Generals are known for formulating tactical plans, defining strategies, and articulating military doctrines when they address matters of national security. They make pronouncements that resonate in history and leave lasting impressions.
Historical figures such as Dwight David Eisenhower, who effectively led the Allied Expeditionary Force during OPERATION TORCH (1942-43) and OPERATION OVERLORD (1944), played pivotal roles in securing Allied victory in World War II.
Field Marshal Georgy K. Zhukov, celebrated for earning four HERO OF THE SOVIET UNION medals, distinguished himself by capturing Berlin for the Allies after fighting on 14 fronts.
Similarly, Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery, known as ‘Monty,’ orchestrated and participated in OPERATIONS MARKET GARDEN and PLUNDER, as well as the BATTLE OF THE BULGE.
Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, also known as The Desert Fox, anticipated that the conflict between Germany and the Allies would culminate in a critical encounter at Normandy, where his troops had entrenched themselves. Rommel confided to his aide, Hauptmann Helmuth, on April 22, 1944: "the first 24 hours of this war will be decisive... the fate of Germany depends on the outcome... for the Allies, as well as for Germany, it will be the longest day."
Rommel’s foresight was later immortalized in Cornelius Ryan’s literary work, THE LONGEST DAY, which chronicles the significant events of that day.
This acute awareness stems from their military training and the impactful nature of their positions, which leads society to scrutinize generals' statements thoroughly.
Recently, during the inaugural lecture at the newly formed Joint Doctrine and Warfare Centre in Abuja, the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), General Olufemi Oluyede, compared acts of terror occurring in Nigeria to the failings described in the biblical story of the prodigal son.
He contended that those who carry out acts of terror are deserving of rehabilitation because they are fellow Nigerians. He provocatively asked: “But even in the Bible, we heard about the prodigal son. If there was not that window for the man to come back, would they have come back?”
General Oluyede further elaborated, responding to his own question, “The point is that these are mostly Nigerians. It is crucial for us to provide them with an opportunity for repentance, if they choose, instead of driving them to extremes.”
His remarks motivated this writer to revisit the biblical account in LUKE 15:11-32, which tells the parable of the prodigal son. Key observations from the story include: 1) the prodigal son requested his inheritance while his father was still alive, 2) he traveled to a distant country where he squandered his wealth and indulged in reckless living, 3) after exhausting his resources, he found himself destitute during a famine and 4) realized his condition, longing for the sustenance of his father’s servants while he faced starvation.
Notably, unlike the terrorists lamented by General Oluyede, the prodigal son did not commit murder, abduction, or harm others. He did not engage in killing, kidnapping, or forcibly removing countless school children and confining them in forests.
As of now, over 40,000 lives have been lost in Borno State since the onset of the Boko Haram insurgency in 2009, not accounting for the broader Northeastern region or other areas suffering under the grip of terrorism.
The blanket of terror has severely restricted the ability of farmers in the Northern region to cultivate their lands, ushering in food insecurity and a rise in Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM)—a plight previously unknown to the populace.
Particularly in the Northwest, terrorists impose harsh taxes and tributes on communities, establishing dominion over many local governments in Zamfara and Katsina states.
As of earlier this year, approximately 3.6 million Nigerians found themselves in internally displaced persons (IDP) camps due to terrorism. Given the escalating violence and fatalities caused by these terrorists, it is likely that this figure has only increased. Furthermore, the psychological trauma inflicted over 17 years of continuous terrorist attacks is profound.
General Oluyede's comparison of terrorists to the prodigal son not only misses the mark but is distressing. Individuals responsible for widespread death, destruction, and chaos do not merit any opportunity for rehabilitation; they must be held accountable for their actions and face the consequences appropriately. The biblical reference invoked by General Oluyede reminds us that those who resort to violence ultimately meet a violent end.
Moreover, do these terrorists offer their victims the chance for redemption before engaging in acts of murder, abduction, or sexual violence? What stands out is that while General Oluyede equates terrorists with the prodigal son and suggests an opportunity for repentance, he remains notably silent on the plight of their victims.
It’s essential to remember that even the faithful brother of the prodigal son, who diligently managed their father’s affairs, felt resentment towards his father’s benevolence. Those who have suffered losses or injuries at the hands of these terrorists will likely share similar sentiments towards General Oluyede’s troubling proposal.
It remains true that experienced generals articulate thoughtful and impactful statements. However, General Oluyede's statement falls significantly short of what is expected, failing to do justice to the Armed Forces’ distinguished service across various battlefields. He ought to reconsider his comments unless he is indicating that the government intends to shield these vile terrorists, who continue to take countless Nigerian lives.
Comments (0)
You must be logged in to comment.
Be the first to comment on this article!