Has the fight against terrorism become a permanent source of income for government officials?

The increasing spread of terrorism in our world today is both appalling and indeed alarming. President Good luck Jonathan of Nigeria was reported to have told the UN general assembly this week that 13,000 lives have been lost to the terrorist group Boko-haram over the years in Nigeria. In Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Pakistan, and in recent times Kenya amongst others, terrorism has been on the rise and it would appear there is no immediate end in sight. Whilst the efforts of these countries and their foreign counterparts in fighting terrorism may appear commendable, it does appear that some unscrupulous elements would rather not see this scourge go away too quickly.

Take Nigeria for example, huge sums of money are being budgeted and spent annually on security. It is widely known that such funds are a good way to launder money and foster corruption if not properly checked. Nobody wants to speak about how security funds are spent, or at least, not in the public domain. If this is the case, then it is no surprise that a state of insecurity is bound to favor elements within the government as well as individual contractors who benefit from these huge security votes in the purchase of security hardware, rehabilitation of victims of insecurity and the securing of territories prone to attacks. It is one thing to budget and allocate for security whilst it is another to ensure that security votes are used exactly as appropriated. As such, the national assembly must not shy away from the responsibility of probing how security votes are spent.

Another issue puzzles me. Nigerian officials say that the US will not sell arms to it because of certain unfavorable human rights reports leveled against it. If this is the case, then someone needs to explain to me how logical it is that terrorists who kill indiscriminately do have access to arms and ammunition (whatever their sources) while a seating government is denied military hardware needed to fight them. This is not to say that i do support human rights abuses, but there should be other ways to checkmate these abuses if proven right. In fact, countries serious about fighting this menace need to tighten border controls to stop arms and ammunition from reaching terrorists and effectively cut off their sources of financing. I understand that identifying and blocking sources of financing is a heinous task, but governments need to be seen to be sincerely and assiduously working towards achieving this.

Whilst it may be too harsh to presume that seating government officials or elements within it will allow insecurity thrive for financial gains, governments must recognize that the fight against terrorism presents a full time business opportunity to many within and outside it. It must be seen to be transparent in the vote and usage of security funds whilst understanding that lives depend on it and that monies wasted could have been properly channeled into other productive sectors of their economies.