Certainly, religion is one of the many dividing lines in Jos and elsewhere in Nigeria. But it is not the main one.
In Jos, as elsewhere, the cause of fighting has, more often been the struggle for resources than it has religion. In Jos, my AFP colleague Aminu Abubakar reports that the original cause of the latest clash was the alleged theft of cattle, blamed by a group of settler-farmers on a group of cattle herders. Often the fighting in the north is between the semi-nomadic cattle herders (who happen to be mostly Muslim) and settler-farmers (who happen to be mostly Christian), fighting about the diminishing access to land.
“For all those who will go out and fight their Muslim or Christian brothers on the streets, there are many more (Nigerians) who will take them into their home to protect them, when fighting breaks out,” a Nigerian Islamic law student once told me, attending an animist festival in the south.
The reason these conflicts turn deadly in Nigeria is not any greater degree of religious animosity there than elsewhere, however much exists. The reason is poor government: one that fails to send in troops early enough to quell trouble when it flares and never jails those responsible when it is over. Mediation of disputes is too often left to others, too.
Amazing how often when violence flares up in Jos there is someone claiming the discord has little to do with religion. A colleague of mine, from a village near Jos has a different opinion. Before she left Nigeria 15 years ago, she said they had to have guards standing at the doors of their church during services to alert the congregation to flee ahead of gangs of Muslim young men with sticks and machetes. I don’t know how often this occurred, but often enough to have people stationed as look outs. In her view the Muslims want nothing less than to drive out, kill, or convert the Christian population and nothing less will satisfy them.
I’m sure the problems are exacerbated by economic rivalry and government ineptude. But the greatest source of strife sure seems to be religious in nature.
Incidentally, you can find this Guardian story under the RI – Islam tab – it was no longer under the RI- Christianity tab.
This strikes me as an effort to provide cover for religious violence. It simply does not agree with all the many reports that [i]do[/i] appear under the RI-Christianity tab. Even the WSJ posting above contradicts the Guardian’s perspective. What is it among some of those in the MSM that motivates them to downplay such violence? Is the narrative [i]so[/i] very important that the truth must suffer?
🙄