Address at Roundtable on Herdsmen/Farmers Clashes and Border Security in North-East Zone,
April 16, 1998.

I would like to welcome you all – discussants and the audience – to the first session of the Roundtable Discussions on herdsmen/farmers clashes and border security in the North-East Zone.

At the plenary sessions yesterday, papers were presented on the general conflict situation in the zone, and the role of modern and traditional methods of managing them. No doubt, that must have given us the right and relevant background for the business of the day. While plenary sessions take a general and holistic view, the session today is going to consider in-depth and in greater detail the perennial clashes between nomadic pastoralists and sedentary farmers and the question of border security. Needless to say, the clashes between the growers of our food and the providers of our protein is too important to be left to pure chance to solve or settle. Doing that is fraught with dangers for our long-term food security and social harmony. We must, with all sense of seriousness, plan well and evolve a strategy to bring an end to the clashes as swiftly as possible.

Farmers and herdsmen fight over water and land, which they must share because there isn’t enough of either to go round and satisfy everyone. And unfortunately since we have no way of increasing either land or water, the only way to solve the problem is by better management and having an acceptable sharing formula. Our task, after fully identifying and examining the nature of the conflicts, is to find ways of ensuring equity for the parties to the conflict. Anything less will only postpone the dreaded day. Inevitably, therefore, our deliberations and discussions must find a way that can guarantee access to the land and water for both parties. To the farmers we must guarantee security to farmlands and farm produce and access to water for irrigation. To the herdsmen, we must guarantee permanent stock routes for their cattle and access to watering places.

On the question of border security, the first requirement for peace to prevail is to make alien infiltrators see our preparedness and readiness to demonstrate it in the defence of our territorial integrity. The second requirement is to exercise effective control over all our ports of entry, especially in regions where clashes had occurred, or where the threat to do so exists. The third requirement is for us to place a high enough value on the lives of our citizens who live at the receiving end of aggression at our borders. In both the issue of clashes and security at borders, traditional methods of conflict resolution, which are adaptable to our situation now, promise much dividends if we will only give them a try. There is enough in traditional wisdom to help us regulate, manage and resolve all nature of disputes that occur at the local level.

I do not wish to take away all your valuable discussion time with endless observations, which I better reserve till my closing remarks. However, before I conclude, I would like to urge you to note the tightness of our schedule this morning. I urge you to make your point as clearly and as quickly as you can so that we can cover and do justice to the twin issues of herdsmen/farmers clashes and border security.
Thank you very much.

Closing Remarks After The Roundtable:

In addition to the points you made during the discussions, I wish to suggest that most of our prescriptions this morning are long-term measures geared towards providing pastoralists with land and tenural rights including free and safe access. However, a solution to the tense short-term situation must be found very quickly. The crux of the matter between herdsmen and farmers revolves around crops and crop residue damage and the need for livestock to have adequate access to water. A way must therefore be found to ensure adequate supply of water as well as a sufficient supply of fodder for livestock. One way to minimise clashes over crops is to ensure that cattle traffic is timed to allow farmers enough time to remove their crops from the farms. In Niger Republic, for instance, all traditional and community leaders are involved in ensuring that the cattle movement is timed and controlled. Violations are severely dealt with, which perhaps explains why conflicts seldom ever take place in Niger Republic despite the longer dry season there. In the meantime too, the North-East Arid Zone Development Programme and the states’ agricultural development programmes can, through consultative forum, as a matter of urgency, pressure the federal government to amend the Land Use Decree 1978 to meet the demands of Fulani herdsmen, and help them acquire the 5000 hectares allowed by the decree for the purposes of grazing. We have now come to the end of the session of our Roundtable Discussions. But before I conclude I would like to intimate you of the intervention the Petroleum (Special) Trust Fund (PTF) has planned for this sector in order to help in solving the problem of herdsmen/farmers clashes. The package is quite elaborate and has addressed all the relevant issues. It is as follows: PTF Intervention:

It is against this background that the PTF is supporting a programme to assist in the immediate rehabilitation of agricultural and livestock production facilities including a comprehensive Pastoralist Development Programme, PDP, aimed at:

i. Rehabilitating two grazing reserves per each PDP state;
ii. Rehabilitating 12,525 km of stock routes nationwide;
iii. Establishing a Pastoralist Advisory Team to promote sustainable livestock production and reduction of incidences of crop farmer/pastoralist conflict.

The project will involve the identification, survey, demarcation, gazetting and rehabilitation of strategically selected grazing reserves nationwide to sustain pastoralist areas.

Existing infrastructure within grazing reserves proposed for rehabilitation will include:

· Pasture
· Water supply
· Schools
· Clinics
· Access roads

This will complement provision of agricultural inputs, veterinary services and other incentives to the pastoralists as well as crop farmers.

Implementation Strategy:

(a) Project Formulation.
i. The Fund has developed operational modalities for the implementation of the programme. These will include the training, monitoring and coordination of activities of various teams which will be appointed, to ensure timely execution of the programme.
ii. The Fund will also provide all the necessary expert advice throughout the implementation period through its appointed consultants.
(b) Sustainability
i. To ensure smooth and sustainable operation of the pastoralist programme, three different teams will be formed as follows:
· Pastoralist Advisory Team (PAT)
· Grazing Reserves Team (GRT)
· Stock Route Team (SRT)
ii. These would be formed in each state of the federation under the supervision of state project consultants and the national monitoring and advisory consultants.

These teams will comprise officials and representatives of state ministries of agriculture and natural resources, local government, traditional authorities, pastoralists, farmers and relevant security agencies. It will be the responsibility of these three teams to provide guidance on grazing reserve, boundary demarcation and beaconing, and all protocol regarding relocation of those who have encroached within each grazing reserve. In addition to these, the pastoralist advisory team will assist in the monitoring of the rehabilitation works on the grazing reserves. Once rehabilitation has taken place satisfactorily, the end-users are expected to bear the cost of maintenance with advice from the pastoralist advisory team.

Similarly, after the rehabilitation project, the teams will be vested with the responsibility of identifying and re-opening existing stock routes, identification of encroachment on stock routes and the training of stock routes’ overseers for sustainability.

Therefore, it is envisaged that the pastoralist advisory team will be of considerable value to the pastoral community in each state to sustainably operate and maintain the rehabilitated facilities.

Beneficiary Participation and Counterpart Contribution: The states, as part of their counterpart contribution to the PTF intervention, are expected to undertake the immediate gazetting of grazing reserves and stock routes which interlink these reserves, thus reducing the frequency of conflict between the crop farmers and pastoralists. This is expected to be carried out in close liaison with the traditional rulers, in addition to relocating those who have already encroached into these facilities. This is a pre-requisite for the Fund’s intervention as no rehabilitation will take place until the PTF is assured that the grazing reserves and stock routes are gazetted, protected by law and free from all encumbrances.

The Pastoralist Development Programme emphasises community participatory approach for sustainability. Therefore state governments are expected to second personnel and enforce all the grazing reserves and stock route laws.

The relevant federal government agencies on their part would monitor the movement of the transhuman pastoralists from neighbouring countries. This, we believe, will go a long way in addressing the crop farmer/pastoralist conflicts in particular, and enhance peaceful co-existence in Nigeria in general.

Border Security
The north east zone borders three African countries – Niger, Cameroun and Chad. The protracted civil war in Chad which has lasted more than three decades has had a devastating security effect on conflict situation in Nigeria. The Borno area bordering Chad has been a haven for run away Chadian rebels who have established their camps in some Nigerian villages close to Mallam-Fatori in Abadam local government area, mounting road blocks along viable commercial routes where they often harass and extort large sums of money from Nigerian citizens. Sometimes in the pursuit of Chadian rebels, Chadian federal troops occasionally cross into Nigeria. This often leads to confrontation which results in the loss of lives and property of invaded part of Borno State and destroyed a village in Magumeri Local Government Area in search of Chadian rebels.

In addition, the Turbo rebel elements from Niger Republic often infiltrate Nigeria through the Borno State border. The Turbo tribesmen are known for their blood curdling attacks on Nigerians who transact business in village markets spread across Abadam, Gubio, Mobar and Nganzi local government areas. Also, Camerounian gendarmes and Chadian rebels have continued to terrorise Nigerians at border towns, killing them and carting away their property. They operate as armed bandits and are difficult to contain.

We are now faced with the following questions:
1. How do we address the problems of the infiltration of Udawa herdsmen into Nigeria? 2. In what ways can we tackle the problems being faced by both Nigerian herdsmen and farmers over (farming and grazing) land?
3. How do we tackle the problem of border security posed from neighbouring countries? 4. How do we contain the menace of armed banditry in the zone? 5. What is the role of individuals, security operatives, community and government in resolving these contending conflicts?