Tinubu’s plan to end farmers- herders’ conflict

PRESIDENT Bola Ahmed Tinubu, on a recent visit to Niger State was reported to have promised, within three weeks, a plan of action that will end the perennial clash of farmers and herders in most parts of Nigeria. He said: ‘ We must reorient our farming population, including livestock programmes…[ and] when we reorient the herders and make provisions for cattle rearing, governors must provide the land and I, as president, is committed to giving you in two to three weeks’ time, a comprehensive programme that will solve this problem.’ If this is not a ‘ political statement’ to please his specific audience ( the time of mere politics is over) the President may be commended for his self- assured optimism. However, against the backdrop of the recent history of the problem, it is doubtful that it can be approached so simplistically.

There are several strands to the farmers- herders’ conflict that render it complicated; these must be taken both separately and together to arrive at an enduring solution. There is a globally accepted best practice that ranching is the modern – and best yet known - method to animal husbandry. The days of open grazing are gone for reasons that include increasing demand for the land that is not correspondingly expanding, the perennial clash between farmers and pastoralists, and the uneconomical method of walking cattle long distances to graze, with negative effect on their value. It is a settled matter that ranching is the best option to rear cattle; herders should bring themselves to accept this fact and go along with it.

The vocal and somewhat influential Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore that apparently speaks for the mostly Fulani herders continues to resist this with the excuse that open grazing is their way of life and ranching threatens ‘ our means of economic livelihood’. It has therefore called for a return to the grazing routes and reserves of the colonial and First Republic times. This is archaic; the world has moved beyond this, and Nigeria must not be left behind. In various parts of this country, forward thinking cattle owners establish and profitably manage ranches, alone or in collaboration with private and public sector investors. The evidence of this abounds here and elsewhere.

In respect of the uneconomical method of open grazing, the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo, who noted the unreasonableness of it, suggested as far back as the 1960s that the animals be reared in grazing reserves and slaughtered in abattoirs in the North; refrigerated trains would then transport the fresh meat to markets around the country. For reasons that defy good thinking, both stakeholders in the animal husbandry business and successive Nigerian governments have never explored this option.

There is no shortage of grazing land in the northern part of Nigeria. Indeed, besides the grazing reserves that dot the country north and south, a former governor of Kano State, Abdullahi Ganduje was sufficiently concerned with ‘ the senseless killings in the name of Fulani herdsmen and farmers’ clash over grazing land’ to invite ‘ herdsmen from all parts of Nigeria to relocate to Kano because we have enough [ grazing] facilities to accommodate them ... in Rogo, Gaya, Tudun Wada, Ungogo, and other reserved places…’ Again, why the herders will not explore this reasonable option is so strange only they can explain.

Animal husbandry, like crop production, is a private business. Of course governments at all levels support in various ways these private enterprises in national interest, But, as has been said by many commentators, government must not get over- involved in any of these businesses.

There was a time that Mr. Audu Ogbe, as minister in charge of Agriculture and Rural Development proposed a dubious and suspect ‘ cattle colony’ that the Federal Government would create all over the country as a solution to the farmers- herders clashes. It was an idea ‘ dead on arrival’ anyway because, for many reasons, many considered it illmotivated and intended to achieve a sinister purpose. One major reason was that the Federal Government must not be seen to support an ethnic group to acquire land in states for the purpose of the private business of any group.

Farmers- herders’ conflict is generally situated in the struggle for access to water and land for agriculture and grazing. But until recent times, and especially during the Buhari administration, it never assumed political, deliberate, ethnic cleansing, land grabbing dimensions that, altogether now threatens the stability and corporate existence of Nigeria. University of Abuja teacher, Dr. Olowu Olagunju calculates that between 2001 and 2023, over 60,000 Nigerians have died in the conflict that affects at least 22 of the 36 states of the federation, largely in the North central geopolitical zone. And the killings continue under the Tinubu administration.

The fact that Nigerian blood continues to be spilled daily speaks volumes about the capacity so far of this administration to enforce the rule of law that it committed itself to in the Tinubu Agenda for a Better Nigeria document. It says that a ‘ Tinubu government will operate on the premise that the rule of law is paramount’ meaning ‘ supreme’ or above all else.

The farmers- herders’ conflict arose and continues because of a fundamental violation of the rule of law by all involved. Therefore, the plan of action envisaged by Tinubu must not overlook the criminality aspect of the conflict – murder, kidnapping, rape, and wanton destruction of property, crops and animals. Perpetrators of heinous crimes under the guise of farmers-herders clash must be fished out and appropriately punished.

Given that the herders are mostly of the Fulani ethnic stock, the Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria ( MACBAN), described as ‘ a loose partisan advocacy group centred on promoting the welfare of Fulani pastoralists in Nigeria’, has positioned itself as the leading protagonist for the semi- nomadic and nomadic ethnic group. Lately, it announced the establishment in Nasarawa State of a 2,140 - strong security outfit called Nomad Vigilante Group that it says will complement security agencies’ efforts and promote peaceful coexistence. This statement led to the circulation in the social media of a fake certificate of registration of the group that in turn triggered public concern about what MACBAN is up to.

On the one hand, Tinubu’s plan to ‘ reorient’ farmers and herders sounds nebulous: in the face of the insistent position of farmers as indigenous owners of land to cultivate, and that of MACBAN on constitutional freedom to, as a way of life, roam with their cattle, what exactly does Tinubu want to preach that will ensure equity and fairness as acceptable to each side? On the other hand, whatever solution his ‘ comprehensive programme’ contains, the states may not give land unless under terms that do not violate extant anti- open grazing laws.

Even if state authorities align with the programme, there is no assurance that the citizens will accept it. The Indigenous People of Biafra ( IPOB) has warned that it will ‘ never allow ceding or selling of any part of our ancestral land to terrorists and bandits for whatever reason’… [ because the people of the Southeast region] are farmers and pastoralists too’.

In Niger State, Tinubu gave himself a tall order. That is the challenge of leadership anyway; especially one who not only professed to come to the task well prepared but unequivocally insisted it is his turn to lead Nigeria. The matter at hand demands much more than political acumen, indeed all the wisdom he can marshal. However, let it be said directly that a lasting solution to the conflict between farmers and herders must go beyond what is immediately politically expedient; it must be fair and just, and in line with global best practices. All things considered, this country must not succumb to whosoever desires to live in the past. Nigeria needs first to be made safe, and second to look ahead and move forward. To this end, the buck stops, for now, at the table of President Tinubu.