Daily Justice

In the wake of devastating terrorist attacks in India and Nigeria, the responses from their respective governments highlight a profound disparity in leadership, priorities, and respect for their citizens.

India’s Decisive Response to Tragedy

About two days ago, a terrorist attack allegedly originating from Pakistan claimed the lives of 29 people on Indian soil. The Indian government, led by the Prime Minister, acted swiftly and decisively:

Immediate Return: The Prime Minister cut short a state visit to Saudi Arabia to return home and address the crisis.

Diplomatic Measures: The government suspended the Indus Water Treaty, a significant move signalling strained relations with Pakistan.

Border Closure: The Attari-Wagah border, a symbolic point of connection, was closed to underscore India’s stance.

Visa Cancellations: All SAARC visas for Pakistani nationals were revoked, limiting cross-border movement.

Defence Realignments: Defence advisers were recalled, further isolating military cooperation.

Expulsion of Diplomats: Pakistani diplomats were ordered to leave India, marking a severe diplomatic rebuke.

These actions reflect a government prioritising national security and the dignity of its citizens, sending a clear message that such attacks will not be tolerated.

Nigeria’s Troubling Inaction

In contrast, Nigeria faced a series of brutal terrorist attacks that killed over 150 citizens. President Bola Tinubu, who was in Paris at the time, responded in a manner that has drawn widespread criticism:

Extended Absence: Instead of returning to Nigeria to lead the response, Tinubu extended his stay abroad, relocating from Paris to London.

Repeated Rhetoric: The government issued multiple statements proclaiming “Enough is Enough,” a phrase repeated ad nauseam without accompanying action or policy measures.

The absence of substantive steps—such as enhanced security protocols, international cooperation, or even the President’s presence in Nigeria—has led to questions about the government’s commitment to its people. The repetitive, hollow declarations of “Enough is Enough” have done little to console a grieving nation or deter further attacks.

A Verdict on Leadership

The contrasting responses underscore a fundamental difference in governance. India’s proactive measures demonstrate a government that values its citizens, both living and deceased, and is willing to take bold steps to protect them. Nigeria’s response, marked by absence and empty rhetoric, suggests a leadership disconnected from the suffering of its people. Critics argue this raises a troubling question: Is there effective governance in Nigeria at all?