Reconciliation beats division, by Engr. Bello Gwarzo Abdullahi, FNSE
Unsurprisingly, the formation of the Northern Reconciliation Group (NRG) has attracted widespread attention, along with a wave of speculation about the motives behind it. That reaction, however, should not distract from a simple and enduring truth: reconciliation remains one of the most effective tools for building unity in deeply diverse societies. Importantly, reconciliation should not be viewed only through a narrow legal or constitutional lens. Across our communities, we have long relied on traditional and cultural methods of conflict resolution—methods that prioritise dialogue, forgiveness, and the restoration of relationships, and which have proven their worth over generations.
As has been rightly observed, we have wronged one another, and the time has come to forgive and rediscover the bonds of brotherhood and sisterhood that once defined our coexistence. This call could not be timelier. At a moment when religious tension and mistrust continue to threaten social cohesion, collective effort and goodwill are urgently needed to restore harmony and peaceful coexistence.
Seen in this light, the NRG’s engagement with the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) and Jama’atu Nasril Islam (JNI) should surprise no one familiar with Nigeria’s long history of internal divisions—and with how easily religious, ethnic, or regional differences are manipulated for narrow interests. Experience shows that whenever sincere efforts are made to build bridges, familiar voices emerge to cast doubt, question intentions, and spread cynicism. The pattern is predictable, and the outcome is often the same: divisions are preserved, while those who thrive on discord remain comfortable.
READ ALSO: Sule Lamido, coalition, and 2027, by Engr. Bello Gwarzo Abdullahi, FNSE
Nigeria’s situation, however, is not unique. Societies around the world contend with internal disagreements. What separates stable and progressive nations from fragile ones is not the absence of conflict, but the ability to manage differences constructively. Constitutions and policies provide essential frameworks, but they do not implement themselves. Real progress depends on leadership, goodwill, and human agency. To reject reconciliation simply because conditions are not “perfect” is to misunderstand how healing actually begins. Commitment, not perfection, is always the starting point.
Critics argue that the current reconciliation effort is ill-timed, insincere, or dismissive of truth, justice, accountability, and constitutional order. These concerns are legitimate and deserve serious engagement. Yet they should not be used as blunt instruments to shut down dialogue entirely. Reconciliation does not replace justice; it can, in fact, create the conditions under which justice and accountability are more likely to be pursued calmly and credibly.
Beyond semantics, the larger reality is that optimism must be sustained and historical perspective preserved. There have been moments in our collective past when diversity was managed through dialogue, accommodation, and restraint. Those lessons remain relevant. Endless blame rarely heals societies; more often, it deepens wounds and hardens positions.
While constitutional failures—particularly the state’s shortcomings in protecting lives and welfare—must be acknowledged, legal arguments alone cannot repair broken relationships. Constitutional fidelity is essential, but it is not sufficient. Soft approaches such as dialogue, courtesy visits, symbolic gestures, and confidence-building measures play a crucial role in de-escalation and trust-building. Unity is forged not only through laws and institutions, but through sustained human interaction.
Questions of timing and sincerity should not become rigid barriers that invalidate every outreach effort. Circumstances evolve, and a more constructive approach is to ask how such initiatives can be improved, guided, and held to standards of inclusiveness and good faith. Dialogue should be refined, not rejected.
READ ALSO: Nigeria in Crisis: Unite or falter, by Engr. Bello Gwarzo Abdullahi, FNSE
The hard truth is this: Nigeria is too diverse, too fragile, and too interconnected for suspicion to remain our default mindset. Muslims, Christians, and the many ethnic nationalities of this country share common struggles—insecurity, poverty, illiteracy, unemployment—and a shared desire for dignity, peace, and progress.
Anyone genuinely working to reduce tension, promote peaceful coexistence, and rebuild trust across religious and ethnic lines should be encouraged rather than demonised. Encouragement does not mean blind acceptance; it means engagement in good faith, constructive criticism, and a firm insistence on sincerity, without closing the door to dialogue. Unity is not naïveté. Unity is strategy.
Nigeria’s future will not be secured by waiting for ideal conditions, clinging to rigid legalism, or nurturing permanent suspicion. It will be secured when courage replaces cynicism, engagement replaces isolation, and hope replaces grievance. Sincere reconciliation is not a weakness; it is a necessity. In a nation as plural as ours, unity among Muslims, Christians, and all ethnic nationalities is not optional—it is existential.
Written by Engr. Bello Gwarzo Abdullahi, FNSE.
Email: bgabdullahi@gmail.com
Follow the Neptune Prime channel on WhatsApp:
Do you have breaking news, interview request, opinion, suggestion, or want your event covered? Email us at neptuneprime2233@gmail.com
