Garba Shehu, media aide to Nigeria’s President, Muhammadu Buhari, has shed more light on comments he made in the wake of the recent massacre of innocent farmers in Borno state by marauding Boko Haram terrorists in the area that appeared to “justify” those killings.
It will be recalled that this past weekend, Boko Haram terrorists who are known to operate in the area killed at least 43 farm workers and injured six in rice fields located near the village of Koshobe, on the outskirts of Maiduguri, the Borno State capital. The terrorists who are known to oppose Western values, particularly Western education, tied up the unwary agricultural workers and slit their throats.
In the aftermath of those attacks, Shehu, spokesman of the Nigerian President, had said none of the farmers had received clearance from the Nigerian military to farm in the area, which is known as a hotbed of Boko Haram activity. His comments were seen as a justification of the farmers’ killings by the Boko Haram terrorists and prompted an immediate backlash.
Offering a clarification through Twitter, Shehu said his statement was misinterpreted, adding that as a human being “with tons of compassion and empathy”, he could not have said that the victims deserved their fate for ignoring security clearance.
Shehu, according to his Twitter thread, said “Today, I found myself leading the trends in the social media for the wrong reasons. The State of Borno is essentially a military zone up till now that we are talking and much of what people do; much of where they go are governed by the exigencies of security.
“Routinely, traders, administration officials and even UN agencies get the green light to go to many of the areas to avoid trouble. Information from security agencies says that the Zabarmari marshlands are infested with land mines and movements in and around those areas are subject to military oversight. No one is delighted with the massacre in Zabarmari and there is nothing anybody will gain by playing blame games.
Said Shehu: “The question I tried to answer on BBC was: did the security sign off on the area as being free of mines and terrorists? The honest answer is, no. I’m a human with tons of compassion and empathy, and could not have said that the victims deserved their fate for ignoring security clearance.
“I was merely explaining the mode of military operations in the war zone of the Northeast. There are areas that are still volatile that require security clearance which is intended to put people out of harm’s way.
“When tragedies occur, questions arise in terms of how something happened in order to avoid future recurrence. Informing the military of our movements in an area of volatility and uncertainty is intended to preserve public safety. Explaining why something happened doesn’t mean I have no sympathy for the victims. I was just explaining the military procedures on the safe movement of the people and not supporting the death of the victims.”