Category: Columnists

  • Highways are happy ways (I)

    Highways are happy ways (I)

    When the British arrived in what is now Nigeria in the closing years of the nineteenth century, they came with a clear mission; to extract from their colony, the raw materials with which to feed their industries and export them back home at minimum cost. In order to fulfil their mission, they immediately began to build the roads along which the raw materials they had extracted were to reach the ports for onward shipment to Britain. One of the first steps taken to consolidate their hold on the new colony was to straighten and widen as much as they could, the old footpaths which existed in all parts of their newly acquired territory. They were quite successful in this enterprise especially since it was complemented with the railways, the construction of which began at the same time as the roads. This made sense as it was the railways which at first did all the heavy lifting as the previous means of moving produce on the roads was by human porterage and the odd camel or donkey.

    By 1926, the existing roads had become inadequate, especially because motorised vehicles had become available and needed asphalted roads on which to move efficiently. The colonial government therefore took the decision to build what they described as Trunk A roads throughout the colony. They might have been grandly described as Trunk roads but in reality they were narrow, winding and quite dangerous in parts but they did the job for which they were designed and evacuated produce from the points of production to railway stations and the ports for onward transmission to Britain. It is funny that these roads were in no way comparable to the magnificent roads with which the Romans criss-crossed their vast empire more than two millennia before, some which are still in use today. Some of these roads were built in Britain but our colonial masters did not seem to have seen the remnants of the old Roman roads as a template for the roads which they were building in their own colonies. It has to be said for all it is worth however that the Trunk A roads were carefully maintained by the Public Works Department (PWD) which kept them free of potholes. For this purpose, the PWD had work camps all along the Trunk A roads as these roads acquired a life of their own, as with their use, a sort of culture developed along the roads and was sustained by the people who had seen the utility value of the roads as they were being built. For example, the roads were quite long and journeys along them could stretch over a couple of days and more. On the Western Trunk A road which passed through developed urban centres, it stretched from Asaba all the way to Lagos and passed through relatively big and long established towns all along the way. Benin, Owo, Akure, Ilesa, Ife, Ibadan, Sagamu, Ikorodu before reaching Lagos. A culture which was associated with the road, grew in all those towns and made them memorable to all those who at one time or the other, travelled along it. As far as I know, the importance of that road to Ilesa, where I now live, is shown by the observation that its commercial importance was drastically reduced when Lagos bound traffic was diverted to the Benin – Ore road shortly after independence. The Trunk A roads of those days were tarred but virtually all other roads were left to the mercies of rain, wind and sunshine. The vehicles which plied those roads together with their passengers were invariably covered in a fine but tenacious coat of dust such that your journey was not truly over until they had taken a bath to wash off the effects of their journey. The use of some of those designated Trunk B and C roads were actually quite seasonal and they were hardly kept in a state of repair. Even today, those early colonial roads still exist but are now recognised as Federal roads (Trunk A), State roads (Trunk B) and Local government roads (Trunk C).

    Read Also: “Ember Months’’: Why accident increases on highways – FRSC

    Although the new roads were primarily designed to move agricultural produce, the period of the building of those Trunk A and others led to the development of passenger transport which may, or may not have been factored into the plans which led to the building of those roads in the first place. After all, passenger transport did not contribute to the movement of cocoa or palm oil to the ports. It was soon clear however that there was the need for passenger traffic if the usefulness of the road was to be sustained. This aspect of road development was left to local entrepreneurs who began to build fleets of lorries which moved both freight and passengers, some of them over vast distances. Although those lorries were no more sophisticated than motorised wooden boxes, each of them represented a very substantial investment and enormous prestige for the owners. Nothing represented wealth more glaringly than a lorry which carried the name of the owner or owners as the case may be over vast distances or even within a defined locality. Furthermore, it was also not practicable to put a solitary vehicle on the road as any need of any but the most trivial repair could take the lorry out of commission for long periods of time. Consequently, any transporter worth his salt needed to maintain a fleet of vehicles. This dictated the formation of partnerships of varied longevity because it was soon discovered that joint ownership of vehicles was a tricky business indeed. The giant of motor transport in those days was Armels Transport, not surprisingly, a company whose origin is shrouded in mystery but which at a certain point in time dominated the  Nigerian transport sector to the virtual exclusion of any other transport company. Many companies dealing with the transport of

    goods and passengers all over Nigeria have emerged since then but no other transport company has stirred the imagination quite like the Armels Transport of my early years. The company operated on a schedule which was adhered to come rain or shine and you could send anything to anywhere through Armels. There are still a few toothless oldies around who remember as children, being sent safely and punctually to far destinations through Armels. The company which had its origin in Benin City was involved in the transport of goods and passengers. It was so trusted that it was a dedicated mail carrier on contract to the colonial government. It also carried passengers in perceptibly greater comfort and safety than her competitors and was consequently heavily patronised by the emerging middle class. The company was bought over by the Midwest government in 1971 and has since been swallowed up in the morass of the Nigerian business environment.

    Another example of a transporter of that era was Ojukwu Transport, an enterprise which was begun with one second hand lorry in 1930 but had grown to a fleet in excess of two hundred only twenty years later. The company concentrated on ferrying goods, mainly on government contract, from the East to Lagos. Although it was founded in Nnewi, its headquarters was and indeed is still in Lagos even though you are never likely to see a vehicle with Ojukwu Transport stenciled on its side. The company appears to have been swallowed by history and there are not many people who have memories of travelling by Ojukwu Transport as it was mainly involved in carrying goods on behalf of the colonial government. Her heydays were the war years when it provided lucrative transport services to the British Army, a service for which its proprietor was not only handsomely paid but was also decorated with a knighthood by the grateful owners of the now defunct British Empire. The days of hauling raw materials from the East to the ports are now firmly in the past as the country has transformed from a producer of agricultural raw materials to the collection of rent from our troubled oil fields. All in all, it appears that nothing lasts forever!

  • FG – ASUU landmark agreement on tertiary education: Tinubu scores bullseye again

    FG – ASUU landmark agreement on tertiary education: Tinubu scores bullseye again

    For nearly two decades, Nigeria’s public university system existed in a state of  uncertainty—never fully open, never fully closed. Each strike by the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), “without a scintilla of doubt the country’s most  disciplined, most serious, and absolutely most focussed Labour Union”(columnist), emptied campuses, fractured academic calendars, and reinforced a national sense of déjà vu: agreements signed, hopes raised, promises broken”- channels TV.com

    If you have not been able to put your hands on the problem with Nigeria, it must be because you have never really put your mind to it as it is so easy to know. It is simply that of a blessed country, home to some of the  best and brightest on the surface of the earth but which have, unfortunately, seen several hundreds of thousands of its citizens voted with their feet, out of the country, simply  because it has been ruled at the topmost level, like for ever,  by its 3rd Eleven – those you will, with considerable justification, describe as emergency, or amateur politicians. It was worse with the military. That, of course, was until the coming into office of the incumbent, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

    Please come with me as I navigate this obvious truism.

    Prof Richard Adeboye Olaniyan is one   teacher of mine I respect hugely. He taught me History at the University of Ife, Ile – Ife. He had arrived the University from the U.S, during my graduating year, after earning a Ph.D. from Georgetown University,

     Washington D.C.

    A President’s Scholar, and Fellow of the Nigerian Academy of Letters, he is the author of several books, among them, ‘IFE: Holy City Of The Yorubas’.

    Today is not about  him; rather it is about the highly thought provoking piece he sent me  sometime ago; and for him to share a WhatsApp post, it must have been worth its weight in gold.

    That post became the theme of my article of  4 June, 2021 about which the new FG – ASUU renegotiated agreement pungently reminds me. It was titled: Cry The Beleaguered Country.

    It becomes germane now that President Tinubu is on the way to returning our Universities, and higher institutions generally,  to an era of sanity and stability again, reminiscent of what he did with the scandalously corrupt Nigerian oil industry when, on his first day in office, he put paid to fuel subsidy, a ruinous sink hole.

    Happy reading.

    Smartest People, Mediocre Nation – The Irony of Nigeria.

    British Nobel laureate,Dorothy Hodgkin, once noted that the University of Lagos was one of the world’s centres of expertise in her field of chemical crystallography.

    Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria had the first world class computer centre in Africa while the University of Ife had a notable pool of expertise in nuclear Physics. Our premier University of Ibadan had an international reputation as a leading centre of excellence in tropical medicine, development economics and the historical sciences. It is no news that the Saudi Royal family used to frequent the UCH, Ibadan, for medical treatment in the sixties.

    The engineering scientist, Ayodele Awojobi, a graduate of Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, was a reputed genius. He tragically died of frustration because our  environment could not contain, let alone utilise, his huge talents.

    Ishaya Shuaibu Audu, pioneer Nigerian Vice-Chancellor of Ahmadu Bello, Zaria, collected all the prizes at St. Mary’s University Medical School London. His successor in Zaria, Iya Abubakar, was a highly talented Cambridge mathematician who became a professor at 28 and was a noted consultant to NASA. Alexander Animalu was a gifted MIT physicist who did work of original importance in superconductivity. His book, Intermediate Quantum Theory of Crystalline Solids, has been translated into several languages,  Russian inclusive.

    Renowned mathematician, Chike Obi solved Fermat’s 200-year old conjecture, with pencil and paper, while the Cambridge mathematician, John Wiles, achieved same with the help of a computer, working over a decade.

    Read Also: ASUU, CONUA laud renegotiation deal

    After the harsh environment of the 1980’s IMF/World Bank structural adjustment programme, the Babangida military dictatorship undertook massive budgetary cutbacks in higher education in Nigeria.

    Our best and brightest fled abroad.

    Today, Nigerian doctors, scientists,  engineers etc are making incalculable contributions in Europe and North America.

    Philip Emeagwali won the 1989 Gordon Bell Award for his work in super-computing. Jelani Aliyu designed the first electric car for American automobile giant, General Motors. Olufunmilayo Olopede, Professor of Medicine at the University of Chicago, won the McArthur Genius Award for her work on cancer.

    Winston Soboyejo, who earned a Cambridge doctorate at 23, is a Princeton engineering professor, laurelled for his contributions to materials research. He is Chairman of the Scientific Advisory Board to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Washington University biomedical engineering professor Samuel Achilefu received the St. Louis Award for his invention of cancer-seeing glasses that is a major advance in radiology.

    Kunle Olukotun of Stanford University did work of original importance on multi-processors.

    National Merit laureate Omowunmi Sadik of State University of Binghamton owns patents for biosensors technology. Young Nigerians are also recording stellar performances abroad.

    A Nigerian family, the Imafidons, were voted “the smartest family in Britain” in 2015. 

    Anne marie Imafidon earned her Oxford Masters’ in Mathematics and Computer Science when she was only 19. Today, she sits on several corporate boards and was awarded an MBE in 2017 for services to Science. Recently, Benue State University mathematician Atovigba Michael Vershima  solved the two centuries’ old Riemann Conjecture that has defied giants such as Gauss, Minkowski and Polya.

    Another young man, Hallowed Olaoluwa, was one of a dozen “future Einstein”, awarded postdoctoral fellowships by Harvard University. He completed a remarkable doctorate in mathematical physics at the University of Lagos, aged 21. While at Harvard he aims at focussing on solving problems relating to “quantum ergodicity and quantum chaos”, with applications to medical imaging and robotics.

    Another University of lagos alumnus, Ayodele Dada, graduated with a perfect 5.0 GPA, an unprecedented feat in a Nigerian university. Victor Olalusi recently graduated with such stellar performance at the Russian Medical Research University, Moscow, and was feted as the best graduate throughout the Russian Federation. Habiba Daggash, daughter of  Senator Sanusi Daggash, recently graduated with a starred first in Engineering at Oxford.

    Emmanuel Ohuabunwa earned a GPA of 3.98 out of a possible 4.0 as the best overall graduate of the Ivy-League Johns Hopkins University. Stewart Hendry, Johns Hopkins Professor of Neuroscience, described the young man as having “an intellect so rare that it touches on the unique…a personality that is once-in-a-life-time”.

    There is also young Yemi Adesokan, postdoctoral fellow of Harvard Medical School who patented procedures for tracking the spread of viral epidemics in developing countries.

    Ufot Ekong recently solved a 50-year mathematical riddle at Tokai University in Japan and was voted the most outstanding graduate of the institution. He currently works as an engineer for Nissan, having pocketed two patents in his discipline. This is only the tip of the iceberg.

    If our system were not so inclement to talent we would be celebrating a bountiful harvest of geniuses in all the fields of human endeavour from our home Universities. This is why the correlates between our gene-pool and national development are so diametrically opposed; so bad Nigeria is almost becoming a failed state.

    We punch miserably below our weight in the hierarchy of world economics and politics. None of our institutions come near the top 500 in the World Universities League Table. Almost  50% of our people live in extreme poverty. Youth unemployment hovers around 45 percent ;70% and above, for the far-North.

    The poverty is heartbreaking. Our per capita GDP is less than $3,000 as compared to Singapore’s $55,252.  We have the worst road carnage record in the world, with more than 20,000 lost to road accidents annually.

    We wasted some $16 billion on the power sector during the Obasanjo years and our people still live in darkness, decades after, though he has forgotten all that debacle grandstanding, and sermonising, all over the place. 

    Many state governments, before the removal of fuel subsidy by President Tinubu, were literally bankrupt, and could hardly pay their staff salaries.

    With stability now sure to return to our higher education – and government must extend this sanity to all levels of the country’s educational system – we shl.ould be able to invest in science and innovation, both of which are the way to our future development.

    Without science and innovation we will be unable to  overcome our underdevelopment, and millennial servitude.

    Leveraging on our Universities,

    we should be able to incentivise all-round talent while building a merit-based society.

    In Brazil, a Nobel laureate is entitled, by statute, to the same pension rights as a former President. Society must adequately recognise, and reward, all men and women of excellence.

    Our government should keep a roster of all super-achievers of Nigerian origin whose brains we should tap to build   this country”.

    The first thing to note in the above is that no part of Nigeria  is left out of this sheer embarrassment of riches. So I ask: why do we remain this pathetic?

     As I indicated earlier, the problem lies in our political leadership recruitment process. 

    We continue to see opposition politicians berrating President Tinubu for the bold measures he took at the beginning of his administration, and since, whereas without them, as recently cogently argued by Tunde Lemo, a former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank, the Nigerian economy would since have gone south. Afterall, Venezuela has far more oil reserves than Nigeria can ever dream of. Yet it was in tatters before U. S President Trump’s recent assault on its sovereignty.

    Some even argue that  governance has nothing to do with education, but I’d say that is nothing but gross ignorance.

    Judging by how past governments  messed up our Universities, as a result of which many of our best brains migrated abroad, the place and role of leadership and governance should be more than obvious.

    Nigerians must, therefore,  be very careful in  our choice of leaders, going into the 2027 Presidential election.

     There is this apocryphal story of the Heads of state of the UK, U.S and some other developed countries going to God to remonstrate against His many blessings on Nigeria in human and material resources, whereupon God was reported to have told them,  to go and look at Nigeria’s leadership cadre, whereupon the visitors left happier than  they arrived.

    Was it by chance that not a single Nigerian former Head of state,  came prepared for office? All that the much revered Sir Tafawa Balewa wanted to be was a teacher, perhaps a school headmaster. Even President Obasanjo, to whom some development could be credited, was  only an accidental military Head of state who became President only because some people wanted to profit from military “espirit de corps”.

    Do we have a single  Nigerian Head of state one can  compare with Chief Obafemi Awolowo in the way he equipped, and prepared, himself for political leadership? Wasn’t that why on his death, a British Prime Minister said he could, effortlessly, have been the British Prime Minister?

    How can Nigeria ever develop with our present political architecture in which some members of our legislative houses are barely literate?

    Yes, many will ask legitimate questions as to how well political appointees from within our universities  performed in office?

    The saying that “fish rots from the head down” fully encapsulates the Nigerian condition. It  confirms the fact that leadership is key to organisations, qua organisation, be it a country, a company, or even family.

    The consequences of our political leadership failure are legion. For instance,

    the word, “Andrew” assumed a new meaning in Nigeria when President Obasanjo, as military Head of state, descended on University lecturers, ordering them out of  their accommodation on campus. Many like Professor Isaac Adewole, the former Minister of Health, knew that they had to rapidly bid the country bye.

    Today, not just the family head, but  entire households, are fleeing town – Japa – ing, as they now call it, presenting Nigeria like a beleaguered country with its people, including  top salary earners, with their entire families, thronging Airports, to check out before the apocalypse.

    This is happening especially in areas of the country where people value their children and would  not simply throw them to the elements, or at the mercy of  marauding terrorists.

    The above, and much more, is where puerile political leadership, which neither “incentivises talent”, nor concerns itself with “building a merit-based society”, has landed Nigeria while her best continue to illumine the outside world.

    One needs not dwell on the need for members of ASUU and those other unions that will similarly be impacted, to make the best use of this opportunity for the greater good of Nigeria

  • January 15, 1966 Coup: A reassessment

    January 15, 1966 Coup: A reassessment

    It is not in doubt that Nigeria’s first military coup d’état, executed in the early hours of January 15, 1966, remains one of the most controversial and misunderstood events in the nation’s history. Led by Major Emmanuel Ifeajuna and spearheaded by the charismatic Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu, this intervention came at a time when our nation teetered precariously on the brink of collapse. To understand the motivations behind this dramatic action, one must examine the profound crisis of governance that had reduced Africa’s most promising nation to a laughingstock of democratic pretensions.

    By late 1965, Nigeria had descended into what could only be described as organized anarchy. The federal elections of 1964 and the Western Region elections of 1965 were not merely flawed—they represented the complete desecration of democratic principles. These elections were rigged with such brazen impunity that they shocked even the most cynical observers of African politics. In the Northern and Western Regions, opposition parties faced systematic harassment, their members intimidated, their rallies disrupted, and their candidates prevented from campaigning freely. The electoral process had become a grotesque charade where ballots were stuffed, results were written and announced before voting had been completed, and the will of the people was treated with contemptuous disdain.

    The Western Region crisis epitomized the hypocrisy and double standards that characterized the First Republic. When chaos erupted in the Western House of Assembly—complete with a theatrical dance that led to a broken mace and the infamous “roforofo” fighting—Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa moved with lightning speed to declare a state of emergency. This swift action led to trumped-up charges of coup plotting against Chief Obafemi Awolowo, one time Premier and the region’s most popular politician with many of his acolytes in the then Action Group, who were subsequently sentenced and imprisoned. The speed and decisiveness with which Balewa acted against perceived threats in the West would later stand in stark contrast to his paralysis when confronted with actual violence.

    Chief Samuel Akintola’s boast to voters remains one of the most infamous declarations in Nigerian political history. With characteristic arrogance, he declared that even if the people did not vote for him, he would still return as Premier of the Western Region. When this prophecy fulfilled itself through electoral manipulation, the Western Region exploded. Operation Wetie unleashed unprecedented violence as enraged citizens burned properties, attacked political opponents, and plunged the region into chaos. Lives were lost, properties destroyed, and civil order completely broke down.

    Yet here was the supreme irony: the same Balewa who had been so quick to declare emergency rule over a broken mace now claimed, to the utter astonishment of the world, that he lacked the constitutional powers to declare a state of emergency in the face of widespread violence, arson, and murder. This selective application of federal authority exposed the rot at the heart of the First Republic—a government that protected its political allies while allowing the nation to burn.

    Read Also: Abia couple seeks help after fire guts home, leaves family homeless

    The Tiv crisis in the Middle Belt added another dimension to Nigeria’s descent into chaos. The massacre that ensued, with federal troops deployed against citizens in what amounted to a campaign of suppression, further demonstrated the government’s willingness to use violence to maintain political control. If soldiers could justifiably topple Shehu Shagari’s government in 1983 for corruption and economic mismanagement, what exactly was wrong with the January boys’ intervention when confronted with electoral fraud, regional violence, ethnic persecution, corruption and the complete collapse of constitutional governance?

    Let me submit that the loss of lives during the January 15 coup was indeed tragic. The deaths of Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Sardauna of Sokoto, Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa, and particularly the killing of senior military officers like Brigadier ZakariaMaimalari, Brigadier Samuel Ademulegun, Colonel Kur Mohammed, and Lieutenant Colonel Pam remain painful chapters in our history. One wishes the young officers had found a bloodless path to reform. However, to characterize this intervention as an “Igbo coup” represents a fundamental distortion of historical truth that has poisoned Nigerian discourse for generations.

    Violence is an inherent risk in forceful changes of power—this is an unfortunate reality throughout history. What the January 15 boys sought was not ethnic domination but a halt to Nigeria’s drift toward complete disintegration. If certain elements insist on labeling these young patriots as murderers, then consistency demands we apply the same designation to the architects of the July 29 counter-coup: Yakubu Gowon, Murtala Muhammed, Ibrahim Bako, TY Danjuma, Sani Abacha, and others who orchestrated a revenge mission that saw the targeted killing of Igbo officers and civilians which then  laid the foundation for the Nigerian Civil War.

    The infallible claim that the coupists intended to install Obafemi Awolowo as Prime Minister stands as the primary evidence cited by those who insist this was not an Igbo coup. Indeed, authorities no less than General Ibrahim Babangida have publicly rebuffed the long-held notion that seeks to pass a collective verdict of guilt on Ndi Igbo for an action planned and executed by young  Nigerian officers who had grown disgusted with the corruption and misrule they witnessed. There is also the gnawing evidence of General Aguiyi Ironsi and fellow Igbos like Alexander Madiebo and Conrad Nwawo playing opposing roles to the January 15 protagonists, if I am mistaken the trip mentioned are either Hausa Fulani or Shuwa? Sarcasm intended, It will also appear that Colonel Arthur Unegbe, who was the Quarter Master General, an Igbo from the ancestral town of Ozubulu, gunned down for refusing to hand over the keys of the Ikeja armoury to the January 15 protagonists was also a part of the plot to install a hegemony of the Igbos!

    Now, with all these evidence, it is particularly galling that individuals like Femi Fani-Kayode—whose father, Remi Fani-Kayode, was a direct beneficiary of the electoral manipulations of 1965—continue to peddle this divisive narrative. Alongside an equivocal character like Reno Omokri and the  comedian Bovi, they persist in casting aspersions and stoking hatred against a people who had nothing to do with planning the January 1966 coup, suffered enormously in its aftermath, and continue to bear psychological scars from the counter coup,  pogrom and civil war that followed. Their selective memory and deliberate distortion of history serve only to perpetuate the ethnic divisions that continue to undermine Nigerian unity.

    The January 15, 1966 coup was not an Igbo conspiracy but a desperate intervention by young Nigerian officers who watched their beloved country crumble under corrupt, incompetent leadership. While we may debate their methods, questioning their patriotic motivations while ignoring the catastrophic failures of the First Republic represents intellectual dishonesty of the highest order. Nigeria must finally confront this history honestly if we are ever to move beyond the poisonous ethnic narratives that continue to define our national discourse.

  • How Tinubu’s reforms are reshaping Nigeria’s global standing

    How Tinubu’s reforms are reshaping Nigeria’s global standing

    Last week unfolded like a carefully choreographed score in the long and often arduous symphony of reform that has defined the presidency of Bola Ahmed Tinubu. It was another eventful week, yes, but more importantly, it was another week in which Nigeria began to take delivery of the fruits of reforms that were painful at the start, disruptive in the middle, and are now steadily yielding measurable rewards.

    The week’s defining moment did not even begin in Abu Dhabi, where the President spent much of the period on official duty. It began at home, with the quiet but consequential announcement that Nigeria had been officially removed from the European Union’s list of high-risk third countries for Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT). The decision, reached in December 2025 and made public on January 9, only fully sank into national consciousness on Thursday when the Federal Government formally welcomed the development. And rightly so.

    For years, Nigeria laboured under the stigma of that designation, an invisible but costly tag that subjected Nigerian businesses, banks, and individuals to enhanced scrutiny, raised compliance costs, slowed transactions, and dampened investor appetite. Its removal is not cosmetic. It is structural. It is the difference between suspicion and confidence, between hesitation and engagement. It is, in real terms, a restoration of trust.

    This milestone did not happen by chance. It followed Nigeria’s exit from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey list in October 2025, after painstaking reforms to address long-standing deficiencies in financial oversight, regulation, and enforcement. The European Union’s own Delegated Regulation, adopted on December 4, 2025, merely followed the evidence. From January 29, 2026, transactions between Nigeria and EU member states will no longer attract automatic heightened scrutiny. That alone is a quiet revolution for Nigerian commerce.

    Finance Minister Wale Edun captured the moment succinctly when he described the delisting as a validation of President Tinubu’s “extraordinary leadership, unwavering political will and clear reform vision”. It is also, unmistakably, a reward for the sacrifices Nigerians have endured since May 29, 2023, sacrifices often questioned in the moment, but now increasingly justified by outcomes. The reforms were tough because the rot was deep. The resistance was fierce because the vested interests were entrenched. But Tinubu’s boldness, his refusal to govern by half-measures, has ensured that progress, when it comes, comes with weight.

    If Brussels provided the validation, Abu Dhabi supplied the momentum. President Tinubu arrived in the United Arab Emirates on Sunday to participate in the Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week at the invitation of Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, and once again demonstrated that foreign trips under his watch are not ceremonial excursions but transactional missions.

    On the sidelines of the summit, Tinubu and his UAE counterpart witnessed the signing of a landmark Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) between Nigeria and the United Arab Emirates. For Nigeria’s business community, this was not just another trade document, it was a doorway.

    Read Also: Tinubu hails Super Eagles’ fighting spirit after AFCON bronze triumph

    Under the agreement, the UAE will eliminate tariffs on over 7,000 Nigerian products, granting immediate duty-free access to agricultural and industrial goods ranging from fish and seafood to oil seeds, cereals, pharmaceuticals and chemicals. Over the next three to five years, tariffs will also fall on machinery, vehicles, electrical equipment, apparel and furniture. For Nigerian manufacturers long hemmed in by narrow export markets, the CEPA offers a clear, competitive pathway into one of the world’s most dynamic trading hubs.

    The agreement goes further. Nigerian businesses can now establish operations in the UAE through subsidiaries and branches. Business visitors gain extended access, while executives and specialists can relocate with their companies for renewable three-year periods. For investors, the clarity provided by the agreement removes long-standing ambiguities that have discouraged capital inflows. This is economic diplomacy with intent.

    Tinubu understands something fundamental: that credibility abroad is inseparable from coherence at home. That is why his participation at Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week was not limited to applause lines. He spoke of electricity as the foundation of modern economies. He spoke of balancing industrialisation with decarbonisation. He spoke of reforming global finance to unlock private capital for developing economies. And he backed words with policy.

    On Thursday, he approved the full roll-out of Nigeria’s carbon market framework, a far-reaching climate policy projected to yield at least $3 billion annually by 2030. It is an audacious move, positioning Nigeria not as a passive recipient of climate prescriptions but as an active player in the global carbon economy. With a national carbon registry, mandatory emissions reporting, phased compliance, and generous incentives for investors, the framework aligns environmental responsibility with economic opportunity. It is diversification by design.

    Yet even as the President was winning friends and sealing deals abroad, he did not lose sight of duty at home. Thursday also marked the 2026 Armed Forces Celebration and Remembrance Day. Though physically in Abu Dhabi, Tinubu was fully present in spirit and message. Represented at the ceremony by Vice President Kashim Shettima, he used the occasion to reaffirm his commitment to the welfare and dignity of Nigeria’s Armed Forces.

    His message was sober, respectful, and deeply human. He honoured the fallen, acknowledged the pain of their families, and spoke directly to serving personnel across land, sea and air. “A nation that forgets its fallen heroes loses its direction; Nigeria, however, remembers,” he said. It was not rhetoric. Under his administration, defense and security have remained a priority, not just in words but in budgets, reforms and institutional attention.

    Beyond the big-ticket assurances that defined the week; Nigeria’s removal from the European Union’s AML/CFT watchlist, the signing of the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement with the United Arab Emirates, and the solemn national salute to the Armed Forces, the week also revealed something quieter but equally instructive about Tinubu: a President attentive to the full texture of national life.

    From Sunday, the tone was set with a message to former Senate President Ahmad Lawan, where Tinubu acknowledged legislative service anchored on dialogue, stability and cooperation. It was not mere courtesy, but a reminder that institutions endure because individuals once carried them with discipline and restraint.

    On Monday, the President turned to history and heritage, mourning the passing of Oba of Badagry, Babatunde Akran. His tribute reflected a respect for traditional authority and community leadership, recognising how decades of steady guidance can hold together harmony, tolerance and identity in an ancient kingdom.

    Tuesday and Wednesday extended that sensitivity to personal loss and national memory. Tinubu mourned former First Lady of Ogun State, Chief Lucia Onabanjo, whose long life symbolised compassion and quiet service, and Yakubu Mohammed, a veteran journalist and co-founder of Newswatch Magazine, who helped define fearless reporting in difficult times. In both, the President spoke not just to families, but to values, service, courage and conscience.

    The same attention followed in his felicitation of the Minister of Agriculture and Food Security, Senator Abubakar Kyari, and the Minister of State for the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Dr Mariya Mahmoud, tying personal milestones to ongoing reform efforts. He celebrated Nigeria’s creative power at AFRIMA, hailed party stalwarts, honoured elder statesman Bisi Akande, and mourned the humane courage of Imam Abdullahi Abubakar.

    These gestures underline a presidency that watches the details, recognising that governance is not only about agreements and policies, but about people, memory and meaning.

    Taken together, last week told a coherent story. From Brussels to Abu Dhabi, from climate markets to military remembrance, the threads were connected by a single theme: deliberate leadership. Tinubu’s presidency has never promised instant gratification. It promised restructuring. It promised pain before progress. And increasingly, it is delivering proof that the path, though steep, was not misguided.

    Nigeria’s removal from the EU’s AML/CFT list is not the end of reform; it is a checkpoint. The CEPA with the UAE is not a silver bullet; it is an instrument. The carbon market framework is not a slogan; it is a system. Each gain is incremental, yes, but together they signal a country steadily reclaiming credibility, competitiveness and confidence.

    For Nigerians who placed their trust in Tinubu’s administrative and political acumen, last week offered something rare in public life: reassurance. Reassurance that sacrifice was not in vain. Reassurance that boldness, when anchored in vision, pays off. And reassurance that Nigeria, once again, is learning how to convert resolve into results.

  • Fubara, Wike: peace, war indistinguishable

    Fubara, Wike: peace, war indistinguishable

    At first, reports suggested that 26 lawmakers in the Rivers State House of Assembly on January 8 had signed up for Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s impeachment for breaching provisions of the constitution amounting to gross misconduct. The governor was accused of engaging in extra-budgetary spending, demolition of the House of Assembly complex, flouting Supreme Court judgement on legislative autonomy, and withholding funds allocated to the House of Assembly Commission, among other infractions. By Thursday, four lawmakers had, however, developed cold feet and called for dialogue to halt the impeachment process. They nevertheless stopped short of dissociating themselves from the impeachment notice. But last Friday, the four lawmakers publicly reversed themselves, accused the governor and his deputy of deliberate intransigence, and renewed their association with the impeachment notice. The lawmakers finally addressed the press late last week and insisted that the impeachment process was proceeding apace.

    The Assembly claimed to have properly served the impeachment notice, but the governor has denied being served. Whatever the status of the notice, it is clear that going into the weekend and perhaps early next week, and regardless of ongoing mediation efforts, the Rivers drama will assume fresh vigour one way or the other. The governor probably reposed too much hope and assumes ironclad protection in his membership, together with the lawmakers, of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). He could not understand why members of the APC would undermine an APC governor, obviously because he does not understand what a null hypothesis is. Maybe, instead of wondering why APC lawmakers would want to remove him, he should have asked why as an APC governor better and deeper cooperation with the lawmakers was not expected of him.

    In any case, two main groups are mediating the Rivers impeachment crisis, the first of its kind in the Fourth Republic where members of a party are sworn to removing a governor of the same party. The mediators seem likely to be able to resolve it where everyone else had failed. The first group, a seven-member committee of the Pan-Niger Delta Forum (PANDEF), headed by eminent lawyer and former Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) Kanu Agabi, will attempt to reconcile the warring parties. By his training and experience, not to say his initial diplomatic statements on the crisis, Chief Agabi seems perfectly placed to make a dent on the problem. Should he and his other six committee members fail to bring peace to Rivers, it is hard to see anyone else succeeding. But as a fail-safe measure, Rivers State Council of Traditional Rulers has also empanelled another high-powered nine-man Reconciliation Committee to procure peace between the warring factions. Headed by His Majesty Dr Suanu Baridam, the Gbenemene and Kasimene of Ancient Bangha Kingdom, the committee is expected to plug any other existing loopholes to the forging of peace in the state.

    Read Also: JUST IN: Rivers Assembly directs Chief Judge to raise committee to probe Fubara, deputy 

    When the impeachment idea came to light on January 8, the second time in Mr Fubara’s less than two-and-a half year rule, it was expected that President Bola Tinubu would again wade in and mediate the crisis. Perhaps he still might. But so far, there has not been any open or concrete move from the presidency to find a common ground between the battle-hardened Rivers politicians. The president had twice mediated the same crisis between the governor and his predecessor, Nyesome Wike, and even imposed a state of emergency chiefly to abort the first attempt to impeach the governor. The warring sides reached a truce and gave indications that Rivers would, going forward, begin experiencing peace. Each side knew what it had signed, and what was expected of it. Shockingly, however, though the peace deals were rendered in English, they were as quickly broken despite the absence of ambiguities. Perhaps buyer’s remorse interjected itself.

    If the president intervened twice, imposed a state of emergency, and the war still persisted, it would be naïve to expect that he would rush into another intervention, forge another deal, and go back to sleep. What proof exists that any new intervention would engender the lasting peace Riverians desire so fervently? In fact, the bigger question is to ask what proof exists that the two new committees of eminent Rivers stakeholders would succeed where the presidency appeared to have failed. The answer is that this time, however, the mediators are Riverians themselves. More, they are indeed eminent personalities and individuals who, once they reach a consensus, will not tolerate the violation of their decisions. Indeed, the suspicion is that both mediating groups will at a time during the mediation process harmonise their positions and ensure that no one breaks the truce again. What may in fact be difficult to fathom is how the groups will achieve a consensus in light of the obstreperousness of the combatants and their equally ill-tempered and incompetent advisers coaxing their principals to dig their heels in.

  • Europe, Greenland and Trump

    Europe, Greenland and Trump

    Since his assumption of office in January last year, the unrelenting United States (US) president Donald Trump has continued to insist on annexing Greenland, an autonomous Arctic territory under Denmark, the hard way or easy way. He absolves himself of the huge responsibility of taking the right decision on a matter that exemplifies his personal greed rather than US national security interest. Just when it seemed his interest had waned, it resurfaced even more virulently. He justifies his hard line position by citing competing and countervailing Chinese and Russian interests in the Arctic and minerals-rich territory.

    Mr Trump did not say how many territories he would take if competing great powers showed some interest. Was anyone competing for Canada when he desired to make that country the 51st US state? And would he have shown interest in Venezuela had that country been arid, poor and ridden with problems and disease, like Haiti for instance? And what of Mexico, over which he has shown no interest in making the US’s 52nd state? Why, of course, it is Hispanic, and that race of people war against his racist inclination. But over Greenland, he will likely come a cropper. European countries in NATO have signaled that any attempt to forcibly possess Greenland would spell the end of the Atlantic alliance. Regardless, the US president has sworn to punish with tariffs anyone who stands in the way of Greenland annexation.

    Read Also: Trump as Europe’s nemesis

    Unsure that Mr Trump is not as hard of hearing as he is greedy and megalomaniacal, European NATO members have begun to take tentative steps to back their commitments to Denmark and Greenland with action. Germany and France have sent military teams to Greenland to look at all probabilities and possibilities, including preparing grounds for military deployments. After interacting with Mr Trump for a few years and seeing how mean, intransigent and incorrigible he is, they have probably begun to realise that the only way to stop a bully is to stand up to him, not yield inches and yards. In other words, Mr Trump will have to determine whether to fight Europe over Greenland or shelve the greed that has defined much of his adult life.

  • On the evolving nature of elite consensus

    On the evolving nature of elite consensus

    • Clarifications, elaborations and amplifications

    The Return of the Man from Birmingham

    THIS is supposed to be a commemorative piece.  Next week, it will be exactly fifty five years that is February, 1971, since yours sincerely published his first op-ed piece in a major Nigerian newspaper while still a teenager and a staffer with the Nigerian Tribune, then based at Pa Aminu’s house at Adeoyo, Ibadan. University education at the then University of Ife commenced later in the year in October.  Titled Enoch Powell and the Coloured Immigrants, the piece was submitted to the Features Editor of The Nigerian Tribune,  Mr Fola Oredoyin, who later in 1979 ended up in the Lagos State House of Assembly while his boss, the Editor in Chief, Alhaji Lateef Jakande, ended up in the gubernatorial mansion. A man of pure and noble heart, Oredoyin immediately published the piece in the features page while hinting the editor, Mr Olukayode Bakre, that his wonder-boy had done it again. In effect, this would mean a lifetime spent at the barricades of the mind in addition to other dangerous political sorties.

     But this is not so much a commemoration of a personal benchmark, as significant as that is, but a moment of bemused introspection about the changing or evolving nature of  the phenomenon of elite consensus. The concept of elite consensus is not original to the author. It was first noticed in the works of some leading scholars of Scandinavian and northern European politics while the author was a researcher in the Netherlands at the tail end of the nineties.

    Readers of this column and some other writings by the writer would have noticed a scholarly obsession with the concept, particularly as it pertains to the postcolonial nations of Africa with Nigeria as primal focus of attention. Having  closely studied what they observed as the virtually intractable and “pillarised” differences among the political elite of these Nordic countries, the scholars came to the conclusion that only skillful negotiations and “pacted” deals could have allowed the nations to transit to meaningful and impactful democratic order.

    Without this elite consensus, elections are national fiascos foretold. We can then imagine the prospects for real and meaningful democratic order in a postcolonial Africa with its multiethnic armada, its cultural and religious polarizations and fractious political elite. An observer of the just concluded elections in Uganda noted with wry submission to fate that the country has had nine head of state since independence but none has ever handed over power to his successor. Yoweri Kaguta Museveni has been at it for a whopping forty years.

          Theories of dynamic human interaction and political culture evolve not from scholars’ studies and closet libraries but by closely observing the dialectical collision and collusion of contending and countervailing actions in the theatre of politics as factions slug it out on a daily basis bending or altering concepts and received notions to human will in the process. This is where our Powell article assumes a significant analytical dimension for our troubled world and the whole notion of elite consensus. The only thing its youthful author recalls at this moment is the ringing phrase “resultantly negrophobist”as a sophomoric dismissal of Enoch Powell’s outlandish rant.

       But who on earth is Enoch Powell? And why is his unquiet ghost disturbing the peace of the world from the Warwickshire cemetery where his illustrious bones are interred? As a person, Powell was as distinguished as they come. He was MP for Smethwick in Birmingham in the sixties. By consensus, the Midland politician with the manic glint of a possessed shaman, is regarded as the most cerebrally outstanding and intellectually gifted person to have sat in the House of Commons in the last century. He was as brilliant as they come. Having taken a Double Starred First at Trinity College, Cambridge, he was named a full professor of Greek at the University of Sidney in Australia by the age of twenty five and had ended the Second World War as a Brigadier in the British Army. A sympathetic and perceptive observer rued that Enoch Powell wasted his exceptional talents on politics.

        Where fame crosses into infamy and renown dips into notoriety is easy to plot in this instance.  On April 20, 1968 Powell delivered a speech which has turned out to be as historic as it is a landmark intervention in modern British politics. Dispensing with customary niceties, polite formalities, coded etiquette and the British admonition that a gentleman must wear his hat and opinion lightly, Powell tore into the heart of British post-war elite consensus by dismissing the whole notion of unchecked immigration by coloured people and the idea of integrated racial harmony in a society whose culture immigrants can never imbibe as a derisive hoax and a clear and present danger to the health of the nation. Deploying his immense erudition and unrivalled mastery of Classics, Powell dropped an apocalyptic bombshell: if the rot was not immediately arrested, Britain would soon resemble a River Tiber foaming with blood.

    Read Also: JUST IN: Omisore embraces Oyebamiji as APC consensus candidate for Osun poll

    Retribution was swift and exemplary. Edward Heath dismissed him from his post as Shadow Cabinet. Speaking invitations were summarily cancelled. Polite circles began avoiding him. He had infracted against the cardinal canons of British post-war settlement: no part of the society must be made to feel unwanted or unappreciated however small and whatever may be the race, colour or creed. That is an invitation to anarchy and social conflagration. The British learnt their lesson the hard way in bloody confrontations in their colonies. Fighting alongside their old colonial tormentors had also shown the natives that there are no superior races where suffering and pains are concerned, and a baronetcy is no armour against bullets.

       The snag in this ruling class social engineering is that a survey of the time put the percentage of those who privately agreed with Powell’s gloomy prognostications at sixty which amounted to a dire forewarning of what the future held in store. Just around the corner lay Margaret Thatcher’s brutal rightwing intervention which felt like social Darwinism on steroids. While Enoch Powell did not believe so much in ideology as the driving principle of politics and human interaction, the puritanical daughter of a Methodist alderman was an astringent cold warrior who believed everyone could be pigeon-holed with ideological labels.  This obsession with endless labeling powered by a deeply suspicious and polarizing mindset eventually led Thatcher to a political overreach. She bluntly declared that there was no such thing as society. This finally set the alarm bell ringing in Tory circuits particularly among the storied grandees who clung to the old liberal consensus like a waning talisman.

      At that point in time, we were still far from the consequences of Margaret Thatcher’s open heart surgeries on the British patient, but not very far in real time. Enoch Powell’s Tiber was welling up with its gory contents but not about to overwhelm its banks. It will take the failure of Tony Blair’s anodyne, a mere leftwing sheen and gloss on Thatcherite Darwinism, and a series of incompetent and dismally limited Tory leaders hovering over the patient as if it is a fascinating cadaver, to tip the scale. This is not discounting unfavourable global developments particularly the resurgence of an economically buoyant China, Russia’s geopolitical malevolence, the rise of xenophobic nationalism and authoritarian populism all over Europe and America and what appears to be the fundamental inability of the British political class to reset the nation’s economic categories in the face of growing international encirclement. Britain has been living on borrowed times and borrowed largesse. The creditors have arrived. Harold Macmillan’s patrician ululations to his country people that they had never had it so good was predicated on an economic delusion without any foundation in reality and real time production.

        Now, the man from Birmingham is back with an ear-splitting bang. Almost sixty years after his hair-raising prediction, Enoch Powell is moving to the centre stage of British politics once again after being banished to the margins. His prediction is about to come to pass but not in the way he himself could have foretold. People make predictions based on their own prejudices and the colouring of their imagination. And they come to pass not in the way they could have imagined. This is due to the cunning of history. Unless there is an apocalyptic meltdown, the streets of Britain are unlikely to foam with blood. But never in the postwar history of Britain has there been such open xenophobia, such foul and sullen distemper in the streets with the fabric of elite consensus completely rent asunder.

      The circumstances of an enfeebled and exhausted lapsed empire unable to come to terms with its own historic superannuation which made Enoch Powell to issue his tempestuous edict have now manifested in the fullness of time. From the margins of elite disavowal, Nigel Farage and his Reform UK party have happened upon the funeral rites with the proboscis relentlessly probing and devouring the grisly entrails of the Conservative Party. Appropriately too, and with superb dark humour, the Conservative Party has gone ahead to enlist the services of a Black woman originating from Lagos to preside over the rituals of passage. Let no one deny that Kemi Badenock is doing very well. It was not for nothing that her father, a noted physician, was known as Iwosan, or healer. Enoch Powell who saw no difference between the two parties and who quit his party for the Ulster Unionist Party will purr with satisfaction wherever he is.

       It is a collapse of the elite consensus which has held Britain together since the end of the Second World War.  No one can be sure of what will replace it. This is what happens when political elites, within the limits and limitations of their talents and endowments, are overwhelmed by historical circumstances beyond their remit. It will be foolish and feckless to count out this great and gifted country, despite all its foibles and historical peccadilloes. No nation is perfect. Those of us who consider ourselves as avid Anglophiles will be rooting for its revival and rejuvenation. For now, the old order is gone. It will take a new generation of gifted and visionary political actors to put a new deal together based on extant realities.

       There is a signal lesson here for the elites of postcolonial Africa. As we have seen from the above, forging national consensus is not a tea party. Political elites who have not reached a national consensus on the shared destiny of their nation cannot be expected to achieve the level of critical unanimity to effect a positive change when it comes to the political and economic direction of their nation. This is the consuming tragedy of many contemporary African nations.

  • Under the boots of Jack

    Under the boots of Jack

    To the iconic Muson Hall, Onikan last Thursday for the much heralded unveiling of Ayo Opadokun’s book, The Gun Hegemony. A big scary word, hegemony gives the uninitiated some jitters, just like the Yoruba word, egeremiti, which could well be a scare word which announces its intimidating intent by sheer onomatopoeic intensity. Hegemony is one of those useful Greek words which have found their way into the modern English language to elaborate on the concept of human domination by dominant or hegemonic groups that exert their dominion over others by sheer force and/or pleasant persuasion. Just because you are scared of the word doesn’t spare you the spell of its pervasive invasions.

      This morning, the atmosphere was redolent of human distinction and respectability. They had all come to honour and pay their respect to a man who was a known face of popular resistance to military dictatorship and the struggle to rid Nigeria of despotic rule which high noon was the annulment of the freest and fairest presidential election in the history of the country and its disastrous aftermath. Captains of industry, moguls of the press, barons of solid capital, scions of old money, illustrious royalty, masters of political brinkmanship, emergent plutocrats, former governors, old ministers, top international diplomats, brave journalists of the old barricades, warriors of the protracted siege against the military/feudal complex, former freedom fighters now lapsed into sedate respectability and unreconstructed anti-military stalwarts who had come to hang their old tormentors.

    Read Also: Oyetola, Walson-Jack unveil digital platform for Marine, Blue Economy

      No one in the hall appeared more pleased by the distinguished crowd which included Femi Gbajabiamila, the Chief of Staff to the president, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, than the man of the moment and author, Ayo Opadokun. He was effusive in his praise of his friends, comrades, associates, benefactors, rescuers, patrons and supporters including his beloved spouse.  Opadokun himself is quite a bundle. But he is a bundle to cherish in your corner of the ring. Brave, fearless and indomitable when going forward, his political and institutional memory is a tad short of staggering. He knows where all the dead bodies are buried and it will be a truly feckless fellow who chooses to mess around with him. As a Chinese proverb has it, if you tarry long enough by the bank of the river, the bodies of your enemies will wash by. In the jungle of Nigeria’s postcolonial politics, the Offa-born warrior-prince is an arch-survivalist.

      As speaker after speaker rose in fury to denounce military rule in all its infamy, its villainies and brutal decimation of the Nigerian dream this fine Thursday morning, you got a sense that they have come to bury Ceasar and not to praise him. Particularly outstanding  was Chief Emeka Anyaoku who gave a clinical analysis of why a new federalist constitution was an urgent imperative for the nation. Standing proudly erect and impressively alert a few days short of his ninety third year on earth, the former international diplomat has spent the better part of twenty six years since his retirement canvassing for a wholesale reconfiguration of the unitary arrangement that is at the heart of Nigeria’s endemic instability and political predicament. From the fiery denunciations and the enraptured approval of the audience, it was clear that the noise was not about to disappear.

       Here comes the sublime irony. Not all military interventions can be dismissed with a wave of the hand. In any case, hegemonies even of the gun cannot be sustained by force alone. They require intellectual rationalizations and philosophical fabrications to insinuate them into the popular consciousness. Soldiers alone do not construct the gun hegemony. They require intellectual ammunition and critical firepower from the political and intellectual class. We must be painfully honest with ourselves. There is no point hiding behind one finger. You cannot build something on nothing. Military intervention in Nigeria was probably inevitable; a disaster waiting to happen.  So was the gun hegemony. Had there been some national consensus following the military mutiny of 1966, the rump of Balewa’s cabinet would have withstood the attempt of General Aguiyi-Ironsi and his cohorts to subvert the constitution. But the famous owl of Minerva always begins its flight after the event.  

  • A day to remember

    A day to remember

    • May the January 18, 2026 agreement between the FG and ASUU permanently end their hostilities. Amen!

    January 18, 2026, would for a long time be remembered in the annals of university education in Nigeria. It was a day that two hitherto sworn ‘enemies’ agreed to sheathe their swords.

    This is significant given the belligerent nature of their relationship, especially since the signing of a controversial 2009 agreement that had been the source of acrimony between the two parties. This had led to strike several times, which paralysed academic activities on our university campuses, and made nonsense of their academic calendars.

    Some accounts say the country’s university system lost about 1,200 days to the 17-year-old crises.

    I am here talking about the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) and the Federal Government.

    The 2009 agreement dealt essentially with university funding and budgeting; academic welfare; university autonomy and governance; research and development (R&D); legal frameworks and implementation, as well as implementation and review.

    It was supposed to be a foundational document aimed at revitalising public universities in the country, which, really, were in dire need of revitalisation. However, the agreement suffered poor implementation, leading to incessant strike by the university lecturers.

    On the basis of the agreement, ASUU called its members out on a strike that lasted four months in 2009; followed by another that lasted five months in 2010. There was a 51-day strike in 2011 and another five months strike in 2013. In 2017, ASUU members went on a month-long strike while students were sent packing for three months in 2018.

    As if these were not damaging enough, ASUU went on what could pass for the ‘Mother of all strikes’ in 2020. The strike lasted nine months, followed by another eight months strike in 2022.

    The effects of all these strikes cannot be quantified in financial terms alone. Students who should spend four years on their chosen courses ended up spending six years or more. Of course, students staying at home for longer than necessary were exposed to all manner of dangers, including but not limited to drug taking and sundry crimes. As they say, ‘an idle mind is the devil’s workshop’.

    Abroad, certificates issued by our public universities lost recognition. It was private universities to the rescue.

    It was not that ASUU did not have good reasons to protest. Things were bad enough in our tertiary institutions to make anyone who had an idea of what many of these institutions were in the past, angry.

    Read Also: Nigerian Army remembers fallen soldiers, assures troops of support

    Just that many Nigerians saw ASUU as too rigid in its demands from successive governments, especially its penchant to resort to strike. The truth of the matter is that our higher institutions, including the hitherto iconic ones, have become shadows of their former pristine state.

    Those of us who went to some of these institutions even as late as the 1980s know the kind of things we met on ground, which were even at that time mere remnants of what those who were ahead of us enjoyed in the higher institutions, particularly the universities.

    I remember vividly then that we had foreign lecturers that were among some of the best anywhere in their respective disciplines. Till today, myself and some of my colleagues still speak nostalgically about one of such lecturers, one Father Schuyler.

    Just as we had foreign lecturers then at the University of Lagos, we also had foreign students on the campus from around the globe. These were positive indices about those institutions then. One, foreign lecturers on our university campuses pointed in the direction of the comparative pay the institutions offered, among other things. Foreign students on our campuses, on the other hand, was indication of the high quality of our academic standards.

    All of these are gone with the winds.

    A few months back, I was discussing with one of my seniors at the Federal School of Arts and Science in Ondo, Ondo State, who is now a lecturer at the University of Lagos. When he told me what a professor earns, I felt so sorry, first for myself, and then the country. How come? How did we sink that low?

    How do you attract good hands to the universities if lecturers are not well paid? It is only a matter of time for the institutions to decay because they would not be able to attract brilliant minds and can only recourse to people who just want a job, any job at all, not necessarily people who want to impart knowledge to others. Even if they want to impart knowledge, where do they get it? If they too had it, they wouldn’t be in the universities where they are paid peanuts when they can get better pay outside of the academic environment.

    In the same vein, foreign students would not come to study in universities where students perch on windows to listen to lectures. The state of most of our public higher institutions is just nothing to write home about.

    This reminds me of what a student in one of the public higher institutions told me about two weeks ago. I am talking specifically about The Polytechnic, Ibadan. We were discussing on why the student chose to stay off campus when there are hostel facilities on the campus. I expected her to say it was because they didn’t have enough space to go round. But what she said surprised me: she said many of them chose to stay off-campus because the toilets and some other facilities were bad. And, as if to punish the students for the bad state of the facilities, the institution forces those of them who chose to stay outside to pay about 50 per cent of the accommodation fee for what it calls “hostel refusal”!

    In our time, we did everything possible to stay on the campus. The situation must be so bad for many students to want to stay off-campus, given the many advantages. Of course, a few may want to stay outside because they have free accommodation somewhere around or because they want to do some other things beyond what their parents sent them to do in school. But there is cause to worry when majority fall for the off-campus accommodation and, on top of that, they are forced to pay for refusing to stay in the hostels.

    Let no one get me wrong. The Polytechnic, Ibadan, might not be alone in this. It is only a metaphor for the state of affairs in many of our public higher institutions. Perhaps the institution itself was forced to be collecting money for a service not rendered as a result of the larger malaise of underfunding that the institutions are grappling with.

    Given the afore-stated, among others, one would think successive governments would have dealt with the tertiary institutions’ matter with utmost urgency. That they didn’t, and only kept flexing muscles with the union lent the governments open to accusations of being insensitive to the plight of the students and their parents.

    Although the neglect that these institutions suffered from successive governments was not good enough, ASUU still got the chunk of the blame for its inability to think out of the box for solutions to the universities’ seemingly intractable problems. As people in the ivory towers, Nigerians expected them to be more creative in dealing with the government.

    Indeed, this penchant for strike led to the formation of CONUA, the Congress of University Academics, which has always opposed ASUU’s flagrant recourse to strike to settle disputes with the government.

    Be that as it may, it is good that, as they say, “all is well that ends well”.

    The ASUU/government feud has only confirmed what Ralph Waldo Emerson said that “Peace cannot be achieved through violence, it can only be attained through understanding.” Many other people have affirmed this saying in different words. For instance, Sun Tzu also said that “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”

    It is incredible that the braggadocio and an ego war that has lasted so long could end, albeit at a roundtable without, literally put, any single ‘shot’ being fired. But that is the way of all wars.

    I am not sure that many Nigerians were aware of the processes that led to the signing of the agreement. Even if they were, they would have simply dismissed it as improbable fiction.

    But here we are today, celebrating what should herald hope of uninterrupted academic activities in our universities, a thing that has eluded us for years.

    Although one would have to see the details of the current agreement before drawing conclusions, one needs to remind the government that the curtains cannot be drawn on the challenges in the universities without attention paid to the aforementioned areas and others outside of the universities.

    The Bola Ahmed Tinubu administration has come a long way in barely 30 months in office, particularly in the area of tertiary education.

    The government’s student loan scheme, the Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND), alone speaks to this commitment. It is one major way of demonstrating its resolve to expand access to tertiary education.

    At least about N89.94 billion has been paid directly to 263 tertiary institutions for tuition and institutional fees, and N72.03 billion paid directly to students as upkeep allowances at N20,000 per student, for the over 864,798 students that had benefitted from the fund as at January 13.

    As the Managing Director of NELFUND, Akintunde Sawyerr, noted, “These figures are not just statistics. They represent real lives impacted, real barriers removed, and real opportunities created.”

    I commend the Tinubu administration for coming this far on the ASUU crisis. Specifically, the Minister of Education too, Dr Maruf Tunji Alausa, should be commended.

    But, as we have seen with past pacts, the problem is not in signing agreements, the issue is honouring them. This government must do its utmost to honour the agreement. At least we did not see anyone pointing a gun at the other person before it was signed.

    Not only that, it is not only our university teachers that have been clamouring for better conditions of service. Their counterparts in the nonacademic unions, teachers in the polytechnics, etc. also deserve consideration. Mercifully the minister acknowledged that much: “I can assure you that the ASUP and the NASU agreements will be finalised as well.”

    Again, as Dr Alausa observed, “However, we cannot resolve a 20-year-old problem in just two and a half years,” nonetheless, we urge it to sustain the tempo such that our public higher institutions would gradually begin to regain their lost glory.

    This is the expectation if we must avert the kind of violence that we are battling with in the northern parts of the country. Half-baked graduates are only a shade better than stark illiterates.

    What would it benefit us if we invest so much in education only to reap whirlwinds in return? God forbids,

    We must never return to the ugly era of incessant strike. This is a cautionary note to both the government and ASUU.

  • SNAPSONG    275  

    SNAPSONG    275  

    From Grass to Grace

    Rice and Shine

    Now let me arise

         With my precious bag of rice

    So long in coming

         Our heads were already turning

    We thought it was gone

         With our budget czar on the run

    Our empty stomachs growled

         In a tone that was tense and loud

    But this anxious time around

         Fate ran the tale aground

    The soothsayers were wrong

         Our luck was bold and strong

     So here they are

         Delectably rare

    Heaving golden grains

    Read Also: Tinubu laying strong foundation for long-term prosperity – Information Minister

         And their forgotten pains

     Hauled in from near and far

         On each bag a smiling star

    With gentle hints of the waiting kitchen

         And the feathery flavor of the wary chicken 

    Cooked, fried, and gently jollofed

         Ready every way to be liked and loved

    With dazzling dishes in their appointed place

         We find our way to the Orchard of Grace