The most
discussed subject in Nigeria today is what is called “restructuring” and indeed
so popular is this subject that it has attracted the attention of roadside
commentators, the
bright, the not-so-bright, the mischievous and the outrightly
unintelligent all united by the singular claim that Nigeria belongs to all of
us and we all have a right to determine its future.
The last person who brought up this subject
with me is a mechanic in Abeokuta! He had heard about Biafra, the Arewa youths,
the President’s absence, Professor Osinbajo, Nnamdi Kanu, what Igbo leaders,
Northern leaders and Yoruba leaders have said about restructuring and he wanted
a conversation. That’s how democracy works, not so? The inclusiveness is actually very good for
us…
But the point
I have always made stands proven: that Nigeria remains an unanswered question,
more than a century after the amalgamation of 1914. Before and after
independence, virtually every government has had to deal with this same
question, viz, the national question. Brought together in an unwieldy, unequal
and uneven union by the British, Nigeria’s about 400 ethnic nationalities have
been unable to transform into one nation, one union, a community of people and
communities driven by a common purpose - to create a united, progressive
nation, under the umbrella of patriotism and the common good.
We have
fought each other since 1950 to date, we did not even all agree on
independence, and
since that
happened, we have been at each other’s throats. We ended up fighting a civil
war, and from all indications we are at this moment, seemingly preparing for
another one. The laziest excuse is that the British caused all our problems,
but more than 50 years after independence it should be clear enough that we are
the source of our collective agony.
Other
countries who were at the same level with us in 1960 have since moved on and
developed into better nations despite their own internal contradictions.
Nigerian leaders have perpetually lived in denial. Every step forward has
resulted in our country taking two steps backwards. A combination of the
big-man-syndrome, the too-know syndrome, the us-before-others-mentality, ethnic
politics, sectarian politics, greed, cronyism and a terrible leadership
recruitment process has turned our process of nationhood into an unending
struggle. Today, fewer Nigerians believe in the idea of Nigeria.
In 1977/78,
the Constituent Assembly whose deliberations resulted in the 1979 Constitution
almost ended with fisticuffs. The 2005 National Political Reforms Conference did not fare better either, as the
Niger Delta conferees staged a walk-out and the politics of Third Term or no
Third Term sabotaged the entire process. In 2014, the outcomes of yet another
National Conference could not be followed through because a succeeding
administration declared it would not even look at the report. At every stage when it looks as if this
country is faced with an opportunity to address the national question, certain
interest groups erect the roadblocks of denial and wishful thinking. No country
can live perpetually in denial. This is
the message of former Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union and their disintegration.
As for the military, they merely worsened Nigerian politics.
Fifty years
after the outbreak of the civil war, we now have a man called Nnamdi Kanu. He
may well end up as Nigeria’s nemesis. He is the most frightening product of our
many years and acts of denial and he may well throw the country into a
nightmare worse than Boko Haram, if care is not taken. He started out as the
leader of a group called the Indigenous People of Biafra and as director of
Radio Biafra.
He and those who bought
into his rhetoric of secession and the renewal of the Biafra dream organized
protests across the world, and they looked, from afar, like a group of
disgruntled Nigerians in diaspora. In the foreign lands where most of the
members lived, they looked like persons over-enjoying the freedom of speech
from a safe distance. They didn’t appear to have the force of MASSOB, which is
locally based and seemingly more malleable.
The renewed struggle for Biafra that Kanu and his crowd talked about
could have been nothing more than an internet and television revolution. But
everything went wrong the moment Nnamdi Kanu chose to visit home and he was
arrested, detained and taken through a court trial.
Whoever
ordered Nnamdi Kanu’s arrest and prosecution did this country a bad turn. Kanu
is a character that could have been better ignored. His trial and travails have
turned him into a hero and a living martyr among Igbos. And the young man so
far, understands the game. Since he was released on bail, he has been taunting
the Nigerian state and government. Daily, he dares those who granted him bail
and he laughs at the conditions they gave him. He associates with more than 10
persons. He moves about Igboland freely, like a spirit. He addresses rallies
and grants interviews. He has been busy
issuing statements. On May 30, he ordered a shut-down of the entire South Eastern
region and that order was obeyed not only in the South East but also in parts
of the South-South, and Abuja.
Nnamdi Kanu
who probably barely struggled to survive as a black man in Europe, has been
turned by the Nigerian Government into a credible apostle of a resurgent
Biafran revolution. The other day when he held a meeting in Umuahia, over 5,000
persons trooped to his compound. Kanu is
a master of symbolism. He is exploiting the Jewish symbol: to signal to the
world that Igbos are being persecuted. He visits symbolic sites of the civil
war to prick the injured part of the Igbo consciousness and mobilise the
people. His pre-eminence is a comment on the quality of the state and its
strategic intelligence system. If he succeeds with his threats, we should know
those to blame. A few days ago, someone on social media further compared him to
Jesus Christ and described him as the true saviour. Every revolutionary in
history graduates from ordinariness to being messianic, propelled by opiumized
endorsement.
Nnamdi Kanu
is certainly capable of doing more damage to the system than the MASSOB, OPC,
and such other groups, and should he push things further, he could ignite a
crisis worse than Boko Haram. My gut feeling is that some people in certain
places are beginning to realize this and that is why Nnamdi Kanu out of
detention appears untouchable; it is the reason he is able to dare the state,
and ridicule his bail conditions. The lesson here is obvious enough: the brazen
use of force and intimidation to deal with certain situations could create
really bad unintended consequences.
The Federal
Government under Acting President Yemi Osinbajo has been holding meetings with
key stakeholders within the Federation. The consultations are in order, but the
Acting President is yet to talk to the right people. He is talking to people who carry their
international passports in their pockets because they don’t know what tomorrow
promises in Nigeria. He is consulting persons whose family members are mostly
one-leg-in-one-leg-out Nigerians; many of them in fact have dual nationality.
Nigeria is their trading post, the place where they make the money they and
their children spend in Dubai, UK and wherever.
The people
the Federal Government should be talking to are the angry Igbo youths who now
kneel down to greet Nnamdi Kanu and call him their god, the Arewa youths who
have told the Igbos to get out of Nigeria and get away, and who have called the
Yoruba names while further insisting that they are not afraid of the Nigerian
government arresting them. The people to talk to are the leaders of the various
other groups who are taking sides. Leaders of the Middle Belt and the South
South are holding talks; some Yorubas are planning to hold theirs this week in
Ibadan. Draw the map of the emerging rhetoric in Nigeria today; what you have
is a divided country. The scenario is so painfully reminiscent of the early
60s. Every Nigerian leader since the civil war has boasted that he would not
preside over the dismemberment of Nigeria. Some of those leaders have suddenly
started saying restructuring is the answer, how nice!- the same restructuring
they never wanted and that they didn’t want as at 2015.
Crisis
management is an important part of nation-building. We have failed to manage
most of the crises that have befallen our nation, on a sustainable basis, and
that is why every proverbial snake that is killed suddenly resurrects. It is
the reason we have produced a country where the population of the aggrieved
appears to be growing daily. It is the
reason Nnamdi Kanu and his followers have become the fish-bone in the throat of
government. As things stand, there is no
stronger voice in Igboland today than that of Nnamdi Kanu. The Igbo elites and
the self-styled political leaders of the East know that Kanu is more
influential than all of them put together. How many among them can command a
willing crowd of 5, 000 to their doorsteps? The politicians hire crowds, but
the crowds go to Kanu and obey him.
With the kind
of influence he wields, Kanu is in a position to dictate the political future
of the South East. The same political leaders who posed for photographs at the
Aso Villa will go to him at night and beg him to support their candidates if
future elections hold in that region.
They will condemn Kanu during the day, but lick his boots at night.
The ancillary
challenge however is the worsening trend of ethnic polarization with regards to
the control of power at the centre. I describe this as the conflict between the
na-my-brother-dey-there syndrome and the no-be-my-brother reactive tendency. It
used to be the case in this country up till the time President Olusegun
Obasanjo left in 2007, that whoever held power in Abuja was openly and strongly
supported by other Nigerians, regardless of ethnicity or religion. Obasanjo got
more support from outside Yorubaland, and probably felt more reassured by
persons from outside his own ethnic group and religion.
With the
death of President Yar’Adua in office, ethnicity, a long-standing threat to
Nigerian unity became more potent. The Boko Haram, with its base in the
Northern part of the country gave the succeeding Jonathan administration
hell. With the emergence of President
Muhammadu Buhari in 2015, the same Boko Haram suddenly became tame. Curiously,
the militants of the South East and the South South, who had been significantly
quiet during the Jonathan years, also became more vocal and calls for secession
became more strident the moment their kinsman and in-law left office.
By the
same token, the conflict between pastoralists and farmers, an old problem,
became worse, with the former asserting themselves more arrogantly for no
reason other than that they are sure of better protection under a central
government controlled by the North. Our point: Nigeria’s stability should not
be so dependent on the whims and caprices of ethnic gladiators. No Nigerian
President should be at the mercy of ethnic or religious politics, now or in the
future.
The debate
about restructuring and renegotiations is therefore useful and most
relevant. It is indeed urgent if we must
take the wind out of the sail of the secessionists and nihilists. Those who
have always blocked or hijacked the people’s conference must by now realize
that we are close to “the point of no return” on a review and rephrasing of the
Nigerian question, in order to make every Nigerian feel a part of the Nigerian
project. The alternative in all possible shapes appears ominous.
No comments:
Post a Comment