Author: Eremipagamo Amabebe

On Tuesday, March 16, thousands of Nigerians marched on the capital, Abuja, to show their frustration with the woes that continue to besiege the country. This sort of protest has not been a common feature of the Nigerian political scene – at least not in this decade– though this demonstration is one of several that have taken place this year.

The protest was organized by Enough is Enough, a diverse coalition of youth, media, and business leaders. The group marched to the National Assembly building bearing a letter which outlined their demands, four of which they said stand out as requiring “urgent intervention”. Excerpts of the demands are as follow:

1. The Jos situation makes it clear that the Nigerian state is incapable of securing the lives and limbs of its citizens…. We demand an urgent overhaul of the security and intelligence apparatus in our country…

2. The promise of 6000 megawatts was flagrantly broken…. [We] demand that within the month, the government gives a realistic, practical plan to solving this perennial power problem.

3. We also demand that President Yar’Adua should resume, resign or be removed so that Nigerians know who their leaders are…

4. The Uwais report has been lying between the executive and the legislature for months now, and now election timetables have been released… We demand that all its recommendations be passed and implemented before the next elections.

[The Uwais Report is a document containing recommendations for making Nigerian elections fairer and more transparent.]

The coalition's letter emphasized the fact that those under 35 make up 75% of Nigeria's population; it carried a warning for the upcoming election:

We will come out to vote massively this time around, we will be watching closely and we will not leave election centres until all votes are counted. Anyone who rigs elections this time around will have themselves to blame. Young people across the country – from the North to the South – will be coming out in their millions…

The letter concluded:

We grew up hearing ourselves addressed as the “leaders of tomorrow,” and now we have realised that it is time… to take our destinies into our hands if we want to stand any chance of witnessing that much-touted “tomorrow.”

The protest ended relatively peacefully, and was largely declared a success. Olamild gave a play-by-play of the events of the day:

After hours of waiting and chanting, the crowd switched to Plan B Mode – they sat on the bare floor insisting that bankole and mark come out.

[Dimeji Bankole is Speaker of the House of Representatives; David Mark is President of the Senate]

The crowd insisted on seeing who they came for and gave an ultimatum – ” It is either we march into the house by force or you bring Mark or Bankole to come out and speak to us.”

The doors were eventually opened and the youths marched into the house where they encountered 4 layers of hand-locked policemen. Serious pushing was involved but they got in. On getting in, they were told that the House of Assembly officials had escaped through the back door. Protesters were then urged by their leaders to head out and end the rally. Angry Stella Damasus yelled “we can't just go like this. “

[Stella Damasus is a popular Nigerian actress]

The youths were shocked at the act of cowardice displayed by the House of Assembly. “They ran away?? Only one who has done evil will run away at a time like this. We will come back again and the next time we come, we will shut this place down.”

Twitter users Gbengasesan and Bubusn posted pictures of the march, and live footage of the event was available at ustream. The demonstration had an online presence unprecedented in the history of Nigerian protest: Facebook, Twitter, and Nigeria's extensive blogging networks were all mobilized in support of the event (of particular note were the Facebook group Save Nigeria and the demonstration organizers' website Where is Yar'Adua?). Nigerian Curiosity even reported that the hashtag #enoughisenough was the number three trending topic on Twitter (though she pointed out that not all the tweets referred specifically to the demonstration in Abuja).

Many in the online community expressed their support for the marchers. Jcsgrl, a commenter on Bella Naija's post about the protest, articulated many people's thoughts when she wrote:

This is quite new to us Nigerians. We’re not known to protest. We sit back and let things happen to us. Perhaps, the fear of military leadership still rules our life. Give it time…be patient. Keep building momentum and developing a grassroots mentality. We’ll get it together one day. In the mean time, don’t ever give up hope and don’t ever stop fighting for what you believe in. I support this group 100%. Just hope the fight doesn’t end there.

Demiji, commenting on Imnakoya's post, had a similar view:

I’m proud my people have found a new zeal to pursue their demands, how I wish I could be part of this historic moment!

Tolu Ogunlesi wrote of his reasons for protesting:

This sorry state of our country has left an interesting side effect. It has turned us all into comedians, people for whom no lemon is too unripe to be turned into lemonade, for whom absurdity is an instant ‘open-sesame’ for verbal ingenuity. We have made jokes about everything; composed ballads for President Yardie, turned “Turai” and “Mutallab” into verbs; and wondered why, after having a president who suffered kidney failure, we now have an acting president afflicted by “liver failure.”

Increasingly, however, we are realising that it is time to move on, to go beyond Concern, and Comedy, and make our way into the uncharted territories of Commitment. It is dawning on us that it is not enough to be Angry Young Men and Women, trapped in the online factories of Twitter and Facebook assembling jokes and status updates from our ever-increasing frustrations.

We need all the support we can get. So, if you are young, or young at heart, and think it is time to say ENOUGHISENOUGH, to electoral malpractice, to power failure, to fuel scarcity, to the cabals in high places, and to whatever else you may think of, let’s start in Abuja on Tuesday March 16, 2010.

Not all observers were unequivocally optimistic. Imnakoya wrote that he admired the protesters energy and commitment:

They are the ones in the trenches and up against the brutality of the security forces. Putting their bodies at risk and investing their time to make a case for the general well being of Nigerians is a noble task, and I doff my hat!

But he was skeptical of their demands. He outlined his reasoning as follows:

The removal/resumption/retirement of Mr. Yar’Adua is no longer critical at this stage of event in Nigeria. What is important is having in place constitutional measures that will prevent similar occurrences in the future. Let’s deal with the issue of transparency, the root cause of the problem.

We could have asked for the establishment of regional/local/ industrial parks nationwide with 20-24 hrs of electrical power (and other necessary amnesties) where businesses can set up shop and engage in symbiotic existence. Nigeria does not need power 24-7 nationwide at this point, just guarantee power to the industrial and production centers! Ending the five-month scarcity is easy, just get more ships to bring in more fuel! But this is not the solution to the problem…

Oil refinement must be done locally, and open to the private sector involvement. Three refineries are too few to handle the demands of Nigerians and her nearby neighbors! Rid the sector of politics and see how quick a turn-around will happen. Have each geo-political zone own and operate a refinery.

Solomonsydelle was similarly skeptical:

Will any of these demands be fulfilled by the end of March? A reasonable thinking person familiar with Nigeria would be foolish to say yes. There were promises made to my grandparents generation that are yet to be fulfilled by the Nigerian federal government. And for that reason, I personally would be seeking more than a plan when it comes to the second demand concerning electricity. Despite this, I feel that this protest is a step in the right direction for Nigerian democracy, as it is crucial for citizens to express themselves even when the consequences could be dire.

In Jos, conflict seems to recur in ever-narrowing cycles: deadly riots rocked the city in 1994, 2001, 2008 and –not even two months ago– in January 2010. The current conflict is said to have started in reprisal for the destruction that occurred in January — there have been reports of children and the elderly being particularly targeted by roving gangs armed with guns and machetes.

Like the previous riots, the current conflict in Jos has been fought along sectarian lines – Jos lies on the border between Nigeria's Muslim-majority North and Christian-majority South. Access to land and resources is often determined by whether one is a native, or “indigene”, of the historically Christian city, or a “settler” from elsewhere (“settlers” are most often Muslims from the North; see a Human Rights Watch report on the subject here for more on the subject).

Many sources have placed the death toll in the hundreds: Al-Jazeera and the BBC both reported more than 500 casualties, although one government source put the figure at 55 official deaths. Quick burials make it difficult to accurately assess the total dead, while political considerations also lead to discrepancies in the numbers. Shuaibu Mohammed of Reuters gives one explanation:

Death tolls have been highly politicised in previous outbreaks of unrest in central Nigeria, with various factions accused of either exaggerating the figures for political ends or downplaying them to try to douse the risk of reprisals.

In the blogosphere, horror, shame and empathy were the prevalent emotions. Linda Ikeji posted a photo on her blog which graphically displayed the carnage. She wrote:

NO, I won't take the picture down. This is our shame and failure as a country. Let's all stare at it!

A commenter on her site agreed with her decision:

Thanks for leaving it up because we have to stop pretending everything is alright…it is time for these things to stop….

Several bloggers drew parallels between the earthquake in Haiti and the violence in Jos. Tywo, another commenter on Linda Ikeji's post wrote:

God has blessed Nigeria so much. I mean, we rarely have natural disasters and things like that. We only have deaths that are caused by heartless humans. The truth is we are not moving forward.

Babajidesalu shared a similar view:

As the world is experiencing natural disasters, Nigeria is experiencing self inflicted disasters. The latest massacre in Jos attests to this observation.

In the aftermath of the January 2010 riots, one blogger started a site, We are Jos, to help the victims of the rioting. She explained her motivation as follows:

It was the effort of wyclef jean that made other stars come together to give towards Haiti. I noticed some Naija bloggers even gave towards Haiti while at the same time decrying what happened in Jos, VERBALLY while saying God should help Nigeria.

I've often wondered why we Nigerians complain and proffer no explanations or solutions to the problems that herald us. In whatever small way I can, I try to solve a problem or even make an effort.

F, another commenter on Linda Ikeji's post, saw the problem as broader than religion, and endemic to the country as a whole:

The nonsense will stop in Jos when the nonsense stops in Abuja. All this shadowy politics needs to cease so that the people can have access to basic amenities. They say a hungry man is an angry man. It is the same in the Niger Delta. If everyone was well-fed, had access to quality education, power supply, clean water and a decent standard of living, who would think of trying to kill off another religious/ethnic group seen to be “competing for space”?

…We will continue to express anger/disgust at these killings- this will not stop them from happening. Dealing with the root cause is the only solution to this on-going tragedy.

Adeola Aderounmu expressed a similar view, laying the blame with Nigeria's leaders:

The Jos issue is not a local issue. It is a reflection of the lack of democracy and failure of the system. We have no defined system and the country is built on very useless people instead of strong institutions and good principles of governance.

But a commenter on his post disagreed:

You are always separating the elite from the masses. At one time or another the elite emerged from the masses. So you can’t really separate them. (Many members of the masses are striving to join the elite).

The failure of Nigeria and Nigerians as a people collectively has to be shared all round.

Nigerians will have to look at themselves as a society and question why they have systematically over 50 years done nothing to arrest the slide into oblivion and hopelessness? Why is it when the get a sniff of power, they do all the wrong things? The fact is that most of society is corrupt, as such corrupt practices are condoned, in some cases celebrated…

Since the violence began on Sunday, army and police forces have taken control of the city, making more than 100 arrests. SolomonSydelle reported on the possibility that the International Criminal Court may step in to bring judicial resolution to the situation and avert a spiral of future reprisals.

Read about the January 2010 riots here.

Just when many Nigerians were sighing in relief that perhaps the drama of the past three months had come to an end,  a new plot twist enfolded: only two weeks after Vice President Goodluck Jonathan's long-anticipated confirmation as Acting President, President Yar'Adua was flown back to Abuja under cover of darkness.

Initially, many commentators assumed that Yar'Adua's arrival in Abuja signaled his imminent return to his presidential duties. But as the days slipped by without any communication from the President, many began to fear that his condition was even more serious than suspected.

Reactions from the blogosphere varied, with many expressing sympathy for the ailing leader; however, the prevailing feeling was frustration at the continued secrecy regarding Yar'Adua's condition and future intentions.

Chinedu Vincent Akuta wrote about the abnormality of such excessive secrecy:

President Yar’Adua is, and will not be the only sick president. When Fidel Castro (Cuban President) became seriously ill, he was televised live on his sick bed when Venezuela’s President (Hugo Chavez) visited him. When late Yasser Arafat (The Leader of Palestine Liberation Organization) was taken to a French hospital before his death, the entire world was kept informed of his situation. Also when former Israeli Prime Minster (Ariel Sharon) was taken to hospital, the world was kept informed. I find it too difficult to understand the secrecy surrounding our president’s sickness.

Imnakoya at Grandiose Parlor also expressed frustration:

The man is clearly incapacitated and not able to perform his duties required under the law. In fact, it now appears the man is not even in the right state — physically and mentally, to make his situation known to the people who gave him his mandate! This is what the recent events strongly suggest since his return from Saudi Arabia about a week ago.

So why has it remained a Herculean task to the representatives of the Nigerian people to do the right thing and relieve the man of his burden?

Why is the conscience of our elected officials so dead to the expectations of the people whom they represent?

In February, Vice President Goodluck Jonathan's confirmation as Acting President ended months of political uncertainty; but Yar'Adua's return has confused the situation, and, for many Nigerians, only raised more questions.

SolomonSydelle at Nigerian Curiosity wrote:

The main question on every Nigerian's mind is why did Yar'Adua choose now to return to the country after spending 3 months abroad? There are likely various reasons for this choice but some key factors spelling the significantly diminished political capital of Yar'Adua and his supporters could be a main reason.

Max Siollun saw a similar agenda in Yar'Adua's return:

The timing is very telling. The political mood in Nigeria has been moving toward having Yar’Adua PERMANENTLY declared incapacitated, and the “acting” President Good luck Jonathan has been treated with some hope and optimism with many assuming that Yar’Adua was not coming back, and urging Jonathan to carry out reforms.

Yar’Adua’s return must be viewed in this context. He and his allies are feeling the heat, and are trying to pre-empt any moves that could permanently sideline Yar’Adua from power.

Many commentators saw the President's return as political brinkmanship designed to disrupt Jonathan's rule and strengthen Yar'Adua's supporters. Some pointed to the President's wife, Hajia Turai Yar'Adua, as being a key figure in these suspected intrigues.

On February 25th, the Nigerian news outlet 234Next published an article chronicling the First Lady's alleged behind-the-scenes political maneuvering. The article generated more than 600 comments and was widely cited in the Nigerian blogosphere.

Rayo commented on the First Lady's seeming omnipotence:

Turai is back and the whole world knows it. Who else can demote Goodluck Jonathan from Acting President to Vice President then return him to Acting President, all within 24hours without National Assembly or Federal Executive Council’s input, if not Almighty Turai?

Opeyemi Agbaje echoed her complaint:

The constitution does not recognise a first lady, any minister or other appointee of a president and certainly not his personal security aides and childhood friends as legitimate inheritors of political power in the event of the absence, indisposition, medical leave or incapacitation of a president.

But many commenters saw the 234Next article as sensationalized. Gaskiya, a commentator on the site wrote:

Stop printing lies. The first lady cannot sign any document as she is not recognized constitutionally. She only flew in yesterday with her ailing husband and now someone is saying she had taken over the affairs of government of this country?

Many saw the First Lady's alleged manipulations as symptomatic of larger systemic flaws.

Loomnie wrote:

If she can command the power she is claimed to [be] commanding then the so-called ruling elite are to blame for rolling over and letting her take control.

And that might well be the case. In many situations in Nigeria, if you want to curry favour with the boss you do not go to the vice, you go to the wife. Power is often seen as being embodied in the person who holds it. In order to have access to that power one needs someone who has unrestricted access to the Power.

Doofan, another commenter on the 234Next article had a similar view:

Turai is a product of this society of ours. Why do you blame her alone? This battle is for the control of resources, party machinery, oil and funds. Do you guys think it’s for the good of this country? Next and the other media houses are more interested in sensation of the story than in reporting the actual facts. Our political class is as guilty as the first lady they made her that powerful by bribing her to get favours now they want Nigeria to think that she is the only devil and they are saints.

Others felt Mrs. Yar'Adua was pursuing power at the cost of her husband's health and reputation. Kayode Ogundamisi wrote:

It is painfully embarrassing to see that we have been denied the privilege to empathise with the Yar'adua family over the predicament of their son and Turai must take the bulk of the responsibility for that because of the obvious choices she has made. She must be held accountable for the fact that rather than cushion her husband's pains, she is fueling the outrage that compounds his situation by insisting that he hangs unto power at the expense of Nigeria and his life.

Another theme of the discussions was acting President Goodluck Jonathan's perceived inaction. Chxta expressed the feelings shared by many commentators:

I was, and still am angry about the lack of spine shown by Goodluck Jonathan in this whole event. I mean, as C-in-C, even in an acting capacity, someone filed a flight plan of such magnitude and you did not know about it until the planes (not plane) were about to land?

Some observers argued that neither the First Lady nor the Acting President actually hold the reigns in Abuja. Sahara Reporters published an article which pointed to a complex interplay of interests, where Mrs. Yar'Adua and Jonathan are only two actors in a constantly shifting constellation of powerful elites. The article pointed to Nigeria's state governors (The Governors Forum) as being the primary power brokers in the capital; Chike Orjiako, writing in the same outlet had a similar take:

Jonathan is a product of a consensus contraption called doctrine of necessity. He is standing on a straw erected by his traducers for their own political expediency. There is a limit to what he can do without upsetting the apples carte. What is on offer presently is politics at its naked form. Could you imagine the decision of the illicit Governors forum to keep Yar’Adua in power dead or alive? The moment they suspected Jonathan was trying to exercise independent power by his appointment of Presidential Advisory council; they struck. We all have a role to play in the effort to rescue us from the gang of Governors, their ministers and National Assembly members that they manipulate at will. Much of the work to force them into submission is ours and not Jonathans. We have to keep protesting without let or loose. By my estimation, Jonathan is doing all right.

On November 23rd, 2009, Nigeria's President, Umaru Musa Yar'Adua left the country without publicly stating when he would return. In the following weeks, the news was released that  he was receiving medical treatment in Saudi Arabia, yet speculation continued, culminating in rumors that the Pesident had suffered brain damage or had even died. On January 12th, Yar'Adua gave an interview confirming that he was alive and receiving treatment, though he gave no indication when he would return to Nigeria.

Yar'Adua's absence created a leadership vacuum which  frustrated many Nigerians,  particularly in the wake of crises such as  Umar Abdulmutallab's attempted terror attract and the religious conflict in the central Nigerian city of Jos. Many Nigerians called for Vice-President Goodluck Jonathan to step into Yar'Adua's shoes, but the situation was complex: As a southerner, Jonathan's assumption of the Presidency would threaten to destabilize the delicate power-sharing arrangement between Northern and Southern Nigeria. Further, without written instructions from the President himself, the legal extent of Jonathan's position were unclear.

For more than two months Nigerian bloggers lamented the leadership void. Chinedu Vincent Akuta at Briefs from Akuta wrote:

Enough of power vacuum, near constitutional crisis, and over heating of the polity all due to the fact that the ruling party (PDP) does not trust the Vice President (Jonathan Goodluck) to formally act as President until President Yar’Adua recovers from his illness. There is no choice other than to respect the wishes of the Nigerian people, power belongs to the people.

And indeed, many Nigerians shared his sentiments. During the month of January frustrated  Nigerians marched in  Lagos, Abuja, and London. Adeolu Akinyemi wrote on why he marched:

We are not happy with a Plane load of 300 people dying in the streets of Jos in Religious wars because of inaction from a missing leader.

Enough is Enough!

We will not accept the label of terrorism bestowed on us by the 58 days inactivity of our president’s mobile phone.

Enough is Enough!

Leadership Vacuum is dangerous and is responsible for killings in the north, kidnapping in the east, Militants gang raping in the South South and intellectual indifference in the west.

Enough is Enough!

Yusef, a commenter on Akinyemi's blog, was more skeptical (edited from the original English version):

How many times will I read this celebrated line “Enough is Enough”?????

It's very strange how we display so much hypocrisy when faced with some adversity and yet are able to make very sharp u-turns once the weather is stormed. If I call on anyone to do what will be absolutely necessary to get our system working, how will I be 100% sure that [me] being a northerner, he will not change his mind once he gets some sense spoken to him by his kinsman… Or [that me] being a Muslim and he being of another faith, [he] wont see me in the deep recesses of his heart, as being an enemy.

There is no such thing as “Enough is Enough” Deolu. We do not know what a nation is yet, not to even talk of kinsmanship. It's not enough to brandish posters of Ernesto Che on our walls to pretend to imagine or understand what it takes to lay down ABSOLUTELY everything for a better day.  We do not know this adversity . . . or we are too selfish hoping that “one day e go better for our side”! ! ! !

Our so-called leaders did not drop from Hell, but are actually just a reflection of our society. Replace [any of them] with even yourself and you will be surprised at what you will do or become.

Popular broadcast journalist Funmi Ayanda also wrote about her frustration with the prevalence passive hand-wringing:

I have sat in the company of bank MDs who stole billions of money, ruling party leaders who manipulate the electoral process and steal billions on naira, pastors of un taxed mega churches where all the above pay staggering sums in tithes and contribution and listened in disbelief as they all moan about bad leadership and the Nigerian situation. I have often mentally checked my teeth for visible spinach; perhaps the joke is on me?

So make l for no crase finish l ask simple questions like, “so what do you think we should do” what is within our own control immediately and how do we build on that? “What will my role be in that”? Usually, the conversation goes no further because l sometimes think both Nigerians and foreigners have a morbid fascination with Nigeria’s undeniable failures.

On February 9th, after weeks of political wrangling, the Senate  confirmed Jonathan as acting President. Many in the blogosphere saw the event as cause for celebration. Solomonsydelle of Nigerian Curiosity provided an excellent analysis of the situation as it unfolded (See here for her coverage). She wrote:

February 9th could possibly go down in history as a day when democratic political measures where used to take Nigeria one step further down the path to becoming a true democratic nation.

Akin, too, was guardedly hopeful:

Maybe and just maybe, we might just have a good President and the good luck in his name brings good fortune to Nigeria, maybe, we can hope, maybe, we can dream, maybe, we can expect, maybe, we can realise – A New Nigeria.

But others saw reason for concern, pointing out that although Jonathan's assumption of power might be a political necessity, it was not explicitly permitted by the Nigerian Constitution.  Max Siollun summed up the predicament as follows:

Jonathan’s confirmation as VP will hopefully put an end to the controversy (at least temporarily), and will give the leadership some semblance of order and due process. While we have arrived at a PRACTICAL solution, I am not sure that the manner and circumstances in which Jonathan was appointed acting VP was LEGAL.

Jide Salu acknowledged the constitutional ambiguity, but was primarily thankful that the country finally has a leader.

I just want some peace and direction. If you were residing in the country, you would understand better. Nigeria was not only headless, it was directionless with all the looting that has gone on and still going. Which for now is under wraps.

Ana Nimmos was optimistic, but also saw cause for concern:

[The political resolution] may not be the actual end of this logjam as it presents its own challenges. For instance, by this resolution – if we accept it for arguments sake – Nigeria now has two Presidents -though one is acting. Yar'adua never left power and Goodluck should be very careful what actions he takes.

Loomnie also highlighted unanswered questions for the future:

One also has to think about the machine that was ruling the country all the while Yar’Adua was not available. Is the new President Goodluck Jonathan going to be able to take charge of the machine? Is he going to be deferring to it/them? Those are going to be crucial questions in the next few months.

On January 17th, news began circulating that violence had erupted in the central Nigerian city of Jos. In the following hours, reports of the fighting spread as witnesses reported mobs armed with knives and machetes roving among burning houses, mosques, and churches.

The conflict is ostensibly sectarian: Jos is a major city along Nigeria's “Middle Belt” – the border area which divides the country's Christian-majority south from its Muslim-majority north. This is not the first time violence has erupted in Jos: once known as a favorite destination for expatriates and tourists, the Plateau State capital has previously seen deadly riots in 2001 and 2008. During the past decade, more than 13,500 deaths have been attributed to sectarian violence in Nigeria — conflict which many observers say is more about resources than religion.

The initial cause of the fighting in Jos remains unclear: some witnesses cite a disagreement over the rebuilding of houses destroyed by rioting in 2008, some point to a row over a football match, some to the burning of a church. However, regardless of its source, the violence spread quickly: some sources have estimated the death toll as high as 400 with up to 17,000 people displaced. Authorities declared a 24-hour curfew on the city and on January 19th, Vice President Goodluck Jonathan (standing in for the absent President Yar'Adua) sent the military to take control of the city.

Brenda Hartman-Souder wrote about her view of the conflict:

Yesterday we seesawed between eerie quiet with almost no traffic on the road below our home and gunshots, the cackling fires of destruction and the excited voices of hundreds of onlookers. They were standing on the rocks and hills behind us watching gangs of youth torch and destroy buildings and homes – Muslim or Christian – depending on which neighborhood you lived in. All of it barbaric and still hard to believe.

This morning we climbed the hill again to see raging bonfires in the empty lot over our wall. Youth were carrying loads of household goods – pots, pans, a bookshelf – and feeding the black and smelly fire. We realized they were burning the possessions in those destroyed houses and other buildings that had been occupied by Muslims. These acts of pure meanness and revenge are happening all over Jos. One group starts a fight or fire, the other side takes revenge, people are killed, their homes destroyed. And what has this accomplished?

Acclaimed journalist Sunday Dare, wrote about the destruction of his childhood home:

My family home in the Nasarawa area where I grew up with all my siblings and where we all lived for nearly three decades was razed down by irate Hausa youths. My only elder brother who had just returned from church moments ago while trying to escape from a burning house was hacked down with knives and machete and left to burn with the house. Even as I write, his charred body lies on the ground around the house because it is impossible to recover his body due to a breakdown of security. I know of several family friends whose homes were equally burnt and relatives missing. I know of thousands of Jos residents hunkered down in hide outs and safe heavens in different parts of Jos unable to venture out.

He reflected on more peaceful times:

Jos never used to be like this. Not the killing fields that it has now become….

My primary and secondary school days were bright and simple. I had friends, many of them and their religion was never an issue. My friends and I, though of different religions and tribe bonded like brothers and shared almost everything.

That was then. This is now. Now in full adulthood, our friendships still remain though pushed into the realm of uneasiness because we all have suffered loss from the several conflicts that have engulfed the State. We have all failed to find an explanation, nay justification for what is happening. When, why and how did Jos lose it? What changed that turned friendly neighbors into bitter enemies and near savages?

Olusegun Gbolagun also wondered what had gone wrong:

Why will a dispute over a building project throw the whole city into predicament? Why would a difference of opinion in a section of the city grossly affect the entire Jos city? What would make neighbours and friends suddenly become enemies?

A simple disagreement claimed over 300 lives, destroyed hundreds of houses, cars and various properties. These are issues I kept thinking about during this present mayhem in Jos City. I keep thinking why there is such a tensed atmosphere in this city. Trust seems elusive.

There must be more than meet the eye in this crisis.

Adeola Aderounmu saw a connection between the conflict in Jos and the attempted bombing by Umar Abdulmutallab. He wrote:

I have at least 2 entries on my blog stating that Nigeria is not a terrorist country but the muslim region north of Nigeria continues to make nonsense of my claims. There are loads of groups now on facebook saying that Nigeria is not a terrorist country. But the more some of us have tried to paint Nigeria positive by saying that we are not a nation of terrorists the more some fools somewhere are negating our claims.

A commenter on Omotade's blog made a similar point:

And people recoiled in shock when they discovered Mutallab was Nigerian… “It is not a Naija thing”, they say… Well, if this isn't terrorism, then Obama is Chinese. Those Al Qaeda people are not stupid. They saw such tendencies towards extremism and made a point to start targetting Nigerians. It's not exactly rocket science.

Writing at A Tunanina…, Carmen McCain saw the violence as being rooted in something deeper than religious conflict:

While the crises have certainly taken on religious dimensions—especially when symbols like churches and mosques are the most obvious markers of identity—I have seen many discussions on the internet, whether in the comments sections of articles or on Facebook, which oversimplify the conflict as a mostly religious one. I think this is a mistake and a serious one, as it is exactly this over-easy identification of the religious symbols as representative of a group which makes churches and mosques the most popular targets in a conflict that is primarily over politics, land, identity, belonging, ethnicity, and retaliation.

Loomnie also wrote on the complex causes of the violence:

Most of the violence that is reported from northern Nigeria is about a weird definition of who an indigene is and who a settler is, and that most often, the immediate cause of the violence is some fight over resources. In other words, people fight over access to resources (control of state power should be seen as a resource), but quickly resort to claims of entitlement based on ethnicity, place of origin and religion. These modes of identification are then often used to mobilise other people with the same or similar identity markers to fight opposing groups.

Citing a Human Rights Watch analysis of the conflict, Jeremy Weate at Naijablog also pointed to the differentiation between “settlers” and “indigenes” as a primary source of the violence in Jos:

At the root of the conflict in Plateau State are two core issues: poverty and an artificial distinction between “settler” and “indigene”…

The settler/indigene dichotomy goes against the fundamental freedoms granted in sections 42 and 43 of the constitution.

Until the government takes a hard look at the issues that block 42 and 43 from functioning (”Federal character” guidelines and the “State of origin” law), the conflicts will remain and Jos will continue to be a flashpoint. Violent conflict will probably exacerbate as desertification, water scarcity and population growth drive northern populations southwards into the Middle Belt in the next decade.

On Thursday, January 21st, the BBC reported that the 24-hour curfew on Jos had been relaxed and Army chief Lt Col Shekari Galadima had declared an end to the violence.  But many still worried about the volatility of the region. In a post entitled, “Silence that is not golden,” Brenda Hartman-Souders wrote about her fears for the future:

The quiet in urban Jos proclaims that something is seriously amiss. Curfew now ends at 10 a.m. and begins again at 5 p.m. Our seven-hour window of “freedom” allows people to buy supplies, check on loved ones, move to a safer place and bury the dead.

Rumors of more “attacks” abound and we try to hear them but not let them paralyze us with fear. Yet with the intensity of the reactions, with the unbridled killing, maiming, burning and looting, it’s easy to believe that more revenge –suppressed for now while the city remains under tight control of the military–will rage upon this area again and again. Intervention at the highest levels of government and cooperation among key religious leaders has to be a top priority if Jos is going to keep from disintegrating into a war zone.