Checking Violence Through Efficient Intelligence

Intelligence is variously defined as a whole gamut of evaluated and processed information needed to make policy decisions with regard to business, security, economy and politics.

For military theorists, strategists and tacticians; diplomatists and political scientists, however, Intelligence exudes a national security connotation with an aura of secrecy.

By experts’ analyses, Intelligence proceeds in five stages that include requirements’ setting, information/data collation, evaluation, communication and their application by the appropriate authority, to achieve certain ends in connection with established interests.

Nigeria as a country, has had too much of violent upheavals over the years, often resulting in enormous loss of lives and property; and even posing threats to the nation’s corporate existence.

“Communal and sectarian crises have continually wreaked havoc on this nation. There have been bombings, kidnappings, Niger Delta restiveness, assassinations, the Boko Haram palaver, the Jos crises, other sectarian outlashes now and then,” Dr Joe Elema, a Benin-based political scientist, recalls.

“In fact, some of these crises almost degenerated into some kind of insurgencies,” moans Miss Florence Bilewu, a Lagos-based public affairs analyst.

No doubt, the combined effect of these crises has been catastrophic on the nation’s image and economy, many perceptive analysts say.

While the Boko Haram and Jos crises are still very fresh in the memory of many Nigerians, the recent acts of violence that trailed the conduct of the last general elections have compelled some Nigerians to critically appraise the effectiveness of Intelligence management by the country’s security services.

Not a few Nigerians have alluded to Intelligence failure; in the sense that the security services did not detect and prevent the crises from exploding into mayhems that led to loss of lives and property.

“Such a failure invariably opens up a ‘window of vulnerability’ in the nation’s search for unity, stability and economic development,” says Elema.

Mr  Achu Ben-Olayi, Director of the State Security Service (SSS) in Lagos State, tacitly admits a kind of intelligence failure in Nigeria, partly due to “the lack of political will among the ruling class and the selfish interests of politicians”.

He spoke at a conference jointly organised by the Nigerian Institute of Industrial Security and the Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps in Lagos recently.

“The job of the SSS is to proactively procure Intelligence for the maintenance of internal security. The decisive application of the Intelligence lies with other agencies.

“A disconnect in the process has led to national security challenges such as sectarian crisis, domestic terrorism, high-profile assassinations, sabotage of vital national installations and institutions, religious fundamentalism and extremism,” he stressed.

Ben-Olayi’s viewpoint is most apt, particularly as security experts insist that the five-stage procedure for intelligence management could fail at any stage due to “visible and invisible variables”, which play themselves out in a labyrinth of complexities.

For these reasons, among others, the experts advise that Intelligence received at any stage must be ‘ ‘timely, accurate and understandable” and should take full advantage of the use of the most sophisticated electronic means available in this age.

Prof. Bola Akinterinwa, the acting Director-General of the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), Lagos, underscores the necessity for effective and efficient Intelligence in the country.

He urges all stakeholders in the country’s security circles to come together to brainstorm, to ensure enhanced intelligence-gathering and management, so as to combat emerging terrorism threats in the country.

He stresses that such discussions should aim at educating Nigerians on the roles of the citizens in national security.

“Terrorism is an invisible battle ….. we need to know how to work with Intelligence agencies on providing information on suspects,” he says.

While alluding to the recent killing of Osama bin Laden by the U.S. Navy’s Seals, Akinterinwa said that the incident has generated issues for public discourse, adding that these include a reflection on terrorism and the struggle against global injustice.

“While Osama was considered by some as a terrorist, some others saw him as a martyr. However, what is responsible for his actions are issues that should be critically appraised,” he says.

He urges the Nigerian security agencies’ ‘to learn from the Americans’ strategy on intelligence gathering”.

Rudimentary principles of Intelligence requires that certain things needs to be known by decision makers to set certain requirements, while field operatives must know what to gather and keep.

As a corollary, obtained raw data or information must be evaluated to provide the best possible answers to questions initially asked, while the processed information must be passed on to the authority, who should apply them purposefully to national ends.

By implication, therefore, when decision makers choose to ignore the information conveyed, they court disaster, experts say.

They also add that disasters could also arise when faulty judgments are made by the authority because of inaccurate information.

Erstwhile Inspector General of Police, Mr Ogbonnaya Onovo, once assured, in the immediate aftermath of the Baka Haram crises in 2009, that the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) would “conduct a review of all its intelligence gathering and operational standards in readiness for future challenges”.

How the review has impacted on security challenges of the day, judging by the recent outbursts of violence in some parts of the country, remains a matter for conjecture.

Abubakar Tsav, a former top police boss, once expressed his reservations over the approach of security operatives to crises, in relation to Intelligence gathering.

He then said, in the immediate aftermath of the Baka Haram crisis, that the incident reflected “the failure of Intelligence”.

“In the past, we (Police) had the Special Branch (Intelligence Bureau), which monitored situations and obtained information that were passed to the authorities,” he said.

“The police and other security services have neglected their duties; the Intelligence people seem to only brief the authorities on what they (the authorities) want to hear, so as to be in their good books,” Tsav said.

Besides, the House of Representatives, at one of its plenary sessions, decried the failure of the security services to pre-empt the violence in some parts of the country, which claimed many lives and property.

Rep. Rabe Nasir (PDP-Katsina) and Rep. Aminu Tambuwal (PDP-Sokoto), among others, alleged incompetence on the part of the security agencies for failing to uncover plans by nefarious groups to unleash terror on Nigerians.

Tambuwal alleged that the nation’s security agencies were “on the defensive, instead of being pro-active” in nipping the crises in the bud.

Mr Emmanuel Ojukwu, the former Police Public Relations Officer at the Force Headquarters, once defended the police against allegations of inefficiency, arguing that’ ‘there is no foolproof intelligence anywhere in the world”,

“Security is everyone’s business; if you notice any suspicious situation, report it to the appropriate security authorities, Ojukwu, an Assistant Commissioner of Police, told the citizens.

Observers say that the May 1 capture and killing of Osama bin Laden by the U.S. Navy’s Seals, underscores the need to have an efficient intelligence network in any country.

While the U.S. chided Pakistan for alleged failure of its Intelligence services to detect bin Laden’s hideout in Abbottabad, Pakistan, the Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani vigorously denied any kind of complicity.

Gilani said that it was, an intelligence failure of the whole world, not just that of Pakistan alone,” adding: “If there are lapses …. from the Pakistan side – that means that there are lapses from the whole world”.

He underscored the necessity for inter-state and inter-agency cooperation in Intelligence gathering and management to curtail threats to the entire human society.

However, Sheikh Mohammed Albany, a Zaria-based Islamic scholar, has once praised Nigeria’s security services for effectively tackling the Boko Haram challenge.

“When the Boko Haram movement started its anti-Western onslaught, security services were informed and they took measures to gather Intelligence about the group,” he said.

He, nonetheless, argued that the security reports were conveyed to the political authorities, which, he claimed, decided not to take prompt action on them.

From all these perspectives, however, security analysts say that security challenges of the times call for astute professionalism to ensure efficiency, as part of efforts to safeguard the people’s lives and property as well as the nation’s integrity.

The NPF, the SSS, the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Directorate of Military Intelligence (OM!) are some key institutions that are statutorily saddled with the responsibility of gathering and managing unique kinds of Intelligence.

Specifically, the SSS functions to “ protect and defend the Federal Republic of Nigeria against domestic threats; to uphold and enforce the criminal laws of Nigeria and to provide leadership and criminal justice services to both federal and state law-enforcement organs,” among others.

Perceptive analysts, however, say that in the present age, security outfits which do not engender the support and confidence of the citizens can hardly make any realistic headway in intelligence gathering; hence they must change their public image and perceptions.

Undoubtedly, many citizens view some operatives of the security services with dread, resentment and repulsion, due largely to the overzealous and unfriendly tendencies of some officers.

But reassuringly, Mr Ita Ekpenyong, the new Director-General of SSS, seems to be charting a new course for his agency, on account of his pledge to “expand the frontiers of security management”, in line with the modern trends.

“The frontiers of security management have moved away from the culture of impunity to the friendly frontiers of the rule of law, due process, civility and professionalism,” he said.

Ekpenyong insists: “Democratic changes and their attributes, such as due process, rule of law and respect for human rights, have become very important for us”.

Many analysts agree with his viewpoint at a recent inter-agency workshop for top operatives that’ ‘the services’ operational methods, processes and procedures must change”.

They insist that Nigeria’s security services could still boast of the finest crop of professionals, adding that the security personnel should be encouraged and availed the requisite resources – material and human – to enable them to function proactively, effectively and efficiently.

They, however, acknowledge that Intelligence gathering and management is an expensive and specialized business that gives no room for mediocrity, while failure or timidity of any sort is totally unacceptable, since the consequences could be dire.

In a nutshell, security analysts believe that no resources should be spared by the Federal Government and the security agencies to check incessant violence in the country, so as to engender meaningful national development.

They also re-echo Ekpenyong’s viewpoint on the need for security agencies to respect human dignity and have compassion for the people, while promoting institutional integrity, teamwork, professionalism, resourcefulness and creativity.

Ohain  writes for NAN.

Celsus Ohain