“They Are Part of Us”: Sheikh Gumi’s Call for Coexistence Rekindles Nigeria’s Herdsmen Debate

Islamic cleric Sheikh Ahmad Gumi has once again stirred national conversation after declaring that herdsmen are not leaving Nigeria and that the country must find a way to live with them peacefully. Speaking against the backdrop of years of violent clashes, deep mistrust, and polarised public opinion, Gumi described herdsmen as an inseparable part of Nigeria’s social fabric, urging Nigerians to embrace coexistence rather than hostility.

According to the cleric, herdsmen are deeply embedded in the country’s history and economy, having existed long before modern Nigeria came into being. He argued that attempts to wish them away, expel them, or treat them as outsiders ignore historical realities and only worsen tensions. “Herdsmen are going nowhere. They are part of us, and we are part of them. We must learn to live together and should never become enemies with them,” Gumi said, a statement that has since drawn both praise and fierce criticism across social and traditional media.

Nigeria has for years grappled with recurring conflicts between nomadic herders and farming communities, particularly in the Middle Belt and parts of southern Nigeria. These clashes, often triggered by disputes over land, water, and grazing routes, have resulted in thousands of deaths, the destruction of farmlands and villages, and the displacement of entire communities. While criminal elements have exploited the situation through banditry, kidnappings, and cattle rustling, the broader herder-farmer conflict has become one of the country’s most emotionally charged security challenges.

Sheikh Gumi’s position is not new. Over the years, he has consistently advocated dialogue with armed groups, including bandits and herders, arguing that understanding their grievances is key to resolving insecurity. He has maintained that painting all herdsmen as criminals is both unfair and dangerous, warning that such generalisation fuels ethnic profiling and deepens national divisions. In his view, many herdsmen are themselves victims of neglect, climate change, and poor governance, pushed into desperate situations as grazing lands shrink and traditional migration routes disappear.

Supporters of Gumi’s comments say his message reflects a hard truth Nigeria must confront. They argue that pastoralism remains a legitimate livelihood for millions of Nigerians, particularly among Fulani communities, and that banning or demonising herdsmen without providing alternatives is unrealistic. For them, coexistence means investing in long-term solutions such as ranching, grazing reserves, conflict mediation mechanisms, and inclusive policies that address both farmers’ and herders’ concerns.

Some analysts also note that climate change has intensified competition for land and water across the Sahel, pushing herders further south in search of pasture. As desertification advances in northern Nigeria, herders are increasingly forced into farming regions, where weak land governance and population growth heighten the risk of conflict. From this perspective, Gumi’s call for understanding is seen as a reminder that the crisis is as much environmental and economic as it is ethnic or religious.

However, critics argue that Gumi’s statements downplay the pain and anger of communities that have borne the brunt of herdsmen-related violence. For many victims, calls for coexistence sound hollow without justice, accountability, and security. They accuse the cleric of appearing to excuse criminality by framing the issue solely around tolerance, while armed attacks, kidnappings, and killings continue unabated in some rural areas.

Civil society groups have also questioned whether coexistence can be achieved in the absence of strong state action. They argue that peaceful living requires clear laws, effective policing, and the disarming of criminal groups masquerading as herders. Without these, they say, urging communities to simply “learn to live together” risks placing the burden of peace on victims rather than on the state and perpetrators of violence.

The debate has also reignited broader discussions about identity and belonging in Nigeria. Gumi’s insistence that herdsmen are “part of us” challenges narratives that portray them as foreigners or invaders. In recent years, claims that armed herders are non-Nigerians crossing porous borders have gained traction, particularly amid rising insecurity. While security agencies have acknowledged cross-border movements, experts caution that framing the crisis as an “outsider invasion” oversimplifies a complex problem and fuels xenophobia.

Government responses to the herder-farmer crisis have varied over time, ranging from the creation of grazing reserves and livestock transformation plans to state-level bans on open grazing. These measures have produced mixed results, often hindered by poor implementation, lack of funding, and political resistance. As a result, the issue remains unresolved, continuing to test Nigeria’s unity and governance capacity.

Sheikh Gumi’s comments come at a time when national cohesion is under strain from economic hardship, insecurity, and mistrust in institutions. His message of coexistence, while controversial, taps into a broader question Nigerians must confront: how to manage diversity and competing livelihoods in a country of over 200 million people. Whether one agrees with him or not, his remarks have forced the issue back into public discourse, compelling Nigerians to reflect on whether the current cycle of blame and retaliation offers any real path forward.

For some, the cleric’s words represent an uncomfortable but necessary reminder that peace cannot be achieved through exclusion or collective punishment. For others, they highlight the gap between elite dialogue and grassroots realities, where fear and trauma remain raw. As reactions continue to pour in, one thing is clear: the herdsmen debate is far from over, and simple slogans will not resolve a crisis rooted in decades of neglect, environmental pressure, and weak governance.

In the end, Sheikh Gumi’s assertion that “we must learn to live together” poses a challenge to both the state and citizens. It raises the question of whether Nigeria can move beyond mutual suspicion to build systems that allow farmers and herders to coexist safely and productively. Until that question is answered with concrete action, his words will continue to resonate, provoke, and divide, reflecting the unresolved tensions at the heart of Nigeria’s struggle for peace and unity.