What makes Charlie Hebdo killings special?

Be it the abduction of more than one hundred girls at the Chibok village, the burning down of thousands of houses in a town in Borno state of Nigeria, the abduction of the wife of Amadou Ali and others in northern Cameroon, the killing of twelve staff members of the French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo in Paris, or even the regrettable 9:11 bombings of the world trade business centers in New York, which claimed hundreds of lives in a few seconds, nothing changes the trends from barbaric, brutal and sub human acts to anything grandiose to celebrate. The only uniqueness in all of these is that lives have been lost, which calls for mourning and grief. But what kind of grief anyway.

We are abashed by what turned out to be the grieving and mourning, characterized by such solidarity which attracted more than forty world leaders, including even some African leaders, in whose back yards the threat of Islamic insurgents is lurking.

Last week, France became the weeping child of the world who must be comforted for the killing of twelve individuals who to some may have overstepped their bounds by toying with a sensitive issue such as religion.

While we regret the brutal killings of our French colleagues, we cannot avoid asking the question, “what makes the killing of Charlie Hebdo journalists more compelling than, other terrorist’s gruesome killings involving the beheading of victims?” We saw how Benin’s president openly wept while attending the French organised protest march, when around him, he is surrounded by the threats of Islamic extremists in Nigeria, Central African Republic Cameroon etc.

We can only put the Charlie Hebdo killings among other similar bloody incidents around the world and list it as an act of terrorism which the international community must collectively fight, instead of magnifying specific situations, such as the Charlie Hebdo case.

We find it pertinent to turn our attention to our own case, which we genuinely believe is a problem nearest our heart. We salute the Chadian President and consider him as a good neighbour, who has not only pledged to send troops to Cameroon to help fight Boko Haram, but has equally promised to be part of the struggle, since it follows the adage that “when you see elephants on your neighbour’s farm destroying his crops, rest assured that the next step could be yours”.

We appreciate the efforts of the Cameroon armed forces for their performance in repulsing the insurgents in the northern part of the country. The Chadian President’s gesture is a moral boosting move, which we think will yield positive results.

We, however, cannot understand our neighbour, Nigeria’s approach to the fight against Boko Haram which was born and continues to grow within the Nigerian territory. Yet that country has continued to stay aloof with the realities.

The greatest surprise is that the strength of Boko Haram tends to grow so rapidly, that town after town is falling into their hands and under the watchful and inactive eye of the Nigeria military. We tend to agree with cynics that the insurgency has been turned into an election issue, but how it does find a place in that context is what erodes our imagination.

For the first time President Jonathan was in Maiduguri where he is reported to have signed a non-violence pact with his rival at the polls, Retired General Buhari. Whatever this means is unclear to many, including Nigerians themselves.

Having shed tears in France, our wish is that the world should join Cameroon, who are seen to be single-handedly blocking the advance of Boko Haram. Victory is sure if the same zeal and courage being demonstrated by Cameroon, can be followed by the African Union, the United Nations and other organisations that recognise the insurgence as a threat that, if allowed to grow, will regrettably become a global threat. Let’s hope it does not get there.