Soft-core Boko Haramists

Also Published in DAILY TRUST

 

From thousands of kilometres away, I followed the devastating series of bomb blasts that rocked my hometown, Kano, on Friday, January 20, 2012. With almost two hundred people killed and huge losses of properties, the attacks were apparently well coordinated and intended to inflict as much harm as possible, which they actually did. They were also perhaps the worst ever coordinated attacks launched in a day in the history of Kano.

Incidentally, notwithstanding whether there is any internal or external conspiracy against Nigerian Muslims or northerners, or whether such attacks or some of them are plotted by other underground elements, the obvious fact, which no logic can deny is that, Boko Haram remains the main perpetrator of these attacks.

Moreover, they also give an excuse to some equally terrorist elements amongst Christians to impersonate them and unleash panic and/or attack some Christian establishments to primarily instigate hatred against Islam and the other peace-loving Muslims, and of course to achieve some other vested interests.

Therefore, Boko Haram’s claim of responsibility for Kano attacks was not surprising especially considering the fact that they had already forewarned of it by sending a letter addressed to Kano authorities a couple of months ago.

However, in as much as I was shocked by such attacks, I am equally disturbed by the growing trend of deliberate attempts by some analysts attempting to exonerate Boko Haram from such crimes.

I would call such analysts the soft-core Boko Haramists even though in reality they are as guilty as the hard-core Boko Haramists themselves, only that they are not audacious enough to take arms like their hard-core counterparts; instead they chose to play their equally devastating roles in the comfort of their homes and offices.

Ironically however, most of such soft-core Boko Haramists are consummated “yan boko” i.e. western educated but with quite little Islamic knowledge; too insufficient to enable them analyze such issues quite comprehensively.

It is very unfortunate to hear or read such soft-core Boko Haramists beating around the bush, manipulating ambiguous words in their subtle though discernable attempt to either raise doubt or even absolve their hard-core counterparts from responsibility for such attacks, or even justify the attacks under some ridiculous pretexts.

As a matter of fact, some of such soft-core Boko Haramists, who (by virtue of their relatively better education) seek to justify their hardcore counterparts’ atrocities more eloquently than even the hard-core Boko Haramists themselves.

In the same vein, some of them deny the existence of any terror organization called Boko Haram altogether, blaming the whole mess on a conspiracy to either destabilize the north, undermine Muslims or even divide the country. While some of them simply equate Boko Haram with other equally dreadful terror organizations e.g. MEND, hence challenge the government to approach Boko Haram’s issue in the same way.

Interestingly, the most ridiculous of all such pretexts is the denial of the existence of Boko Haram altogether, despite the fact that even before they grew such lethal, they were already identified with promoting intolerance and advocating violence.

And even though refuting their misconceptions and pretexts does not necessarily require any painstaking research, as their arguments are too illogical and too weak intellectually to warrant that, some good Islamic scholars had engaged their late leader; Mohammad Yusuf in public debates to expose his illusions.

For instance, in a widely circulated speech, late Sheikh Ja’afar Adam recounted how he, along with other scholars, had engaged late Mohammad Yusuf in debates in some of which he admitted his mistakes and even promised to revise them publically afterwards. But as Shekih Ja’afar maintained, he never did it, instead he went ahead propagating the same wrong views to the public.

Perhaps it was due to his i.e. Sheikh Ja’afar’s firm stand against their misconceptions that they allegedly assassinated him while leading faithful in a congregation prayer. And ever since then there have been more assassinations, attacks and other forms of violence against who dares to challenge them. Ironically however, Muslims constitute more than 90% of the Boko Haram’s victims.

Anyway, equally ridiculous also is the soft-core Boko Haramists’ subtle attempts to justify their hard-core counterparts’ violence under the pretext that it was the government that had firstly provoked them when some of their members were killed in Maiduguri by security forces, which subsequently ignited the mayhem in which many innocent people and other hard-core Boko Haramists including their late leader Mohammad Yusuf were extra judicially executed.

Now since Boko Haram were supposedly on a mission to propagate the “true version” of Islam, and since they were claiming to emulate the Prophetic legacies left by Prophet Mohammed, why did not they refer to his legacy when he and his followers in Mecca were subjected to worse treatment?

Interestingly enough, he and his small Muslim followers were subjected to worse systematic oppression, killing and torture for thirteen years within which he only kept consoling and restraining them, for he realized that engaging in violence would definitely hamper his propagation work and the potential converts would simply be scared away while the few Muslims out there would be wiped out. So, he and his followers endured until they were eventually forced out to migrate to Medina after the Messenger himself had escaped an assassination attempt.

Therefore, assuming that Boko Haram’s propagation itself is correct, their reckless decision to engage in violence as such had denied them the opportunity to continue their propagation in public, hence denied millions of Nigerian Muslims including me the opportunity to get “guided” to the “correct” Islam they were propagating.

Similarly their misconception that allows them to attack any non Muslim simply because Muslims were attacked by some non Muslims elsewhere is completely against Islam and logic. Because even after the establishment of the Islamic state in Medina, there were many non-Muslims, e.g. pagans and Jews in Medina, who continued to live and pursue their endeavours in utmost peace, and there was never a time when any of them was harassed because non Muslims elsewhere had attacked a Muslim. Incidentally, even if one is actually wronged in person he can’t retaliate with another wrong as far as Islam is concerned.

Likewise their misconception as regards the process of establishing Islamic Shari’a is not compatible with actual Islamic process. Out of their intellectual naivety, they mostly quote various Qur’anic verses out of context thereby distorting their intendments.

Being Islamic propagators as they claim, they should have stuck to the propagation of Islamic message peacefully as it recommends no matter how long it takes. Because over time and as long as they are sincere enough their message will keep spreading amongst the public until it grows strong enough to warrant the automatic absorption of full Islamic Shari’a amongst the Muslims.

Nevertheless, their soft-core counterparts pretend to ignore all these and instead keep chasing the shadow instead of the substance. You would often hear or read them for instance suggesting that the government addresses their grievances in the same way it addressed the MEND’s grievances.

While in reality even though they share the same terrorist predisposition, their objectives are never similar, because while MEND has rightly or wrongly agitated for purely economic advantages, Boko Haram has simply conceived a grand illusion in their minds which neither Islam nor logic approves of, yet they seek to impose it on the ground at any cost.