Category: Columnists

  • That Port Harcourt mob attack

    An Ijaw friend of mine from Bayelsa state who has been living in Lagos for close to 30 years now shocked me recently when he made a strong albeit stupid case for a second term for his kinsman, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, as Nigeria’s president post 2015 general elections.

    He pleaded that President Jonathan should be given another opportunity in 2015 to ‘wobble and fumble’ in the presidency again just like his predecessors did and were not denied a second term.

    And in case you think the man was joking, he wasn’t. He was dead serious. He listed former presidents Shehu Shagari and Olusegun Obasanjo who didn’t do well in their first term in office and were still allowed to continue after four wasted years.

    He argued that since every  elected president before Jonathan messed up the opportunity given to them to rule this country and were still given another chance to continue, then Jonathan should be allowed to complete his own ‘messing up’, so to speak before we clean up their mess. As he puts it ‘let the messing up go round’.

    Don’t cry for him or Nigeria. That is the level to which our politics has fallen since we elected to promote ethnicity rather than competence in our choice of leaders in this country.

    If not to appease the Yoruba for denying their son, Chief MKO Abiola the presidency of Nigeria in 1993 through the criminal annulment of his election, why on earth would any right thinking leadership hand over the rein of government to an Olusegun Obasanjo after he bungled the first chance he had as military Head of State between 1976 and 1979?  But that was what the so called cabal then did in 1999, when Obasanjo was ‘elected’ president, even against the wise counsel of his Yoruba kinsmen.

    And to complete the appeasement he was given another four years even when his first tenure was a monumental failure

    Was it not because the north must be allowed to complete its eight years at the saddle that President Shagari was given a second term in 1983 in spite of his glaring inadequacies?  President Umaru Yar’Adua would have asked for and given another four years if death had not intervened to cut short his presidency, even when the signs were there that things weren’t getting better. You could argue that Yar’Adua could have done better were it not for death, but on the evidence of his performance as a two-term governor of Katsina state, even ten more years wouldn’t possibly have changed anything.

    So if you look around you, it’s been one mess up after another for our presidents (including the soldiers), and this was probably why my Ijaw friend was arguing that his Ijaw brother, our president, Dr Goodluck Jonathan be allowed to complete the South-south turn.

    If we are to go by his argument, then the entire 500 plus ethnic nationalities in Nigeria should be allowed their chance to mess Nigeria up for eight years each. Did I hear you scream madness? Yes madness! Because that is what it is, but don’t laugh at him, rather pity him and some of his fellow Ijaw and South-southerners who are rabidly rallying behind a Jonathan-for-second-term project without a thought for the wellbeing of Nigeria.

    By the way, my friend used to be a critic of the lack lustre Jonathan administration, until his recent 360 degrees turn. Why I wouldn’t know. But I know for certain that he didn’t change because he had been paid, but I suspect blind ethnic solidarity which had never been part of him before but which has now crept in and is distorting his sense of reasoning and perception, a malady that is gradually blowing across the Ijaw nation and to some extent, the South-south geo-political zone.

    This malady is playing itself out in Rivers State where the ruling Peoples’ Democratic Party is in a state of civil war which has the tendency to derail not only this democracy but also the fabric of Nigeria’s existence as a united nation. The war has pitched Governor Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi and his supporters on one side against forces loyal to President Goodluck Jonathan, led by the Minister of State for Education Nyesom Wike.

    The story of the unfolding war so far you know, but the whole story might not be known unless the key actors decide to open up. Governor Amaechi has promised to reveal all at a later date, sometime next year and he says Rivers people would be shocked. Wike in response says if the governor opens his mouth and says something, he too has a lot to reveal. But this is beside the point here.

    What is of greater concern here is the dangerous dimension the whole crisis has taken which portends danger for the country.

    Last week, four state governors from the ruling Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), decided to pay a solidarity visit to their colleague and Chairman, Nigeria Governors’ Forum, Rt. Hon Rotimi Amaechi, who they believe is facing persecution from the federal government for standing up against a tyrannical presidency.

    The governors of Kano, Jigawa, Adamawa and Niger states who flew into Port Harcourt International Airport together with Amaechi were reportedly attacked by supporters of Wike (by extension supporters of Jonathan) and held hostage for hours at the airport by stone throwing thugs from the Wike backed Grassroots Democratic Initiatives (GDI), a group of political hoodlums that emerged from nowhere just as the Rivers crisis began.  Though unruffled, Amaechi and his guests had one of the vehicles in their convoy damaged by the thugs as they eventually made their way out of the airport for the Government House, Port Harcourt.

    But after spending some quality time with their host, the governors eventually left for home but not before having some harsh words for the Nigeria Police whose officers and men reportedly looked the other way as the hoodlums held sway at the airport. They reportedly expressed concern at the glaring partisanship of the police against the state government in the crisis and threatened that state governments could reconsider their funding of the police if the trend in Rivers continues. They also deplored the political crisis in the state urging their colleague to stand firm.

    The attack on the governors by Wike’s boys showed the level to which Jonathan and his band of supporters are prepared to go to achieve their 2015 objective. Thank God, at no time were the lives of these visiting governors put under serious threat. If all or one or two of them had been injured in the attack, only God knows what could have happened back home in their respective states. This is the kind of thing you get when thugs are allowed to walk the corridors of power.

    I recall in the run up to the governorship election in old Oyo state in 1979, the then Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), the party that later emerged victorious in the gubernatorial polls in what was then known as LOOBO states, comprising today’s south west, Edo and Delta states, had its primary and it was deadlocked. Chief Bola Ige locked horns with his former teacher at Ibadan Grammar School, Archdeacon Emmanuel Alayande (believed to be Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s preferred candidate for the position) and the deadlock was broken by a certain thuggish looking politician by name Chief Busari Adelakun. Governor Bola Ige was to later reward Adelakun with a seat in his cabinet as Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, against the advice of Chief Awolowo who we were told, warned that Adelakun was a mere thug, not fit for any serious political appointment. Bola Ige did not listen.

    Those who know the story of the political crisis that engulfed Bola Ige’s Oyo state, or witnessed the mayhem that accompanied the National Party of Nigeria (NPN’s) determination to take over the state from the UPN would readily acknowledge, if they are still alive, the role the thug called Adelakun played in the blood bath. It might be necessary to add here that the crisis in Oyo state then was one of those crises that brought down the second republic.

    Another thug is walking the corridors of power now and at the national level. The trajectory of his rise and rise to prominence is probably the fault of his benefactors, including Governor Amaechi and now President Jonathan, who instead of rewarding Wike (for whatever good  he must done to them) with a position commensurate to his thuggish disposition promoted him beyond the level of his competence. And now he is causing all this trouble.

    Nigeria could have been on fire now if anything bad had happened to those governors. And nobody or only a few would remember that Wike’s ambition had a hand or even was the hand that ignited the fire, everything would be on Jonathan’s neck. The earlier the president knows this the better. He should call Wike and his band of thugs to order.

     

  • Old soldiers, new battle

    ‘A lie may travel for donkey years but truth overtakes it in a flash – Yoruba proverb’  

     

    Were Chinua Achebe still alive, he probably would have brewed another classic, brimming with sardonic humour and laconic wit, from the July 18 launch in Lagos of The Tragedy of Victory, Brig-Gen. Godwin Alabi-Isama’s Civil War (1967-1970) memoirs.

    The new war account recounts the exploits of the Third Marine Commando (3MCODO), mostly under the formidable Brig-Gen. (then Col.) Benjamin Adekunle aka Black Scorpion, who attained both heroic and mythical status on the Nigerian side during that war.

    Brig-Gen. Alabi-Isama (then Lt. Col) was Adekunle’s chief of staff. The author, ace strategist and military tactician, saw almost every inch of battle on the Atlantic Front, which proved pivotal and decisive in swinging the pendulum of victory and defeat.

    Still, any literary wit with Biafra sympathies, having read There was a Country, Prof Achebe’s bitter swansong, could easily, “serves-them-right” manner, have turned the July 18 event into Nigeria’s own Tower of Babel, where Nigeria’s own victorious generals, under the tragically ironic banner of Tragedy of Victory, fall upon themselves in ferocious verbal combat.

    Even more grippingly ironic is Gen. (then Col.) Olusegun Obasanjo, as personal metaphor of “tragedy of victory”. Obasanjo (as his name Olusegun, Yoruba for “The Lord has conquered”, suggests) took the Biafra instrument of surrender as final 3MCODO commander, after the more formidable Black Scorpion. On that, he was an immaculate victor.

    But the tragic victor birthed when it was revealed that the all-conquering general, self-hyped to high heavens in My Command (1980), Obasanjo’s Civil War account, is the same that also reportedly fled for dear life from enemy fire, allegedly receiving bullet wounds in his rump!

    Whether that allegation was true or not (Col. Oyinlade Iluyomade, aka Hitler, commander of the troops involved in that particular battle insisted it was), the war hero, military era head of state and first elected president of the 4th Republic, became the butt of hilarious jokes at the venue! That would count as a personal tragedy of victory.

    But there is also a corporate side to that victorious tragedy.

    The near-unanimity of opinions, among the gathered generals, was that Obasanjo, by craftily rigging the Biafra armistice to be a one-man show, gypped other war commanders of earned glory, thus somewhat echoing the perfidious tortoise that renamed himself “All of you”, in Achebe’s Things Fall Apart.

    Factor in Alabi-Isama’s allegation that Obasanjo, as military head of state, conspired with Lt. Gen. Theophilus Danjuma, his chief of army staff, to boot him out of the army after only 17 years, and the perfidious tortoise’s parallel comes to the fore. Alabi-Isama, from his war account, was one of the 3MCODO brain boxes that did the dirty work before Obasanjo came to claim the glory.

    Obasanjo rather viciously rubbed it in, in My Command, in which he emerged the sole super-hero, leaving the other commanders gasping behind as super-villains or just simple nincompoops – a claim the pair of Alabi-Isama and Lt-Gen. Alani Akinrinade, and indeed the armada of generals and other old soldiers at the launch, dismissed as voodoo tales!

    Danjuma, chair and chief presenter at the launch, denied there was any anti-Alabi-Isama conspiracy, insisting that though he couldn’t recall the details, he had documents to show that whatever happened “followed due process”.

    The tragedy of victory was also apparent from the after-war career trajectory of the triumvirate of Adekunle, Alabi-Isama and Akinrinade, the hardy trio that faced the hottest parts of the war and prevailed with uncommon brilliance.

    Adekunle who, according to Wikipedia, renamed 3 Infantry Division 3MCDO, without even formal approval from army headquarters, suffered premature retirement in 1974 after only 16 years. He joined the army in 1958.

    As at the time Tragedy of Victory was launched, Gen. Adekunle was down with illness, prompting his first son, Abiodun, to solicit for support. Adekunle’s odyssey is not much different from the bulk of old soldiers at the occasion who complained of neglect, even after shedding blood to keep Nigeria one.

    Alabi-Isama himself was retired after only 17 years, following the conspiracy he alleged but which Danjuma denied.

    Only Akinrinade, of the trio, attained the apex of his career, not only becoming a three-star general as Lt-General, but also Second Republic’s first chief of army staff; and later chief of defence staff.

    Could the anti-Obasanjo armada then result from peer envy? That is possible, except that the adverse testimony of Gen. Akinrinade, measured, frank, candid and nuanced, both at the book launch and in his widely acclaimed interview with The Nation from the eve of the July 18 launch, did little to enhance Obasanjo’s cause.

    Akinrinade was Obasanjo’s chief operations officer that first met surrendering Biafra General Philip Effiong (who Danjuma jokingly dismissed as colonel in Nigeria, general in Biafra, to wide laughter and guffaw), at his Amichi last war headquarters.

    Still, Gen. Yakubu Gowon, Nigeria’s war-time commander-in-chief, did not share the near-unanimous belief that Obasanjo stole anyone’s glory by claiming the instrument of surrender, even while he was far away in his Port Harcourt headquarters, when Akinrinade mid-wifed the surrender.

    “As the Commanding Officer assigned to command the Division that received the instrument of surrender from Biafra,” Gen. Gowon declared in a supplement Foreword to go with the second edition of the new book, “Gen. Obasanjo rightfully was positioned to claim victory on behalf of the Commander-in-Chief of the Nigerian Armed Forces.”

    That coming from Gowon, though logical, was rare grace, compared with the nasty stuff Obasanjo wrote in his Not My Will, about his former commander-in-chief, following the unfortunate event of 13 February 1976: the abortive coup that claimed the life of Gen. Murtala Muhammad and propelled Obasanjo to his first coming as military head of state.

    In Not My Will, Obasanjo, with exquisite bad grace, talked down on his old commander-in-chief, pillorying him as “Mr. Gowon”, tagging him with “duplicity and complicity” and celebrating his hurried “dismissal” (later reversed by 2nd Republic President Shehu Shagari) from the military – all these over mere suspicion of his alleged involvement in the Bukar Sukar Dimka coup!

    Now, who is this Nigeria, the heartless errant-lady whose troubadours-general kill themselves to protect; and yet who rewards almost each and everyone with disgrace and hurt?

    This is the crisis of Nigeria’s nationhood which, as Gen. Akinrinade correctly said, even the Civil War did not resolve.

    But at the launch, Gen. Danjuma, a tad insensitive but with martial elegance, proclaimed: “Though they said there was no victor or no vanquished, all I know is that we won the war”!

    We? Won?

    Forty-three years after the war, every Nigerian would appear a loser – not the least the generals – and would continue to be until Nigeria’s fundamental contradictions are resolved by restructuring the country along equitable and development lines.

    If Tragedy of Victory rams in this notorious fact, it would do a future patriotic duty just as it has done a past one by putting the records straight on the Nigerian Civil War.

  • As Rivers’ anomie continues

    As Rivers’ anomie continues

    Did anyone ever suffer the illusion that the foiling of the attempted coup by the Gang of Five at the Rivers State House of Assembly on July 9 would bring some respite for the folks in the state?

    Two weeks after, the signs ought to be clear enough: the quintet and their pipers may have been worsted by the superior tactics of Governor Rotimi Amaechi and the 27 loyal lawmakers, there is no relenting on their part. That the Obuah-led faction of Rivers’ PDP wants the governor out by means foul than fair is hardly news; indeed, only those unfamiliar with the PDP’s bizarre inventiveness would consider the pre-emptive valedictory service staged for the governor and his troop at the weekend as anything strange.

    That is how it has always been for the party of the tattered umbrella.

    Now, thanks to the Sunday Sun of July 21, we now know that the event(s) of July 9 is merely a dress rehearsal for the main battle which according to the newspaper, “will be the final push to dislodge Amaechi from his stranglehold in the state and dissolve his post-2015 political ambitions permanently”. Apparently emboldened by the findings of their post-putsch review strategists which blamed their failure on “tardiness and the inability of critical people in the scheme to tighten all the loose ends well”, the anti-Amaechi forces are reportedly fine-tuning a new offensive. This time around, the creek warriors have since resolved that nothing would be considered off-the-table.

    You ask: who is giving the battle orders? After last week’s visit by 16 Bishops from the South-south zone to First Lady Dame Patience Goodluck Jonathan, I believe that the question has been sufficiently answered. Since the details are already in public domain, I do not wish to bore my readers with them here. Suffice to say here that our irrepressible Dame not only repudiated the previously held position of the hired hands that the Presidency had no hands in the crisis, she let out the hitherto suppressed truth about her direct, active involvement in the animus. In a fit of rage, she labelled the elected governor a wayward son who needed to be steered from the path of self-destruction; in another breadth, she would admonish him to stop being used by outsiders against his own blood! Such contradictions are perhaps expected in the atmosphere of contrived crisis.

    So where do we go from here? In the first place, those who see the Presidency as holding the ace miss the point. It does not. If it does, the Rivers story would have changed by now. The issues, as it is, is no longer one of whether or not the lawmakers loyal to Amaechi will hold out. At this point, it does not really matter how things turn out; what we have is a battered, bruised, diminished, demystified, but desperate Presidency.

    I do not think we have had it so bad.

    So, what to expect? More serial missteps; more attempts to subvert the constitution by those sworn to uphold and defend the sacred document. Should anyone be surprised if the Abuja lords finally succeed in crowning Evans Bapakaye Bipi Speaker of the Rivers legislature through the back door?

    Clearly, one lesson that the Rotimi Amaechi ordeal has taught is that the notion of the Nigerian Presidency as the most powerful one in the world has very little in terms of substance really; what has sustained the myth is the historical weak-kneed resistance by an indifferent citizenry. That is what has made it to become self-perpetuating. Our recent history has since taught that it is more of illusion than fact.

    You ask – what of the Ayodele Fayose example? I say, this is 2013; the circumstances are clearly different.

    Still want to ask how the Rivers scenario will play out?

    First, I do not think that anyone should loose sleep over the role of the partisan police. Let me make a quick comment on the ugly event of July 9. After watching the show of shame on Youtube, my conclusion was that there was no language too strong to condemn the brigandage in the hallowed legislative chambers. It is however a different call to be asked to choose between the show of shame on one hand, and the attempted institutional subversion, the brazen attempt by the five gangsters to foist their rule of impunity on the state, coupled with their open, contemptible disdain for the constitution of the federal republic. Simply put: those chaps ought to have been arraigned for an attempted coup!

    How about the drama of declaring one of the principal actors – Chidi Lloyd – wanted or even the extreme measure of hanging the charge of attempted murder for what appears to be at best a case of affray? That is Nigeria Police for you. The point is, the drama is unlikely to go farther than keeping the man out of circulation. After then what?

    Was the governor right to have ‘invaded’ the House with his personal security? How about asking the governor to wait to be kicked out of office by the garrulous five?

    By the way, how dare anyone ask whether it was right for a governor sworn to uphold the law and the constitution to sit in the comfort of his office while lawbreakers are allowed free reign in his domain? Do you ask a governor to play by the rules when the forces massed against him have long parted with the niceties of rules and due process?

    I need to make this final point. The greatest tragedy in the Rivers’ crisis is the diminishing moral authority of the Presidency. A Presidency that would stage a victory ball for the loosing party in a contest cannot but damage its esteem in the eyes of the people. The other day, we even heard the First Lady lecture on respect for constituted authority. Strange, isn’t it coming from an unelected individual that once gave an elected governor a dressing down over state policies?

    These are unusual times. We may as well start to prepare for the coming anarchy.

  • Northerners and power shift

    Ango Abdullahi, secretary to the Northern Elders Forum (NEF) reopened the debate on power shift when he declared last week, that the north was determined to reclaim power come 2015. Exuding incredible confidence on the prospects of the northern project, Abdullahi anchored his optimism on two key planks. The first is the logic of rotation while the other draws impetus from the touted demographic advantage of the region.

    He said the north will rely heavily on the fact that it is its turn to have a shot at that office as was agreed by stakeholders before and during Obasanjo’s regime and in keeping with the constitution of the ruling party. Where this fails to sail through, they will call to action the sheer weight of their numbers to win the ensuing election given the principles of one man one vote.

    Hear him, “the north is determined and insisting that the leadership of the country will rotate to it in 2015 and I am making that very clear to you. If it is on the basis of one man one vote, the demography shows that the north can keep power as long as it wants because it will always win elections”.

    He went on to show how the rotation of power as a way of giving a sense of belonging to the distinct groups in the country was arrived at the 1987 National Political Reforms Conference. Obasanjo became its first beneficiary because of events of the annulled June 12, 1993 elections. According to him, it was supposed to last for four years but later extended due to pleas from Obasanjo to serve for another term since the constitution allows that.

    “With Obasanjo’s eight years and six years of Jonathan come 2015, it would amount to taking the north for granted if Jonathan who was part of this agreement (having signed as number 37 in his capacity as deputy governor of Bayelsa State) puts himself forward for another election”, he would further contend.

    It is difficult not to admit the weighty argument by the north in respect of rotation of power in this country. Obasanjo must have paid heed to it when he manipulated his way to have late Umaru Yar’Adua run as the presidential candidate of the ruling party. He won. But his death after two years in the saddle, unleashed a chain of events that are at the centre of the current crisis of confidence among key political gladiators in this country. The management of his sickness left much to be desired even as contrived obstacles were placed on Jonathan’s way to assuming his constitutional role as acting president until the Senate intervened. All these may have ruffled nerves. We were told by late National Security Adviser, Andrew Azazi that violence in this country peaked following the primaries of the PDP that threw up Jonathan. It would appear security challenges since Jonathan came to power, complicated the disposition of the geo-political zones to the power equation in the country. They also gave rise to palpable fear and apprehension regarding what use the north intends to make of political power. No thanks to the killings of innocent people and destruction of their properties by the Boko Haram sect obsessed with enthroning an Islamic state after the south has been sacked out of the north.

    One mute point here is that, the north intends to realize its power shift project by rotation through the ruling Peoples Democratic Party PDP or where this fails, they will prosecute the same goal through any other party. On the latter, the sheer weight of their population promises to be the game changer. They are saying very unambiguously that power must shift to the north in the next election whether Jonathan runs or not. If the logic of rotation fails and they corner power through their demographic advantage, then it is good by to power shift as they can decide to retain power as long as it pleases them. That is the clear message Abdullahi has sent across which should not be ignored.

    But then the political arithmetic canvassed by Abdullahi is not as simple as it has been put forward. By the 2006 census figures, the north accounts for 52.56 per cent of the population while that of the south is 46.35. Even then, these figures represent the absolute population and not the number of eligible or even registered voters. There is also the misplaced and untenable assumption that all northerners will vote for the northern candidate while all southerners will queue behind a southerner. This is not borne out of our electoral history and strikes as an act of desperation. Moreover, the concept of a monolithic north is by all accounts stale even as Abdullahi would want us to reason to the contrary. Whatever led northern elders to the conclusion that the 2015 election can be fought solely along the north and south divide must be a huge disappointment to the unity of this country. Is it not an uncanny twist of fate that, youths under the umbrella of Northern Youths Network have dissociated themselves from statements credited to NEF and ACF on return of power to the region come 2015? Its president Mallam Alli Kano said those canvassing power shift to the north in 2015 are doing so for selfish reasons as ethnicity, religion and primordial sentiments which the elders had employed to sway choices during elections must be discarded as we prepare for 2015. The elders can as well dismiss this. But such dissenting views were unthinkable in the past.

    There is even a more grave danger in an election that is fought along the lines of the north and south divide. Its outcome given extant realities is loaded with frightening prospects of facilitating the failure of the Nigerian state. Then, earlier predictions from the US would have become a self-fulfilling prophesy. These are the potent dangers in the NEF argument. If the 2015 election is fought and won along these divisions, it will be nigh impossible for the winner to take off as he will not be able to muster the required majority in the National Assembly. The ensuing disputations will quickly catalyze the same disastrous end.

    So Abdullahi and his likes are not doing this nation any good by inventing warped and self-serving arguments all in the desperation to corner power by all means. It would have been of more national appeal if they had argued that where rotation fails, the north will work with fair- minded people from the south to prosecute the same goal. But to give the impression that the north can do away with the south and retain power for ever is the height of deceit and stupidity.

    Even as the logic of rotation is very valid, the posturing of the NEF on the issue of demography brings into focus some of the systemic dysfunctions that are at the root of the festering mistrust and suspicion among our people. Some weeks back, the chairman of the National Population Commission, Festus Odimegwu shocked the nation when he revealed that some of the enumeration centres we have do not exist in reality as some people bought them same way politicians bought voters’ cards to gain advantage. The figures the NEF is bandying may not scale the test of this revelation.

    More fundamentally, the dispute over power shift points to the fact that there some irreducible issues of our federal order we need to reach common agreement on for us to make any progress.

    We need to address more seriously, the inequities and structural imbalances of our national existence contrived to gain advantage over some other sections. Curiously each time the idea of a national conference is canvassed the same north will be the lead opposition.

     

     

     

     

     

  • Obituary

    Obituary

    When former President Olusegun Obasanjo penned his war memoirs, he called it My Command, a cocky title since no one expected anything less than command for a general’s account of his soldiery during the Nigerian Civil War. Again whose command should it have been? Could he have woven the war tales of another general? Readers would have called him presumptuous. Yet, when his fellow combatants read his story, they called him presumptuous. They implied that the earthy man lied through his pen, the man who ran this country twice, once as civilian and the other as soldier, who claimed victory for the war, who affects the air of the soldier as statesman, who even tinkers with the toga of thinker, was not the soldier he claimed. To his credit though, Obasanjo might have claimed to be a soldier but not a gentleman.

    Last week, in the presence of other generals, a new book was launched by a participant and witness. The book, titled The Tragedy of Victory, shot to attention through a series of interviews the author, General Alabi Isama, granted this newspaper.

    At the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, the book, My Command, was ambushed, tackled, shot and killed. It was also buried without fanfare. The command was led by Isama, with a book as counter-narrative. The pictures and maps served as artilleries, the memories and other documents as bullets. But the witnesses who materialised on stage at the launch starred as the bombs. The grenadiers include the urbane General Alani Akinrinade, the fiery General Theophilus Danjuma, the genteel General Yakubu Gowon as well as General Mobolaji Johnson, General Sunday Tuoyo, Col. Oyinlade Iluyomade, aka Hitler, Major Salau. We also had the female testimonies from Mrs. Utuk and Senator Ita-Giwa.

    The witnesses came one after the other to attest to the testimony of Isama. Two truths cannot inhabit one room, since one represents light and the other darkness. With the blast of illumination from Isama’s book, Obasanjo’s My Command slid into an obituary. So My Command, aged 32, was buried in a ceremony of witnesses. Kunle Ajibade, a master book reviewer, brought the book alive for the audience. For irony, a lady named Taiwo Obasanjo, the creator’s ex-wife, said the closing prayers.

    When generals tell war stories they owe us truths. It is a point of view but it ought to be faithful to facts. Hence other generals have written stories like the legendary but brash George Patton who titled his memoirs War As I Knew It.

    My Command told basic stories. One, that he was the true hero of the 3 Marine Commando. Two, all the other generals and subordinates stumbled. Three, that he crafted the strategy that ended the war. That the 3 Marine Commando women operated mainly as flesh comforts for the soldiers. Maps also told the stories. Isama called Obasanjo a blundering general. Obasanjo denied the claims. At the launch, he painted a picture of a fleeing Obasanjo in battle who suffered a bullet in the buttocks.

    Isama’s account made better sense to me because of the authority of the pictures and maps and the consistency of the narrative. Nothing helped this position than the corroboration from Akinrinade and the others.

    Isama’s book told important stories. One, that General Benjamin Adekunle, who commanded the division before Obasanjo took over, gave a good account of himself until the latter part of the hostilities when he became paranoid. According to Isama, and confirmed by Akinrinade, Adekunle plotted an ambush and murder of the two gentlemen. Adekunle, through his son, backed Isama’s accounts. The book also unveils the interconnectedness of the war, Igbo fighting for Nigeria and Nigerians fighting for Biafra. Isama shows pictures of Igbo caught in battle but they signed up to fight for Nigeria. It depicted the war as a meaningless bloodshed of brothers.

    Gowon came across as a bumbling commander in chief who ran a war without a central command. Isama fought shy of that conclusion but it was obvious as General Madiebo affirms in his books. Akinrinade confirmed this in a recent interview with this newspaper. Gowon could not rein in his errant generals. He also has blood of thousands on his hands for not stopping General Murtala Muhammed from forcing his troops across the Niger Bridge. As Akinrinade and also Isama show, it threw soldiers into a suicide dive. Murtala, the erratic general who played hero in his short time as Nigeria’s ruler, gave account of himself as a strategic tragedy, bearing deaths and wounded. He could not escape the charge of genocide in the Igbo-speaking Midwest.

    Also bumbling was General Shuwa, who commanded the First Division. He kept moving from village to village in the East, a thing that forced the Igbo into a rudderless life of impoverished wanderers. Nigeria did not design the war to kill Igbo but to defeat Biafra. His understanding of war, as Akinrinade himself confessed, could have taken the war another ten years. Those who call Shuwa a hero miss the point, and Gowon, the leader, played the politics of survival and let Shuwa and Murtala their tyrannous runs. Gowon became head of state as a Christian, non-Hausa-Fulani compromise in the aftermath of the pogrom that killed Igbo and other southerners who were not Yoruba. Historians should get the facts right. The pogrom was directed at Igbo but killed non-Igbo in huge numbers. That accounted for the preliminary neutrality of Midwest at the beginning of the conflict. No one has accounted for the number of Efiks, Annang and Ibibio slaughtered in the North. The phrase Igbo pogrom understates the fatalities of other ethnic groups.

    Gowon wanted to entrench himself and so would not upset his applecart by expressing authority over two supposedly northern generals. Murtala was from the old Midwest, now Edo, by birth, although he lay claim to the North. Gowon was, therefore, too weak a soldier to craft a grand scheme and implement them. He was lucky Biafra did not pull through Ore. Thanks to soldiers like Iluyomade who held off the numerically superior Biafran troops.

    In Isama’s narrative, the Biafran army blew important opportunities to win the war early. Why did Ojukwu, another bumbler, ask his army to undertake a long trek to Lagos? Why did the army not restrict itself to defend the East, which was the seceding entity? It was Ojukwu’s ego, his rivalry with Gowon but also, ironically, his divided selves as a Biafran who also was instinctively Nigerian all the same. Frederick Forsyth, who worked for Ojukwu, wrote recently that Victor Banjo lost the war. Banjo was an opportunist who hoodwinked Ojukwu but wanted to take over the country in the so-called Third Force. The Ija Ore that resulted led to a disorganised Biafran retreat to the Midwest. Why again did Biafra want to pass through Ibadan? Other routes of surprise existed? Say, for instance, Ilorin. The Ore narrative is still not fully told as yet.

    Why did Biafra recruit many Midwest Igbo officers of sterling records and abilities, and why, according to Isama, were all of them either locked up or killed for being saboteurs? The story begs for details how a whole corps of officers, who exhibited Biafran elan at the outset, became enemies? Was Ojukwu, like Adekunle, not paranoid? Isama said Adekunle wanted to conquer Aba, Owerri and Umuahia (OAU) to make a meeting of the Organisation of African Unity meeting in 1969. He neglected counsels of caution from Isama and Akinrinade about taking Owerri head on.

    Isama argued that Obasanjo took over and wanted to continue Adekunle’s follies. Obasanjo’s first foray was a disaster. He also remained in Port Harcourt and did not know how Akinrinade finished the war but used subterfuge to ensure that other generals like Shuwa, Muhammed, Adekunle did appear at the Biafran surrender ceremony.

    Was it not a statement of Ojukwu’s naivety that he had the best officers but failed because of strategic errors? As Tolstoy shows in his book of love and generals, War and Peace, a war is won not by those who shoot the gunpowder but those who devise the strategy. Ojukwu assumed that his army alone could win the war. Shuwa thought so too. Germany had the strongest army in the world when World War Two began; so did Napoleon in his wars. Weather, more than American prowess or Russian doggedness, humiliated Hitler. Snowed crippled the “little” generals machine.

    From Isama’s account, Biafra succeeded in propaganda to the outside world, but did not win the hearts of the minorities in the present Rivers, Cross River, Akwa Ibom, Delta, Edo and Bayelsa states. They easily signed on to fight for 3 Marine Commando.

    Isama’s book raises many more issues. It is a book written with decency and candour but shows that war never solves anything. Germany rules Europe now without a shot, and all the battles have turned out to be a waste of lives. Isama did not want the fire of hate but healing power of truth. That is what My Command lost. We gained a better story from Isama

  • Royal Rugby in Rivers

    Royal Rugby in Rivers

    God bless Patrick White, wherever the old contrarian chose to relocate to after his earthly sojourn. It was the great Australian novelist and 1973 Nobel laureate in Literature who once famously described rugby as a game of thugs writhing in mud. It was an unfriendly dig at the English Upper Class. Rugby, with its echoes of manliness and muscular menace, its refined violence and Public School pabulum, is a game very dear to the English upper crust. Unlike football, you can take rugby out of England but you cannot take the Englishness out of rugby.

    There is rugby and there is rugby. It appears that the old Australian curmudgeon spoke too soon. He should have watched the royal mud show in Rivers, Nigeria. Something new always comes out of Africa. Perhaps due to the peculiar prehistoric configuration and wiring of the Blackman’s brains, it is easy to convert tragedy to comedy. In a life marked by unremitting adversity and misfortune, laughter is the best medicine and superior political therapy. The alternative is sure suicide This is why after spiritual mountebanks, professional comedians and other comic clowns are among the highest paid Nigerians.

    Hip, hip, hurray! Welcome dear readers to the land of hippos and hipsters. It is called Hippotamia. It is a muddy swamp teeming with manatees, mermaids, mangrove mongoose, mammy waters, ocean going marsupials and other more menacing amphibious mammals. Here when thugs writhe in mud, they are engaged in political rugby which is a game more deadly and dangerous than the original. You can take the wrestling away from the mud wrestler but you cannot take away the mud. And when mud is thrown real hard, some of it is bound to stick.

    In political rugby, the rule of engagement is that there is no rule of engagement and the golden mean is that there should be no golden mean. It is a free for all affray in which no weapon is too sacred or too profane to be pressed info urgent battle. The end will justify the mean. A legislative mace here, an official canister there to register the official presence of the cooperative and officiating police. If the law cannot be enforced, lawlessness must be enforced, leaving in the trail of anarchy broken limbs, bludgeoned heads and the inevitable overseas treatment.

    It is a mystery as to why this murderous mud wrangling commands the attention of the stellar literati. Perhaps there is a muckraker in all of us. Like Patrick White, his illustrious predecessor, Wole Soyinka, the 1986 Nobel laureate, has also waded into the muddy eddy. It will be recalled that the Nobel laureate authored a play titled The Swamp Dwellers. From the vintage muddy observatory, Soyinka has now noted with characteristic caustic candour that you can take a hippopotamus out of the mud but you cannot take the mud out of the hippopotamus. It was a Soyinkaesque display of wit at its most lapidary and lacerating.

    But if the Nobel laureate thought that he had all the rugby ring to himself, he must be profoundly mistaken. There was a huge mud slide and the swamp dwellers rose in fury as if stung by a swamp scorpion. Even the hippotame—or hippodame—weighed in with characteristic robustness. Not one to take a direct shot lying low, the mother of all mermaids was overheard saying: “Yeye Yoruba man with him wuruwuru wig. If him get oblokos make him come near me with him yeye grammar. I go piss for him mouth.”

    This was just a preliminary skirmish before the main tournament. The prize for perjury goes to internet mudslingers and other habitués of what Soyinka himself may describe as the murky madrassa of cybercreeps. Surveying the muddy melee from a safe distance snooper captured one of the alliterate writhers on Sahara asking Soyinka to go back to school to complete his PhD if he must talk. Now, now, now, asking a Nobel laureate in literature for his PhD is like asking Albert Einstein to go and fix his dodgy mathematics before he could pronounce. This is swamp-speak at its most glorious. It could get nastier.

    All of which must tell us that it is a dangerous river to cross in Rivers State. The crisis in that state and its nuclear fallout are the most potent threat to the democratic process that we have seen so far. If care is not taken the entire process may slide down the muddy swamp. It is very curious that the crisis is unfurling in the presidential backyard, so to speak. Will a man set fire to his own backyard just to secure a political advantage? Jonathan must urgently review his strategy for remaining in office beyond 2015. It does not seem to be working for now.

    To be sure, the ethnicization of presidential struggle is not a novel phenomenon in Nigeria. It is a symptom of a deeper and more fundamental malaise: the zero sum politics and winner takes all mindset of our political elite. It is a reflection of the fact that in Nigeria, power is sought not for national development but for primitive accumulation. This is the classic disease of a retarded political class. But as William Inge noted, a man can build for himself a throne of bayonets, whether he will be able to sit on it is another matter. Social cannibalism always leads to the real thing.

    Although Jonathan is not the original brand owner, it should be noted that it is under his watch that the ethnicization of presidential politics has assumed its most dangerous and nation-threatening form. To be fair, this is partly due to the peculiar circumstances of his political ascendancy. He was the president from nowhere. Even the most riotous and raucous of his Ijaw hegemonists ought to have been taken by surprise at what seemed a divine and miraculous intervention in our body politic. What we have today is a siege mentality among Jonathan’s ethnic promoters. For a hitherto minority group to insist on hanging on to the presidency at all cost without the evidence of sterling performance or even elementary competence is going to be a bridge too far.

    Politics is still a game of numbers. Having secured a pan-Nigerian mandate which was fraught and tense as it was revealing of the polarization of the country along regional, religious and economic lines, Jonathan ought to have commenced a process of national healing that would have led to a solid national consensus. It is only in this atmosphere that national transformation can thrive and blossom. But the past three years have seen Mr President at his most polarizing and divisive best. Even his original enablers have fled, ominously watching from the sidelines which way the mud slide will go.

    In three years, Jonathan has succeeded in alienating critical and crucial stakeholders. The dominant tendencies in the two major hegemonic blocs appear to have distanced themselves from him, leaving him with his core ethnic supporters and the traditional carrion feeders from the east. A situation in which four northern governors would visit the presidential backyard only to be stoned and mobbed bespeaks a gathering political hysteria which does not bode well for democracy. Let us not tempt fate.

    Now let us get this very clear. All this would not have mattered were Jonathan to be in the process of constructing a novel and revolutionary society which involves the smashing of old altars and political shrines. But Jonathan is anything but a revolutionary. He is a traditional politician relying on traditional wheeling and dealing. Yet elementary political common sense ought to have told him that you cannot alienate vital and significant interest groups in a nation and hope to reign or rule in peace.

    Jonathan should take a historic cue. The august rumblings and ominous quietude from Nigeria’s traditional centres of power should tell their own story. This past week, General Abdulsalami Abubakar, the military henchman who birthed the Fourth Republic, rumbled from his Minna summit. The normally sedate and temperate Abubakar does not speak often or out of turn. But he noted tersely that the Royal Rugby in Rivers State is the gravest threat so far to democracy and the survival of the Fourth Republic. He must know what we don’t know. Even in Hippotamia too much frozen mud can lead to hypothermia.

  • Okon ambushes General Alabi Isama

    To the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs and its commodious Hall for the launch of General Godwin Alabi Isama’s much heralded war memoir with the inevitable Okon Francis Okon in tow. Never in living memory has this iconic hall been filled to this bursting capacity. The huge crowd spilled to the adjoining terrain with men and women of timber and caliber crouching to get a look in. Alabi Isama is a crowd puller any day. The boyishly affable and amazingly well-preserved former warlord has the rogue charms of a brilliant salesman. The clarity of his exposition was matched by the veracity of overwhelming details. The elephant has a long memory indeed.

    It was the day the dominated discourse of the civil war finally overtook the dominant narrative, leaving in its trail besmirched reputations and exploded myths of suspect heroism . A lie can travel for twenty years but it takes the truth only a few minutes to overtake it. In the end, perhaps nothing can match Brigadier Hillary Njoku’s description of the Nigerian civil war as a tragedy without heroes. Akinrinade, one of its most cerebral and measured products, has put it down to the fact that the civil war solved nothing and resolved little.

    Like bicentennial egunguns, many of the old warriors of yore graced the occasion. Now shorn of power and prestige, there was something quaint and antique about these war veterans. Yet they evinced the aura of nobility and true professionalism. Officers and gentlemen, these aging soldiers represented the finest breed of the old Nigerian military caste. In the brave new world of recent coup mongers, they all looked like magnificent anachronisms.

    As soon as we reached the premises, it was clear that Okon was going to constitute himself into a nuisance and security menace. The mad boy had already begun mumbling some disjointed and clearly seditious nonsense. Snooper felt a chill down the spine as he whipped the boy into line with a severe frown. But as soon as we entered the hall, the crazy boy broke loose and began his customary hell raising.

    “And wey dem Black Scorpion sef, abi na all dem Yoruba dane gun hunters dem take me come meet?” the mad boy yelled.

    “Okon, they will shoot you here like a rat and nothing will happen,” snooper screamed at the mad boy.

    “Oga nobody fit shoot Okon. We no dey dem military rule again,” the mad boy retorted.

    “Okay we’ll see,” snooper rumbled ominously. But the crazy boy refused to be intimidated.

    “And wey dem baba and him gbetugbetu, abi dat one be shakabula soldier sef?” Okon began. “And wey all dem Efik generals, abi dem Yoruba and Fulani people don throw tire for dem like dem kaput General Dan Achibong again?”

    “Okon, another word from you and I will hand you over to the police” snooper growled at the mad boy. This seemed to have quietened him down a bit. But only for the moment. Okon’s eyes suddenly lighted on a sternly serene and sedate General TY Danjuma as he began officiating. “Kai kai, ogbologbo soldier” himself, Okon moaned. Then the devil took possession of the mad boy.

    “Danjuma,” he suddenly called out to the great warrior with the severe frown. “Wey dem Bianca, abi no be him marry dem fine fine Ibo girl sef? He be like if dem dey call dat one Ikenga of Nnewi and him don kaput” Okon noted with a malignant smirk.

    It was at this point that a security operative walked up to us with a worried look.

    “Who is this man?” he asked snooper.

    “Ha, Okon was batman to General Alabi during the war” snooper submitted. But the mad boy immediately put his heavy boot in. “Abi if I no be batman who dey catch bat for am no be lizard and man flesh him dey chop for Obubra?”

    “I see,” the security man said with quiet glee and walked away. It was at this point that snooper decided to apply the final solution by offering the crazy boy some sleeping tablets disguised as trebor mints. He immediately fell into a heavy slumber snoring like ten bandits put together. But when the august and royal looking Brigadier Daramola was asked to come to the microphone, Okon rumbled.

    Ha Baba rere, I beg greet dem Olu and dem Funso for me. I sabi dem for Kaduna when man be vulcaniser for Ngwar Rimi,” the crazy boy intoned. By the time the widow of the heroic Colonel Etuk was narrating her tale of woes and the husband’s lapse into terminal depression and death, Okon was back on his feet.

    “You see why we say dis na yeye country? Efik man good for war but him no good for oyel block, abi?” Then he would lapse into Efik, condoling and consoling the relic of the war hero.” Ein, ein, eyen ekami, eyen eka mi”

    It was time to leave and it has been a great and good day for General Alabi Isama. Snooper had accosted the old war hero to find out where the cocktail was holding. Long accustomed to military camouflage and deception, the wily one pointed in a direction which suggested that he was deliberately and strategically wrong footing the milling lubbers and social lunchers. But Okon caught the drift.

    “Alabi!” the mad boy called out to the vanishing general with disarming familiarity. “Which kind cock dey get tail? Abi dat one na dem Ilorin abami cock? Go tell dat to dem American marines”. Even the American marines would be proud of Alabi Isama’s war exploits.

  • Post-mortem of a trial: Racism lives

    Post-mortem of a trial: Racism lives

    We walk blindly, moving forward into the past

    This is my second column about the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman case. The case is the stuff of drama. In short order, a movie will come of it. Zimmerman will write a book and shall be the temporary saint of the White conservative lecture circuit before slipping into a paranoid, forced anonymity. What will not happen is Travyon’s family seeing him again, except for the image he left in the corridors of their memories or the photographs they keep.

    However, I haven’t returned to this matter because of the individual trauma involved. I hold to this case because of its wider social and political consequences.

    Racism lives. This means the Black race remains endangered although not sufficiently alert to the trouble at hand. The trouble is not that of extermination or physical slavery as centuries ago. The danger is that of a sense of crippling inferiority. This sense is perceived and acted on but no longer formally acknowledged by either side of the racial divide characterizing Black people’s historic relationship with mostly White America and Western Europe.

    Because of the power differential that has existed for half a millennium, the two races view each other differently. To put it mildly, Blacks generally respect Whites but that respect is not reciprocated in equal portion. Each race stereotypes the other. The stereotypes Blacks hold of Whites are, to a large degree, authored by Whites. Therefore, the stereotypes are generally positive. Even the few negative biases amount to critiques that Whites have taken to the extreme what otherwise would be a virtue. Thus, the spirit of exploration becomes one of aggression, conquest, and colonialism. The belief in the primacy of science and technology to improve our material wellbeing becomes unbridled. It turns into the malpractice of distorting our environment and endangering our wellbeing through the very technologic and economic processes once touted as harbingers of a benign future. Any trouble with Whites it is not because they are bad but sometimes they are too much of a good thing.

    Stereotypes affixed to the Black race trend in the opposite direction. While Whites may overload on a fine thing, Blacks are characterized by multiple depravity. Our affluence lies in our nothingness. Almost every dysfunctional, criminal attribute known to man is viewed as our quiddity. While Whites are presumed the best, we are adjudged the worst even before evidence is adduced.

    Intellectually, most people know theses stereotypes are minatory and inaccurate. However, psychology often trumps intellect. After quickly acknowledging the mistakes of this line of thought, people turn back to the wrong ideas in order to embrace them. They find it is easier to live within the comfortable bounds of wrongful convention than to live outside of comfort yet be right.

    The trial of George Zimmerman must be viewed through this perspective if it is to be viewed with perception. Zimmerman is White and Martin was Black. The former killed the latter under questionable circumstances. In America, the clash of White and Black is rarely coincidental. It is a function of a history of racial animus and of the stereotypes that animus has brewed over generations.

    However, the prosecutors, the defense team, and the jury — all of whom were White — all claimed the case had nothing to do with race. While these people may have been in the courtroom, they did not understand the trial or their role in it if they honestly believed their disavowals. For them to say race played no role is worse than disingenuous. They engage in a most dangerous form of chicanery. They lied knowing it was a lie but feeling in their gut that the lie was better than the truth. They dare not admit Zimmerman’s racism because they believed in what he did. They supported it not because of the governing laws on the books but because of the subconscious racism that governs their perspective of the world and that raises the hair on their backs whenever they see a Black person in a situation or position they do not associate with blackness.

    For them to admit Zimmerman’s prejudice would be to admit then try to discard their own. They have no reason to attempt such a thing. Their racism is a comfortable garment worn so long and that fits so smugly that they don’t notice it. It is part of them; it is them. To remove their prejudice would be tantamount to amputating a limb. They see no benefit in undergoing the painful operation for a dead black boy.

    For them, the lie that was the verdict worked because it returned the world to its proper balance. Zimmerman walked free, acquitted of killing an unarmed Black teenager. Confined forever to his grave, Martin was deemed culpable in his own homicide. Because of his race, the murdered was considered his own de facto killer. In effect, the jury decided the young man killed himself, that he basically committed the social equivalent of suicide, just because he did not bow to Zimmerman’s command.

    Zimmerman was not cloaked with legal authority to command anyone to do anything. However, the jury believed Martin’s status as a Black teenager automatically relegated him to a status were he should have obeyed Zimmerman or face the consequences of a real but unspoken law that has shaped the contours of American and world history for centuries. Perhaps the young man was not fully cognizant of his actions. Resisting Zimmerman’s encroachment into the quiet enjoyment of his personal space, the boy rebelled against the great weight of history.

    He might have thought this was a simple one-on-one confrontation. When race is involved nothing is simple and cast in isolation. Everything is tied to history and touched with larger meaning. Superficially, Trayvon was felled by a single bullet. In a more profound sense, this unwitting rebel was interred by the weight of a lopsided, unfair history; his actions were deemed improper by the legal system of a society that had already adjudged him guilty of some wrong by reason of his very existence. To be a young Black man is to be a criminal in waiting. According to the system, Trayvon got what he deserved and Zimmerman was unduly victimized for doing his civic duty containing this human form of the Black Plague.

    Most White Americans support the verdict exonerating the gun-toting Zimmerman; it accords with their racist perceptions of justice. They proclaim race did not play a role in the case. To admit that race was a factor is to confess to a problem. Why would they utter such a confession when the outcome was the desired one, as in the days of old before Blacks acquired civil rights?

    Most Blacks are appalled at the verdict; they sense its ugly ramification because they will bear its lethal brunt in the years to come. The nation is slowly but perceptibly returning to its former self where the door of justice was open to Whites but shuttered to Blacks. What the verdict says is that a Black person peacefully walking the street can be accosted by a White intermeddler. Unless there are objective witnesses around, the intermeddler can have his way with the Black person. The Black will be blamed for whatever happens to him. The verdict is an open invitation for White vigilantes to descend on any solitary black man who happens to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. The woods of southern states are littered with the corpses of Black men killed this way in years past. We come full circle back to this danger that made many Black men run home before sundown less he be caught, never to be seen above ground again.

    In a way, those who say race did not play a role in the case are right. To say it played a role is such an understatement as to be a lie. Race did not play a role in the case: Race was the case.

    Without the Black/ White divide, there would not have been a fatal confrontation. If Martin had been a White teen, Zimmerman would not have pursued him. However, based on the belief that some Black criminals had committed robberies in the area, Zimmerman concluded Martin was one of them. According to Zimmerman, the boy was walking too slowly. Who said there is nothing new under the sun? Low and behold, there is a new rule. A Black person can now be found guilty for walking below the limit permissible for him. In Travyon’s case, the penalty for this seemingly minor infraction was his very life.

    Twenty years ago, Zimmerman’s actions would have been known by its truer name: racial prejudice. Today, it is called justifiable pragmatism and deemed a civic service.

    In a certain sense, the verdict was foretold at the point that the prosecution team was picked. Prosecution lawyers made a jumble of the case because their hearts were not in it. They wanted Zimmerman to walk free. Their efforts were lame ones of merely going through the motions. The prosecutors knew their lives and status in the White community would be at risk if they sent Zimmerman to prison. The local White community wanted Zimmerman off and the prosecutors did what they could to oblige their neighbor’s wishes.

    As such, they were not prosecutors; they were like underpaid actors performing a secondary role just so the play could go on. After all, why risk their status? Travyon was dead. Nothing they did would bring him back. A vigorous prosecution would just make them pariahs in the community. Thus they behaved like the prosecutors in the Old South over fifty years ago when criminal cases were first being brought against Whites for violence against blacks. They tripped and fumbled through the case so that Zimmerman could walk and they could receive the silent, implied tribute of a community happy that the Black menace had received its just comeuppance. The clock always ticks but sometimes, sometimes, its hands move backward to return us to a past that never should have been.

    Enter into the fray President Obama. Immediately after the verdict, he issued a terse, anodyne statement that the jury verdict stands and must be respected. He is consistent in that his usual knee-jerk reaction to first assuage White conservatives was not placed out-of-joint by the case. However, Black and youth frustration has been mounting against him and the overall turn of events and issues in the nation. People have taken to the streets in protests. The nation is one incident away from a riot in a major city.

    Apprehended by the prospect of a race riot and being almost screamed at by a Black community waiting for him to show a little soul in office, the President issues a better still incomplete statement July 19. In that attempt, he tried to thread the needle to douse the frustration of the Black community without upsetting the satisfaction of the White at the verdict. For him, the attempt was a painful one in which he tried so hard to find the right words that he did not say all he needed to say. Historians of the moment will enjoy the irony of a Black president fidgeting to contain African American anger.

    He eloquently mentioned some poignant but relatively petty instances of racism he and other Black high-brows have suffered. He did this because he was not really speaking to the nation. This address was to Black people in particular. The subliminal message was that he was one of us and thus we should not go too far with the protests and demonstrations less we make his job harder. He was pleading, “give a brother a break!” Most people will be taken in by his tact but a growing number no longer see him as a brother. They will not relent to give him any break. They will see this as moment when the Black community just might emerge from protracted stupor to fight to keep the little it has. If that means the man in the White House must experience a bit of sweat under the collar, so be it. His salary is sufficient to take his apparel to a good dry cleaner.

    In the end, he ran into a wall of his own making. While trying to explain the social and political ramifications of the case, President Obama maundered haltingly at moments. He knew what he should say but he could not bring himself to uttering the word that needed to be said repeatedly. He dared not use the word “racism” too often. Instead he spoke of this harsh, flinty reality in soft euphemisms like “historic incidents and antecedents.” Give the rest of the brothers a break, Mr. President! If you can’t say racism is alive, real and killing people, then you have not lived up to the moment and to the unique responsibility you have chosen by commanding the desk in the Oval Office. You remain a standard politician, a man who is black but ill at ease with being a black man.

    It is not that you are bad but that you have sidestepped the higher purpose of your mission because fulfilling that purpose comes with political price you deem too costly to bear. You want everyone to love you. In the end, everyone will remember you by half, as an elaborate incompletion.

    On one level, the case is a simple criminal trial in Florida. On another level, it is universal warning. Racism is not only afoot, it is armed and claiming ground lost in recent decades. This affects not only Black America but Blacks everywhere. Zimmerman shot Travyon because the boy decided to be his own person and stand his ground. This is a metaphor with larger political and economic significance. As they strive to define themselves and stand their ground, Black people and nations will be accosted. The very prejudice that excused Zimmerman’s behavior now fuels increasingly overbearing and paternalistic Western economic and political policies toward Africa. Leaders of those African nations that tow the line, doing sheepishly as instructed, will get a pat on the head. Their people, however, will be asked to sup on the ash and dust of their poverty. Those people and nations that seek to stand will have a tough time of it. Yet, dignity and justice are worth the fight. In the years to come, we shall see of what material we are made. We shall see if we lower our heads and bury our dignity because we eschew the fight. Or will we have the courage of that solitary teenager who stood his ground because he had done nothing wrong except seek to find his way home.

     

    08060340825 (sms only)

     

  • Prof. O. O. Akinkugbe:   Hurray! my boss, my hero is 80

    Prof. O. O. Akinkugbe: Hurray! my boss, my hero is 80

    There is so much impunity and unseriousness  demonstrated by our leaders

    My hero for life! Congratulations, sir. I was privileged my life path crossed Prof’s at a beautiful point in my life. I was young, bright and had only a few years back left the university. On the decision of the University of Ibadan Council, I guess under the chairmanship of the inimitable Sir Samuel Manuwa, the University Registrar, another of my few heroes, the late Chief Sam Okudu, reached out for me – to him a total unknown- but then an Administrative Assistant to my numero uno educational hero, Professor H. A Oluwasanmi, Vice Chancellor, University of Ife, and off, I dashed to Ibadan, to go drive the humongous 25th anniversary celebrations of that great institution – a roaring success dampened only that very night of 17 November 1973, during the 7 pm network news by a very bad and discourteous Obasanjo directing the retirement of the Vice-Chancellor, the iconic, ever impeccably dressed medical scholar, Prof Oritshejolomi Thomas, who was his chief host a few hours back.

    Prof Akinkugbe, who was Chairman of the Ceremonials Committee and with whom I worked directly in those harrowing months, would later request that the registrar redeploy me to his office – Dean’s Office, College of Medicine. Such was the synergy between boss and his boy that I would be one of the very first he encouraged to respond to adverts for recruitment into the University College, Ilorin, to which he had just been appointed Principal (V C) and to which I subsequently went, as its first Senior Assistant Registrar (Academic) and functioned, first, as the Faculty Officer to the three inaugural Faculties of Arts, Science and Education. I learnt a lot at the feet of my oga (boss) and it was my distinct pleasure to see him more regularly in the last 12 months and as dapper as ever: first at the wedding of the daughter of my dear brother, Bayo Jimoh, the highly perspicacious Group Managing Director of the O’dua Investment Co Ltd, then at the beautiful 50th anniversary of the great-read Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile -Ife, where his Government College Ibadan classmate, Ambassador (Dr) Christopher Kolade, gave the anniversary lecture and thirdly, at the epochal inauguration of his other GCI classmate, the Nobel Laureate, Prof Wole Soyinka, as the inaugural winner of the Awo Prize for Leadership, an event that truly showed Dr Tokunbo-Awolowo Dosumu as a true daughter of her illustrious father, the redoubtable Chief Obafemi Awolowo. Prof looked radiant and was as jovial as ever. He cracked jokes with Bayo Jimoh and I and patted me on the back, saying, ‘Femi, those were the days’. Sir, you have more than earned your stripes. Long may you live in glorious health, in the mighty name of Jesus. Amen.

    It’s Ekiti Panupo again

    There is so much impunity and unseriousness demonstrated by our leaders

    For far too many times, I have indicated in this column that nothing of worth passes in this polity without it being properly interrogated on the ekitipanupo web portal – an Ekiti intellectual roundtable with members numbering in thousands – where we meticulously critique or criticise, at times with mutual sabre rattling, even harsh words depending upon where you belong on the political spectrum, policies of governments: federal, state, local and even foreign, as well as those of agencies of government, and most times, conclude by proffering solutions/proposals, as may be appropriate, for the way forward.

    This past week was no exception as our matriarch on the forum, our 80-year-plus-one -old, Mama Adebimpe Okunade, omo Orinkinran, Oye, a scholar and world- renowned teacher of nursing, who I first met when I was an Assistant Registrar in the Dean’s Office, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan in ’73, weighed in as follows on some issues about which Nigerians have become thoroughly disillusioned.

    Happy reading:

    PHCN and other matters

    My question for you Dr. Adu: (Biodun Adu, a UK-based O&G Consultant is my friend and classmate at The School -Christ’s School, Ado-Ekiti). Help me to understand that when you woke up this morning, you mean you went straight to your television screen? I guess that was why you saw the “miracle”! You had electricity supply: that explains why you can afford the luxury of watching TV in the morning.

    On a more serious note ‘Biodun, just this morning, the PHCN, formerly known as ECN, NEPA et cetera (the conglomerate in charge of darkness in Nigeria and through which billions of naira usually evaporate) announced to hapless Nigerians that it will continue to increase electricity tariff with or without electricity! There was an increase only last year!

    Impunity you will call that?

    Even though, Mr. President announced to the whole world from far away USA via the CNN recently that electricity supply has improved in Nigeria, compatriots are still anxiously waiting to see the improvement.

    Abiodun, Nigeria is a place where money is extorted by governments from citizens for services NOT rendered! Examples include forcing us to pay for darkness instead of light. Paying road tax/vehicle license fees while the roads damage your car and ruin your body joints and cause you body aches.

    The latest extortion is that we are forced to change number plates of our motor vehicles throughout the country with a deadline of September 30, 2013. Despite protests, the obnoxious policy stays! Even though the National Assembly informed us that the cost per vehicle is N10, 500.00 what is extorted from us ranges from N24, 500.00 to N27, 000.00!

    My dear, what is more painful in all this is that we are so helpless! As if these were not enough, salt is constantly being rubbed on our open wounds by the wife of Mr. President who talks and behaves without decorum. There is no one to call her to order!

    Impunity is the name of the game here. Have you ever heard/experienced arrogance of power in its crudest form? Come home and see things for yourself.

    I can assure you that despite the perilous times, most Nigerians guard jealously their sense of love, humility, kindness, peace, and other virtues seen in decent societies, mama concluded with her trade mark: ‘PEACE AND LOVE’.

    Rewarding work

    At last, our National Assembly members should be ashamed of themselves. What have Nigerians not done to make their representatives volunteer a word about what they cream off poor Nigerians monthly/quarterly/annually? Mum has been the word. Now it is all out in the open. Maybe not in cold figures but the world at large now knows that in a country where not less than two thirds of the population live below the poverty line, its so-called representatives lead the world in how much they earn, almost for doing nothing.

    Who exactly will take Nigerians out of this savagery?

    It can only be Nigerians themselves, through concerted effort. No one else. And any political party that seriously wants our votes come 2015 must let Nigerians know how it intends to bring these unearned earnings down from the mount Olympus where it presently perches.

    Please come with me as you read the following being the result of a recent study in the United Kingdom:

    The following figures, the result of a recent research in the UK, confirm this ignoble position of our National Assembly legislators.

    Figures represent: Nigeria, 189.5; Kenya, 74.5; Ghana , 46.5; Indonesia, 65.8; South Africa, 104; Brazil, 154; Thailand, 43.8; India, 11.2; Italy, 182; Bangladesh, 4; Israel, 114.8; Hongkong, 130.7; U.S, 174; Japan, 149.7; Singapore, 154; Australia, 201.2; Canada, 154; Germany, 119.5; Britain, 105.4; France, 85.9; Sweden, 99.3 and Norway 138.

    If our National Legislators are men and women of conscience, they will appreciate that nothing under the sun entitles them to what they take home monthly for a job that can very well be done on part time basis. Nigerians must rise like one man and ensure that legislators’ pay, including their stupendous allowances, which in the first place were never approved by the appropriate agency of government, becomes a campaign issue, come 2015.

  • Freedom of Information Act and  Dictatorship of Corruption and Mediocrity (2)

    Freedom of Information Act and Dictatorship of Corruption and Mediocrity (2)

    For our third and final case, we must go all the way back to 1984 when Nigeria was still in the grip of the irruption of military dictatorships into political governance, an irruption whose end seemed to be nowhere in sight. The case in point is the Buhari-Idiagbon Decree No 4 of 1984, unquestionably the most notorious of all military decrees ever promulgated in Nigeria. That Decree has a special bearing on all that I have said so far concerning the challenge of the dictatorship of corruption and mediocrity to the Freedom of Information Act. This is partly because in military rule, dictatorship manifests itself directly and autocratically; it has no need to deviously manifest itself through corruption. Also, you simply cannot talk of a Freedom of information Act in the African dictatorships of the 1970s through the 1990s when the very first thing that goes with the inception of any military dictatorship is the Constitution itself, together with all the rights that derive from it. Moreover, African military dictatorships are notoriously very paranoid, to the extent that many military dictators at the time actually went so far as to promulgate decrees banning rumors, as if any human society has ever existed in which there can be no rumour-mongering as an inevitable part of social existence. At any rate, the Buhari-Idiagbon Decree No 4 of 1984 took this axiomatic and quixotic paranoia of African military dictatorships to a new level when it explicitly stated that you must not and cannot publish anything to embarrass military leaders and their support corps of civil service officials even if what you publish is true.

    It is important to state here that like the two other cases I have already mentioned in this lecture, this infamous decree against truth also had its origins in the phenomenon of endemic corruption in our country. This is because the decree came on the heels of allegations of the disappearance of N2.8 billion naira from the coffers of a federal ministry that had been under the headship of Buhari in a previous military administration. Allegedly, Buhari had been deeply embarrassed by this report and when he himself carried out a successful coup, he promulgated Decree No 4 to deal with those sections of the press that had been most vocal about the alleged missing N.2.8 billion naira.

    From these three separate cases, we can see that there is a common of corruption. However, unlike the corruption that we saw in both the oil subsidy scam and the Obasanjo and Atiku feud that paraded itself in broad daylight, the alleged corruption in the case of Buhari’s military dictatorship was hidden, subterranean. Everyone knew it was there and abundantly so; but you could not talk openly about it; you could not even engage in rumours about it. In Buhari’s Decree No 4 of 1984, this veil of silence and secrecy on corruption was made sublime in its impunity and brazenness: the decree stated without the slightest equivocation that even if true, any allegation of corruption could not be published because it would embarrass the military government and its loyal civil servants. This observation leads us to the next stage of this lecture, the stage in which we now directly engage the crucial issue of a dictatorship that is not military, not exercised through the gun but through the complex mediations of corruption and mediocrity of the highest order.

    To enter into this segment of the lecture, please consider the following ironic reversal of normal expectations concerning dictatorships and democracy. On the one hand, we have a military dictatorship that is non-elective, that is indeed totally contemptuous of popular mandate but is nonetheless very paranoid about being embarrassed by any revelation that it is corrupt. But on the other hand, we have an elective, “democratic” government that putatively bases its legitimacy on popular mandates but is completely unembarrassed by any and all allegations of corrupt practices and dealings.

    I would like to suggest that the irony in both cases is more apparent than real. Military dictatorships are characteristically, even extremely paranoid about being shown to be corrupt only because nearly all military coup-makers come into power on the claim that they have come to clean up the mess made by civilian governments, or even by a preceding military autocracy. Of all the governments we have ever had in Nigeria, the Buhari-Idiagbon dictatorship was the most self-righteous, the most fanatical about imposing discipline on Nigeria and Nigerians; for this reason, it absolutely could not stand being embarrassed by the taint of corruption, especially if the allegation happened to be based on truth.

    The irony in an elective, “democratic” government that brazenly washes the dirty linens of its oceans of corruption in the national and global public sphere is likewise a factitious irony with no basis in reality. This is because the presumption of virtually all our ruling class parties since the return to formal democratic rule in 1999 has been, quite simply, that no party, no politician ever wins or, conversely, loses an election on the basis of public exposure of huge sums that the politician or the party has looted from our oil wealth. At a more general level, winning or losing elections has little or nothing to do with your performance in office. You may be as corrupt and as mediocre as the worst politician on the African continent or the world, but that is no disqualification for you to become a member of the National Assembly, the Executive Governor of a State, or the President of the Republic itself – unless, of course you have been caught, tried and jailed.

    I readily accept the fact that not all our politicians are corrupt and mediocre. Indeed, there are a few state governors and public officeholders that are deserving of respect and admiration. But I think that the great majority of our politicians are fundamentally predisposed to being corrupt and mediocre. This is not because they are necessarily or inherently corrupt or mediocre; it just so happens that this is the prevailing order that they know; it is the universe of expectations and values in which they operate. Corruption and mediocrity reign supreme in our country at the present time because that is the game in town; it is the undeclared dictatorship which has apparently found a perfect hiding place in the outward forms and protocols of a formally democratic political order. Permit me to expatiate a little on this observation.

    I think it is safe for me to assume that most of us in this gathering this morning would agree to a proposition which states that an endlessly corrupt electoral system in which massive, blatant and violent rigging plays a central role is the main reason why virtually all our political parties and politicians do not really depend on their performance in office to win elections. Another way of putting this concretely is to say that rather than actually perform well in office and win the respect and the mandate of the people, virtually all of our political parties spend most of their time amassing the war chest that will enable them either to successfully rig elections or, conversely to prevent successful rigging by opposing political parties and politicians. In other words, rigging does not stand alone; it is part of a vastly corrupt and corrupting political party system.

    Because this is a very crucial point in this lecture, I wish to be absolutely clear about what I am asserting or even claiming here. For this reason, I wish to give one very concrete illustration of my claim here that rigging does not stand alone but is part of a vast network of corruption in our political party system. This illustration, I would argue, is one that most adult and politically sophisticated Nigerians know only too well. Thus, I don’t think anyone would seriously contest the fact that as the ruling party with a so-far iron-clad control of the centre, the PDP spends most of its time between election cycles preparing to rig itself back into power with absolutely no relevance to how it has performed in office. By contrast, the other ruling class parties not in control at the centre but in the seats of power in some of the states of the federation spend all their time between electoral cycles amassing the financial means and the strategies with which to prevent the PDP from rigging itself back into power. Nowhere is this whole apparatus of a deeply corrupt and corrupting political order more apparent than in our election tribunals in which, as everyone knows, political parties and politicians who have much more credible claims to having won elections must still bribe very heavily to secure legal redress for having been robbed of their victories through rigging at the polls.

    It is well known that the 2011 oil subsidy mega-scam that ran into more than N2.58 trillion naira had everything to do with the re-election project of the President and the PDP. But even with that dubious help, we shall never get a full measure of the actual sums that go into both rigging and preventing rigging by our ruling class parties. All we can safely say is that rigging and its opposite, rigging-prevention, are but the tip of an iceberg; behind the whole unholy party-electoral edifice in our country is the widespread, defining feeling among the Nigerian political class that the money is there to be looted either to stay in office or to come into power because, for a long time yet, the oil will keep flowing. I will come back to this point at the end of the lecture.

    In case the point I am making here is not yet clear enough, let me spell it out: the rigging of elections, as heinous as it has generally been in our country since the return to civilian rule in 1999, is but one factor among others that make our electoral system and our present political order so spectacularly corrupt and corrupting. This is why, as much as I loathe and condemn the rigging of elections in our country, I do not ascribe what I have in this lecture been calling the dictatorship of corruption and mediocrity to the agency or primacy of rigging; rather, in my view, corruption itself is the agent, the precondition of a dictatorship that is both kleptocratic and plutocratic.

    I have observed that in the Obasanjo-Atiku feud of 2006, both camps made revelations of corruption about each other that should, at the very least, have led to the impeachment of the President and the Vice President. But nothing happened to them and not a single one of their cronies, henchmen and girlfriends that were the beneficiaries of the “loot” from the PTDF was made to pay back a single kobo. Also, nobody has paid back a single kobo out of the N2.58 trillion looted in the oil subsidy mega-scam, a colossal sum that could make the lives of millions of Nigerians better than the horrible conditions they currently have to endure, thanks to this dictatorship of corruption and mediocrity. As a matter of fact, with regard to this particular case of the oil subsidy scam, the whole nation was treated to a comedy of errors and absurdity when the Chairman of that same House of Rep Ad-Hoc Committee on the oil subsidy scam, Hon Farouk Lawan, was caught by a hidden videotape camera receiving hush-money bribe from one of the biggest names among the cabal of real and fake marketers. Hon Lawan has not faced any significant legislative censure for this egregiously corrupt act. All that has “happened” to him is that he is being tried in a court of law in which he is apparently successfully tying up the legal process in a seemingly endless impasse.

    To be continued

    Biodun Jeyifo

    bjeyifo@fas.harvard.edu