If he had led from the comfort of his presidential lodges, chances are that the rebels who eventually killed him today, wouldn’t have seen him not to talk of targeting him.
Idris Deby, a sit-tight leader alright, was the type of leader that was sure primed to die in action. He led from the front and was always embedded within troops’ formations wherever Chadians soldiers were fighting to either ward off attackers be they rebels or insurgents, or launching attacks to take the fight to enemy locations to either smoke them out or to simply underline capacity to defend territory.
If he had ruled like most leaders in Africa do, by cocooning themselves in their comfort zones, never venturing out to expose themselves to danger, the story, will perhaps be different.
He knew that he was vulnerable, but was, nonetheless prepared to die, to keep his county safe.
With one of the best-trained fighters on the African continent, the late Deby who was on the verge of winning another term as President of Chad had put in close to thirty years in power as President.
He had sat tight, ruling with an iron fist, not taking prisoners, often branded as ruthless and mean, Idriss Deby who was killed in a gunfight when rebels attacked the Capital on Tuesday, had succeeded in securing his country against all forms of violent crimes that are today the bane of many so-called multi-party democracies especially in Africa.
Not too long ago, he led his troops from the front, to attack Boko Haram positions after the insurgents launched daring and audacious attack on Chadian soldiers killing nearly 100 of them.
The expedition paid off handsomely. Chad succeeded in undermining its capacity to take the war on its enemies.
It taught the insurgents a hard lesson and proved that it can defend itself against aggression from all quarters.
One lesson about Deby’s type of sit-tightism is that it was able to secure the country very effectively.
Of what use, is, for example, Nigerien type of multi-party politics, if the country cannot save itself from the marauding bandits and insurgents that are daily exposing the weaknesses and helplessness of the country?
Of what use is Nigeria’s if we cannot borrow a leaf from a poor Chad to make it unattractive for common bandits to corner territories, administer them, collect taxes and stop farmers from assessing their farmlands?
Of what use is any type of governance if it is powerless in the face of insurgent activities that have overwhelmed the country’s armed forces for over ten years and with no discernible ability to curtail such crimes?
Of what use is any type of democracy that could not apply the law effectively to secessionists who openly launch break away agendas and still walk the streets freely with some air of entitlement around them?
Which type of leadership would you prepare? Is it our type of democracy where the streets and the bushes are ruled by bandits, insurgents and their ilk or a Chadians sit tight leadership that guarantees security for all?
Adieu, Idriss Itno Deby, the leader who the bad boys fear.