised by slave-raiding, slave trade and slavery against their host Indigenous communities. The British, however, created an Anglo-Muslim Fulani and Kanuri Rule over Northern Nigeria from the 1st of January 1900 to the 1st of October 1960. The British had earlier amalgamated the Northern and Southern protectorates of Nigeria, on the 1st of January 1914. In Northern Nigeria, the British subordinated the majority of the ethnic groups of the Middle Belt to the Muslim rule of the Fulani and Kanuri, and made them second-class citizens, which institutionalised their inferior status and socio-political role in the hierarchical structure of the Northern Region, by default, until independence on the 1st of January 1960.

The military staged a coup d??tat and took over power on the 15th of January 1966. Subsequent coups and constitution making were docked by the nagging Sharia debates, until its fruition in the 1999 Constitution, which inserted the controversial and conflictual two ideologies: Liberal democracy and Islamic theocracy. This fact institutionalised the state of instability, deep-seated suspicions based upon the British colonial foundation of the political philosophy and practice of all Nigerians, based upon the tri-pillars of ethnicity, religion and region.

Twelve Muslim northern states created full Sharia after the implementation of the 1999 Nigeria Constitution. But serious calls for full Sharia started with the Maitatsine riots in Kano in the early 1980s, the Taliban revolution of Yobe State, the Boko Haram Jihadism of Borno State, 2009, the revived Fulanisation and Islamisation of the Fulani militias and jihadists, the bandits and kidnappers, etc. All these are various Islamic groups turned out practically as Muslim war-fronts created mainly to serve the interest, mainly and principally of the Muslim Fulani. This coinage Fulanisation and Islamisation was done by President Obasanjo as a way of summarising the political agenda of President Buhari, 2015-2023. These two ideologies of the Fulani militias and jihadists are the primary motivating and driving force of terrorism and insecurity in the Northern states, and even beyond. Certainly, this socio-historical background has provided a fertile ground for acts of terrorism, jihadism, banditry and kidnapping in the region. This background provides the historical, sociological, religious, regional and ethnic memories that inflame acts of terrorism and insecurity.

What is the nature and features of terrorism, banditry, kidnapping in the north?

There is statistical and wide evidential proofs of the works of Nigerian and foreign journalists, researches, Nigerian newspapers, mass media (excluding social media), that show massive and wide-spread killings of the Hausa in Hausaland and Kanuri in Kanuriland, and the peoples of the Middle Belt. These killings are well documented, as the bulk of it point to the Fulani. These pieces of evidence litter all over the Northern states.

Statistical records abound of these atrocities across the region. We, Nigerians, need to speak the truth to ourselves and act justly, as regards this obnoxious and disgusting matter.

What has been the position of both national and international communities on the alleged atrocities you highlighted?

There are evident surreptitious propaganda and the evasive and elusive diplomatic language and manipulation of the raw data on genocide in Nigeria against both Muslims and Christians. Let me outline some of them: Firstly ? Herders-farmers clashes. This narrative seeks to hide the truth about what is really going on. The facts on ground show Fulani massive atrocities across Nigeria, which are too numerous to quantify and quantify. This narrative protects the culprits and demeans the victims.

Secondly ? More Muslims are being killed than Christians. If this be the case, why don?t Muslims cry out as Christians? This narrative has many nuances. It dismisses the genuine case of Christians, since they are not the only ones affected. It removes the sting of the religious factor, since the terrorists themselves are Muslims. A Muslim should not kill a Muslim. So, this matter is not religious. Christians should drop their religious claims. But how could a terrorist group that has been established in the name of Islam, be not Islamic in its terrorist activities? This narrative is aimed at silencing the Christian voice.

Thirdly ? These terrorists groups are not ?true? Muslims. There is a mark difference between Islam of faith and Islam of ideology, or political Islam, or Islamism. The charge that the jihadists are not true Muslims Is also paraded around. Nevertheless, these Islamic groups call themselves as the ?true? Muslims. This narrative seeks to dismiss the pervasive and prevalent use of the historical Islamic ideologies, Islamism and Jihadism. This narrative seeks to down-play the Islam of ideology, or political Islam, or Islamism, or militant Islam. Fourthly ? the unknown gunmen. Thus, the identity is hidden. Fifthly ? climate change, bad governance, desertification, migration. These social factors are to be blamed as catalysts to the Fulani atrocities in across Nigeria. As pastoralists, the Fulani must find pasture, hence the herders-farmers clashes. All human beings have conscience, and a measure of morality and ethics. They choose to be good or bad, regardless. The carnage in Nigeria as meted by the marauding Fulani militias bears the marks of the inherent sheer human evil and wickedness against his fellow human beings.

Sixthly ? Colonial and pre-colonial ethnic, tribal and religious myths of superiority-inferiority. There are theories of jihadism that justify Muslim atrocities and denial of human rights of the non-Muslims, especially in Hausaland, Kanuriland and Middle Belt.

Seventhly ? Cattle colonies, RUGA, grazing reserves, river basin and water reserves, national census. President Buhari regime?s proposed these various projects, which Nigerians rejected, as means of easing Fulani migrations and demographic changes to the social environment of Nigeria. Any government policy and project that looks like a Trojan Horse was viewed with great suspicion. Such policies and projects, with calculated government administrative practices and surreptitious manipulations of government institutions, in the long run give the beneficiaries a foothold and stronghold over the entire country. Grazing reserves had already been mapped out in the ancestral lands of the ethnic groups, particularly in the Middle Belt, without them knowing that their ancestral land had become grazing reserves. The Buhari proposed census was cancelled due to the questionable demographic issues.

Eighthly ? there are myths about the heritage and legacy of Usman Dan Fodio that are motivational to the acts of jihadism, migration and invasions into other parts of Nigeria by the use of force. The myths of Fulani superiority and of being the ruling caste of Nigeria embolden Fulani dominance and arrogance over others. Chains of such narration abound in the less- privileged communities across the Northern states, where people had to submit to mighty power and dominance of the Fulani militias.

Ninthly ? the need to avoid ethnic or religious profiling. This is said to give objectivity and neutrality in reporting. Its drawback is that the culprits go scotch-free, since their identity is not known.

Christians, Muslims and traditional religions have been living peacefully for decades. What led to this problem?

This period of peaceful co-existence took place between 1900 and 1960, during the British colonial rule. But soon after independence, political, ethnic, religious and regional crises took over with increasing tempo until today. Since all religions and ethnic groups have a notion of God as their Creator, for this reason, they all have theistic (God) ethic, creational (all human beings are co-creatures) ethic, primal human ethic (human ancestry) and national ethic, as guide to morality and ethics. Nigerians are all capable of formulating and developing common-ground human values, morality and ethics to guide their national attitudes, behaviours and social practices.

In Nigeria, there seems to be a lack of an acceptable national ethical structure, or national ethic that can moderate the excesses of the attitudes, behaviours and social practices of all Nigerians, regardless. Even though we have a national ethical structure made up of the constitution, the executive, judiciary, legislative and the security agencies at all levels of governance, they are only on ?paper?, which have not been appropriated, internalised and made normative for every Nigerian. Nigerian attitudes, behaviours and social practices do not reflect the norms and maxims of the ?paper? national ethical structure.

Who is doing the killings?

The question assumes that Nigerians do not know who is killing who in Nigeria. The historical pattern and the style and nature of the killings are clearly well known. Only that Nigerians are afraid of casting any ethnic or religious profiling. As I have already stated in the previous question that both national and international journalists, and researches, national newspapers and broadcastings, mass media (excluding social media) and other avenues, have always pointed to one group, the Fulani. Almost all the terrorist groups, bandits and kidnappers menacing the Northern states are said to be of the Fulani stock.

Nigerian discourse has always had this question, why the Fulani in all of these? May I have this to say: There are very good and patriotic Fulani, who are our bosom friends and affiliates. Not every act of terrorism, banditry, kidnapping and insecurity can be credited to the Fulani. Every ethnic or religious group has its own peculiar character trait. British colonial anthropologists were hired to do ethnographic studies of the Nigerian ethnic groups to determine the ethnographic profile of each ethnic group. Out of these, the colonial masters used to design colonial policies, administrative practice and attitudes towards the various ethnic groups in Nigeria.

But Christians, Muslims and others are being killed by Boko Haram, bandits and other terrorist groups. Why have the Christians singled themselves out as the only targets or victims?

Have Christians really singled themselves out? Or that the spate and the magnitude of the killings have singled them out? I have already stated that various narratives have been created to hide the real identities of the culprits. They all tend to address the matter in general terms. Popular narration uses vague terms to hide the identity, such as ethnicity, religion and region of the culprits: terms such as, herders-farmers clashes, the unknown gunmen. Further, there are also commonly used and preferred journalistic terms, such as: terrorists, bandits, Boko Haram, jihadists, etc.

Who took the internal matter of Nigeria to the international community, especially the US that has threatened to designate Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC)?

Have we really thought through the reasons some Nigerians would do that? It could be that no one in Nigeria would want to hear them. Or there would be no protection, or justice. If there are groups that have taken the matter out now, I am not aware of such specific groups.

Let us remind ourselves of the celebrated national and international case of the Chibok Girls and Boko Haram. Demonstrations were held in both Nigeria and overseas countries. Remember Aisha Yesufu? Dr Oby? Michele Obama? President Trump in his First Term placed Nigeria under the CPC. President Biden and his Secretary of State, Blinken removed the CPC. In the same period, Nigeria under President Buhari received the highly placed World First-Class Citizens; US Secretary of State, then ICC chairman and lastly, the Secretary General of The United Nations, all visits were done in less than a year. In all, the top issue of discussion was terrorism and insecurity in Nigeria.

In addition, the ICC and the US Government had received not less than 15 petitions from Nigerians on the matter of terrorism, insecurity and genocide. Furthermore, the ethnic Hausa of Hausaland have written a petition to the ICC on the Fulani genocide against the Hausa. All these historical facts are known both nationally and internationally. What is the fuss about?

I do not think that both national and international communities need further education on this matter other than for the government of Nigeria to take the courage and boldness to end the killings in Nigeria.

What are the implications of designating Nigeria a Country of Particular Concern?

There would be no implications should the Nigerian government take a decisive action and put a stop to the killings today, of both Muslims and Christians, and also grant relief to the Hausa of Hausaland and Kanuri of Kanuriland and ethnic and religious groups, be they Muslims, Christians or traditionalists of the Middle Belt. Anything short of this would smear the taste of politics and social cohesion in Nigeria.

But the federal government has denied the said issue of genocide against Christians, affirming that she remains fair to all religions. What is your take on this?

Muslims, Christians and Traditionalists and any well-meaning Nigerian want this government under President Ahmed Bola Tinubu to stop the killings and genocide, and also hold responsible the major culprit, and the terrorists, jihadists, bandits and kidnappers, and any Nigerian, who have been responsible for the crises, conflicts, violence and insecurity that have plagued Nigeria, since 2015.

Are you not afraid that this allegation can snowball into religious crisis in the country?

The real and dominant issue to be afraid of is not genocide in itself, or its attendant fear, but the mandate of boldness and courage of the will of government to act and stop the killings, and hold all the culprits to book.

Even though the federal government has denied the claim, what do you expect her to do?

The act of denial is not the issue, but the necessity to act as the Nigerian sovereign authority and entity under God, to end the killings and genocide in Nigeria.

What is the position of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) over this issue?

The national leadership of CAN has publicly defined and clarified its position on this matter. Being not its spokesman, I cannot re-state its position in this interview.

There?s Nigeria Inter-Religious Council (NIREC), working for all the religious groups to live in harmony. What has been its position on this allegation of genocide against Christians?

I do not know the position of NIREC on this matter. I too, I?m waiting to hear its position. (Sunday Sun)

Update news