Rarely has a top Nigerian military chief sounded so contradictory while assessing his tour of duty than Alex Badeh, the immediate past Chief of Defence Staff did during his recent pulling out parade. In a valedictory speech at the ceremony that marked his retirement, Badeh lamented that he headed a military that “lacked the relevant equipment and motivation to fight an enemy (Boko Haram terrorists).” The assertion, though unsurprising, was a shocking departure from his pronouncements while in office.
Defending his 18-month tenure vis-à-vis the failure to rein in the malevolent activities of Boko Haram, Badeh, who was appointed in January 2014, said, “Over the years, the military was neglected and under-equipped to ensure the survival of certain regimes, while other regimes, based on advice from some foreign nations, deliberately reduced the size of the military and underfunded it. Accordingly, when faced with the crises in the North-East and other parts of the country, the military was overstretched and had to embark on emergency recruitment and training, which were not adequate to prepare troops for the kind of situation we found ourselves in.”
Badeh’s about-face is unbecoming of a gentleman-officer. At a time when local and international reports were drawing the attention of the Nigerian government to the glaring defects in our military capacity in prosecuting the terror war, Badeh had repeatedly affirmed that the Nigerian Armed Forces were well equipped and motivated to rout the Islamic extremists. On the low morale among the troops, Badeh had said, “We don’t pay for accommodation, we have buses that bring troops to work every day and take them back home, we don’t pay for light (electricity), we don’t pay for water, our salaries are good compared to what is paid in the civil place…” And on the scandalous shortage of arms and ammunition, Badeh’s response was banal: “Why do you think Nigeria is doing that for us? Nigeria is doing that for us because we have vowed that we will defend our nation if need be with our blood; so for a soldier to come up and say I am not well equipped, yet, you have a rifle; what do you want? The basic weapon of an infantry man is rifle, so why should there be mutiny…?”
Among other submissions, Badeh had also disputed the claims that there were fifth columnists in the ranks of the military. In 2014, he had said, “Why should you accuse your commander of leading you to an ambush? Come on! How can your commander lead you to an ambush? If they kill my soldiers, then of what use will I be? No commander will do that deliberately.”
But listen to the same Badeh during his pull-out ceremony: “(The) activities of fifth columnists in the military and other security agencies who leaked operational plans and other sensitive military information to the terrorists, combined to make the fight against the insurgents particularly difficult. The activities of these unpatriotic members of the military not only blunted the effectiveness of the fight, but also led to the needless deaths of numerous officers and men who unwittingly fell into ambushes prepared by terrorists who had advance warning of the approach of such troops.” What a terrible display of hypocrisy!
Yet, the rosy picture of the military the retired CDS painted then had many implications for the military and the nation. It is said that a successful commander in wartime conditions is one who is able to give clear and precise commands, one that demonstrates concern, and sets a good example for his military group. A NATO publication, The Qualities of An Officer, puts it quite succinctly. “Military leaders, overall, must have a breadth of long-term vision, be decisive and independent, act and stand firm, be a warrior, speak openly, plainly and frankly, learn quickly from defeats and mistakes, go forward with unswerving fortitude, and know and appreciate the requirements and interests of subordinates.”
But what was the true situation in the past four years? The country was saddled with military leaders that could not lead effectively and had little of substance behind the mask of authority defined by their badges of ranks. Tom Kolditz, a colonel and one time Professor of Behavioural Sciences and Leadership at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, says military leadership is based on a concept of duty, service, and self-sacrifice. “We take an oath to that effect. We view our obligations to followers as a moral responsibility, defining leadership as placing follower needs before those of the leader, and we teach this value priority to junior leaders.” It took the directive of the newly inaugurated President Muhammadu Buhari to get the military to move its central command to Maiduguri, Borno State.That is what leadership in charge of a theatre of war connotes.
Obviously, this was not the kind of leadership Badeh and his general staff offered. For reacting to what Badeh just acknowledged now, many soldiers were charged with mutiny, a few of them were condemned to death, while several lucky ones got jail terms or dismissal. This is certainly not how to fight a war.
The military is very critical to the well-being of Nigeria, not only in fighting homegrown Boko Haram terror, but in case of external aggression from any country. The National Assembly needs to probe how the budgetary approvals for the military have been spent over the past few years and offer a new template on how to make the institution deploy its funds efficiently. Badeh and the other recently retired Service Chiefs should be made to provide the true account of the military on their watch.
Punch
No comments:
Post a Comment