The Nation Newspaper

Category: Columnists

  • The woolwich killings: More questions than answers

    The woolwich killings: More questions than answers

    Some things just don’t add up when it comes to the Woolwich killings. There are certainly more questions than answers. Let us examine the facts. An off-duty British soldier by the name of Lee Rigby was walking down the street in the charming and peaceful London suburb of Woolwich. All of a sudden, and out of the blue, he was randomly selected and run over by a car which was being driven by two young black men. After they hit him to the ground with the car, the two young men jumped out of it, armed with matchetes, knives, a rusty old pistol and a meat cleaver, and in a deep and uncontrollable frenzy amidst shouts of ‘’Allahu Akbar’’, proceeded to take his precious life by carving him up, mutilating him, butchering him and beheading him in full public glare. This all happened barely 100 metres away from Rigby’s Army Barracks home. The attack began at 2.30 pm whilst the soldier gave up the ghost at approximately 3.00pm on a four-point inter-section roundabout and crossroads.

    Immediately after finishing their gruesome act, the killers then conducted their own impromptu press conference, brandishing knives and meat cleavers in blood-soaked hands, with random members of the public asking to be filmed and qouted whilst their clothes were soaked, drenched and dripping in human blood. After their ‘’presss conference’’ ended, they moved to the other side of the road and calmly waited for the police to arrive. They had all the time in the world to do so but they plainly refused to run and attempt to avoid arrest or the imminent arrival of the police. According to eye-witnesses (and I watched the footage on CNN), the police took no less than 30 minutes to get to the scene and confront the two killers. They did NOT get there in the nine minutes that they were claiming.

    When the police eventually arrived, instead of surrendering peacefully to them or attempting to run away, the two young men charged at them brandishing their knives and meat cleaver in a menacing way and attempting to shoot their old and rusty pistol. Unfortunately for them, the pistol exploded in the hand of the individual that tried to use it. They were both promptly shot, wounded and disarmed. Yet before the police arrived another rather curious incident took place. A strange yet very courageous Scandanavian woman, who just happened to be sitting on a bus that was driving past, told the bus driver to stop when she saw the carnage that was being inflicted on the dying soldier, got off the bus and calmly walked over to the killers even as they were still killing him. She then proceeeded to have a detailed conversation with them asking them why they were doing what they were doing and assuring them that in the end they would lose the fight because it was ‘’just them against many.’’

    Is this not a rather curious encounter? Who really was that Scandanavian lady and who does she really work for? Is she a genuine hero or is she what, in security and intelligence circles, is known as a controller? Is she part of the system because to do what she did took immense courage? So many questions still need to be asked and answered. For example, why did the police take so long before responding? Why were the killers given all the time in the world to conduct a graphic, loud and unofficial press conference in the streets with members of the public after beheading and carving up the young soldier?

    Even more curiously, the police and intelligence agencies have now admitted that these two young men were “known to them”. If that were the case how come they were never put under close surveillance, monitored, questioned or arrested? Why did all this have to take place at exactly 3.00pm in the afternoon, at that location (a crossroads of four junctions) and on that date? Why did the assailants have to cut off their victims head, hang around there for thirty minutes whilst ranting and whilst soaked and covered in their victims blood? Why did the killers insist that only women could come near the dying body of their victim? Why was this whole thing allowed to happen and to drag on like it did for 30 uninterrupted minutes by the authorities? Why did the police refuse to move in even though numerous members of the public were having detailed conversations with the assailants?

    Was this whole thing some kind of state-sponsored illuminati-style human sacrifice? Was it designed and orchestrated by the authorities to create more terror in the land and to give them the opportunity to introduce more draconian laws, curb immigration and do away with even more civil liberties on the grounds that they wish to fight the very terror that they themselves created. Are we not being fooled again by the ‘’powers-that-be’’ and the state just as we were over ‘’9-11’’ and over the murder of Princess Diana, both of which were clearly inside jobs with strong illuminatti connections . If anyone doubts this assertion, they ought to do themselves a favour and find the time to watch David Icke’s revealing docuementry titled ‘’9/11-It Was An Inside Job.’’ It is on youtube. They can also find his numerous books and watch his numerous docuementries on the murder of Princess Diana. Their world view will change dramatically after that. Back to Woolwich.

    Are there not clear parallels between the Woolwich incident and the Boston bombings which took place just a few weeks ago. Are there not similarities in the profiles of the two sets of killers in both incidents. Both operations were conducted in full public glare and in the afternoon. Both operations were carried out by two Americans and two British citizens respectively each of them with a foreign heritage and family ties with nations that are rife with and that are being torn apart by islamist terror. In the case of the Boston bombers the two perpetrators had strong links and family ties with Dagestan and Checnya. In the case of the Woolwich incident both perpetrators had equally strong links and family ties with Nigeria. Both sets of killers were muslim fundamentalists and both sets were ‘’known to the intelligence agencies’’ of their respective countries. Both countries in which the murders took place, i.e. Great Britain and the United States of America, are the greatest allies and leaders in the war against terror and they are both committed to standing ‘’shoulder to shoulder’’ with one another in that fight. Is it not strange that similar acts of terror will take place in the two just a few weeks apart and that those acts of terror were all carried out by people with similar profiles and virtually the same age. The coincidences are just too many and things just don’t add up. The performance of the British police particularly has opened up the door for a lot of speculation. They made so many mistakes. Yet I can assure you that the British police and intelligence agencies are NOT that sloppy. They are amongst the best, if not the best, in the world and they just don’t make mistakes. There is far more to this whole thing than meets the eye and there is also a sinister purpose and agenda to it. The full picture has not yet been shown to us and perhaps it never will but little by little those that are well-versed in these matters will work it out and the truth will be exposed.

    Yet the questions just keep coming. Is it possible that those two British boys of Nigerian descent were under some kind of ‘’Peter Powers’’-type hypnosis and mind-control system which was triggered off by something or someone. In many of his books and videos David Icke has alluded to the usage and existence of such capabilities by the more advanced intelligence agencies in the world for the last ten years and he has cited many examples of such usage. Initially, I was skeptical about his assertions until I listened and read carefully and I cross-checked the examples and the events that he cited. After that, I was convinced that he was right and ever since then I have acknowledged the fact that we live in an exceptionally dangerous world where only the dullard would rule anything out.

    Back to the two young men that killed in Woolwich. Were they cultivated, ‘’programmed’’ and used by agents of the illuminati in the British establishment to carry out this gruesome operation and this monstrous sacrifice? It is relevant and interesting to note that the two suspects were not just British citizens of Nigerian descent but that they were both muslim CONVERTS. That is to say they were both brought up as christians and then somewhere along the line they converted not just to islam but to it’s most extreeme and radical brand. They became dangerous islamists that were prepared to kill for their faith. Who cultivated them and took them to this point and how did it get so bad? More importantly will this whole episode not give the western powers and the British people another reason to demonise islam and target mosques and muslim clerics? Is that part of the plan and the wider picture? Is the whole idea to create the atmosphere for vicious reprisal attacks against muslims and Nigerians in the U.K.?

    Is all that I have written here far-fetched? You may believe so but I don’t. And neither have I gone mad. The devil is real and the illuminati is it’s toool for world control and domination. It has been around for years and those that are part of it operate in the deepest secrecy. Yet even if you do not agree with me on anyything that I have said here, the questions that I have raised are legitimate and they are indeed food for thought. In this game there are no coincidences and everything happens for a reason and has its own sybolism and purpose. As far as I am concerned only David Icke can crack this Woolwich nut and unravel it’s secrets and I look forward to the day that he does. Meanwhile I pray that thesoul of Officer Rigby rests in perfect peace and I urge every Nigerian that is resident in or that is visiting the UK, especially if they are muslims, to be exceptionally careful in their movements and in their dealings with the British people and authorities. There is FAR more to this whole thing than meets the eye and whether anyone likes to admit it or not, sadly, there will be some kind of backlash against our people at some point.

    As for the two British men of Nigerian descent (whose names I refuse to mention) that cut short the life of this brave young and heroic British soldier in the prime of his life for doing absolutely nothing wrong, may they both die a slow and terrible death and may they rot in hell.

     

  • Mr. President, when is corruption in Nigeria enough?

    Mr. President, when is corruption in Nigeria enough?

    Our battalion of presidential spokespersons are ever so eager to exculpate the President from responsibility for the broken down anti-corruption war 

     

    In the First Republic, the Prime Minister earned five thousand pounds, the minister, three thousand, same as that of a permanent secretary and a university professor. The legislator earned eight hundred pounds and his job was not full time. They came for two months to debate the appropriation, recess and came back four or five months later for another two months. Today in the National Assembly, there is obviously nothing to keep them engaged full time, all the year round. You only have to watch their scanty numbers at the plenary on television. In the First Republic there was decency and discipline. When the first post independent national development plan was introduced in 1962, despite the political differences between the NPC, NCNC and the Action Group, Prime Minister Balewa, the regional premiers and their ministers all took a ten percent cut from their salaries to trigger the need for domestic savings to finance our plans. Now, what do we have? You suddenly see somebody who did not own even an ordinary bicycle before becoming a Local Government Chairman but who after two years will now have a string of houses and exotic cars without a single agency of government, either of internal revenue or anti-corruption, asking questions. You will see somebody who was not known to be a millionaire but who, after three years in the House or at the National Assembly, will now invite people to come and see him donate two hundred motorcycles and a hundred cars or buses as ‘dividends of democracy. Or, you wake up to see forty pages of a newspaper advertisement, congratulating somebody, because he is forty or fifty as governor or senator. It is nothing short of a national disaster. And I keep asking, have you ever seen a page of the London Times, the Independent, the Telegraph or the Times of India, to name only a few, in which a minister is congratulating the president or the governor? What model of government is Nigeria practicing for God’s sake?

    The above is the slightly edited, recent jeremiad of Chief Philip Asiodu, a distinguished former Nigerian Permanent Secretary, who is no doubt extremely tortured at what nonsense today passes muster as governance in a country which he served to the best of his abilities.

    You will not but pity Nigeria, and, of course, ordinary Nigerians, when you now read that the country ranks with the likes of Nepal, Azerbaijan, and Pakistan on the global corruption perception index. That was as at the Transparency International’s last report in December, 2012, and could, in fact, now be far worse when you factor in other incidences of public service corruption, especially the humongous oil subsidy racket at the lead of which you find mostly, scions of the topmost chieftains of the ruling party who, on the long run, are far beyond the long arms of the law, whatever the make-belief antics of the EFCC. Or won’t their cases also go before Nigerian courts?

    For moving up a measly four places on the Transparency list, scoring 27 out of a possible 100 and placing 139th out of the 176 countries surveyed, officials of the Jonathan administration are yet to stop gloating, attributing the pitiable upward movement to President Jonathan’s fierce anti- corruption efforts when the world knows better. Those who advised the President to have a Face book account should also have told him that employing the new media is like walking naked into a cocktail party. The entire world now daily reads us like a book.

    In spite of the fact that there is no more a hiding place, Mr President has gone on a self-congratulation binge regarding how intangible corruption is in Nigeria. He has even pointedly told the U.S to mind her many problems, man- made and natural, and stop getting unnecessarily exuberant about the minuscule corruption in his dear country.

    If Mr President, for very understandable reasons, cannot be persuaded to see Alamiesiagha’s state pardon as a corruption of the process by the mere fact of grafting totally inappropriate names to the list in order to fake a semblance of an even-handed ‘pan-Nigeriana’, then let us quickly remind him of other acts of putrefaction which have no other name besides corruption. Indeed, it needs be mentioned that Alamiesiagha’s pardon was so badly received by the outside world that the U.S could not hold back from issuing the following statement: ‘The US views this development as a setback for the fight against corruption, and also for our ability to play the strong role we’ve played in supporting rule of law and legal institution-building in Nigeria, which is very important for the future of the country’.

    Not only did Britain come out to say Alamiesiagha has a pending criminal case in the U.K, Mr Bill Gates was so pissed off, he cancelled a scheduled visit to Nigeria even when he was already in Ghana, citing the same issue.

    Earlier in this self-propelling blitzkrieg, the President had, at General Owoye Azazi’s obsequies in Yenegoa on December 30, 2012, said the following: “Corruption is not the cause of our problems. Nigeria has more institutions that fight corruption. Most of the issues we talk about are not corruption. If we do things properly, if we change our attitude of doing things, most of the things we think are caused by corruption are not’.

    In one respect, that is what decent Nigerians are saying: ‘change our attitude of doing things’: banish impunity, follow the due process and allow both the anti-corruption agencies, the police and the courts, do their work without trying to hamstring them because of the next election.

    A case in issue, eloquently showing that under this administration anti-corruption war has gone down the drain, is the issue involving the Minister of Communications Technology and a certain Dr. Gwandu who was, December last year, fired by President Goodluck Jonathan allegedly over controversial secret spectrum allocations to some favoured companies at some ridiculous prices.

    Since issues relating to the matter are already before a court, we would merely sketch the story here.

    As the story goes, Dr Gwandu did nothing more than expose corruption but rather than be commended, he had to go because he had, in the process, roughened some feathers. He was said to have exposed the lopsidedness in federal government’s sale of a 450 MHz Spectrum to an unlicensed company – reportedly owned by a close friend of a very senior government official – in which they paid a ridiculous $6 million for a license that should have fetched the nation over $50 million. Second is the waiver granted to a company linked to a top official at the NCC at the expense of other companies operating in the industry, while the third revolves around his expose of the selling of 800 MHz spectrum to a company for about 13 million Euros when equivalent spectrum sells in Germany, Italy and France for 1.153 billion, 992 million and 891 million Euros respectively.

    Therefore, for allegedly ‘undermining the interest of the country in relation to the operations of a UN body’, the minister in a letter with ref no: MC/ST.01631T4, dated April 12, 2013, and addressed to the Secretary General of the ITU, wants the union to sack Dr Gwandu, not only as the chairman or vice-chair of the two organs but also as a representative of Nigeria.

    The above is symptomatic of the anti-corruption battle under President Jonathan. For ages, top officials of the office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation sat on billions, in their homes, of pension funds, monies belonging to old men and women who had served the country in their prime and some of who are now dying wretched deaths on queues for their pension peanuts which remain unpaid for years. When, for once, the National Assembly acted pro-actively and ordered that the prime pension fraud suspect be presented before it, the police, which provided the man with 24-hour guard, claimed it did not know his whereabouts until he reportedly bolted out of the country.

    Only this past week, a former EFCC Chairman was heard complaining about the useless laws with which the anti corruption agency operates. But since updating these will involve serious work, you can trust the National Assembly not to touch that much needed review with the longest spoon.

    And in all these, our battalion of presidential spokespersons are ever so eager to exculpate the President from responsibility for this broken down anti- corruption war hiding under the distinction between the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary, and, forgetting that there is something called moral leadership and that the buck stops at the President’s table.

  • From Nigeria factor to emergency? (2)

    From Nigeria factor to emergency? (2)

    Boko Haram’s activities provide a sufficient condition for a National Conference

     

    We ended last week’s piece thus: Would emergency declaration be the end of the interrogation of Nigeria’s multicultural federation that has been at the center of Boko Haram’s agenda to turn Nigeria into Sharia country and outlaw western civilization, the source of Nigeria as a country? The objective today is to look ahead, beyond the ultimate defeat of Boko Haram by the empowered JTF and out of the box of the country’s tradition of denialism.
    The news since the commencement of emergency rule in Adamawa, Borno, and Yobe is to the effect that the military is gaining ground at the expense of Nigeria’s Islamic terrorists. We have been told by the commander in charge of the special operation that many Boko Haram fighters have been sneaking into neighbouring countries, such as Niger, Chad, and the Cameroons. It is thus conceivable that after a few months,Boko Haram as a group capable of fighting the Nigerian military might become a footnote to contemporary Nigerian history. This possibility does not automatically include the end of guerilla warfare in the cities by warriors of the extremist sect. It also does not pre-empt deliberate harassment of security personnel or innocent citizens, such as had happened several times in the past.
    The question of the moment is what will be the response of the federal government, the ultimate determiner of security in the country, should Boko Haram terrorists, driven away or underground during the special military operations permitted by emergency, come back to kill and maim innocent citizens periodically, as was the case when the group first unleashed terror on the country? We know what has happened in Mali. The country’s Islamic extremists had been driven largely across the border, but they have not been routed to the point that the security forces in Mali could sleep with their eyes closed. What if Nigeria’s Islamic extremists choose to harass us from their underground cells within or outside our borders?
    There is a Yoruba saying: Eni pa inaoritikotii pa eyin re, niisepuponiwajulati se (If you kill a louse on the head without killing its eggs, you still have a lot of work to do, if you plan to avoid diseases from lice). The point of this proverb is to underline the fact that there is still a lot of critical and proactive thinking to do on the part of the federal government. From some of the grievances and objectives of the group announced by Boko Haram leaders, the sect’s agenda is similar to undestroyed eggs of a louse that has been killed. It is thus crucial for the President and his team to start preparing for a post-battle scenario in which the eggs of killed Boko Haram warriors return to haunt and hurt the nation.
    Boko Haram has consistently raised two basic issues: the view that the group believes that western education, and by extension western civilisation is an abomination and the imperative of turning Nigeria or, at least, northern Nigeria into a Sharia region. The professional negotiators that are being prepared for post-war détente with BokoHaramists must not only think in terms of amnesty as paying money to survivors within the sect of the current battle. They will need to get ready to engage Boko Haram men at the peace talks about the root cause of the conflict. It is not enough to assume, as western pundits have done, that the terrorists are victims of poverty, or in the assessment of the country’s professional politicians, individuals hired to make the country ungovernable for Dr. Jonathan.
    In other words, negotiators on federal government’s side must be ready to ask many hard questions. One of such questions is why would Boko Haram want to end a federation that is over half a century old and that had fought a civil war that claimed over one million of lives by calling for an end to its secular rule? Are Boko Haram thinkers aware of the fact that in a multicultural federation, any group that attempts to impose its worldview on other components of the country risks disintegration of the country or secession by other groups that want to keep their own worldviews intact? Do leaders of the Islamic terror group believe that Nigeria can survive as a country without western civilization, knowing fully well that there would have been no Nigeria without western civilization? Would members of the Islamic extremist group agree to the terms of a secular Nigerian State as part of the settlement of the two or three year-old conflict? How far are the Islamic extremists willing to go in accepting that there are millions of Christians in northern states that are not likely to become Muslims? There will be several other questions to be asked before writing the Amnesty treaty.
    In addition, the federal government needs to prepare for a national dialogue as part of the discussion with Boko Haram terrorists. There is a need to stop being in denial about the magnitude of the problem facing our federation. That it was possible for a group to emerge and hold the country to ransom for about years over its preference for an Islamic State or his opposition to western education should be worrisome to the leaders of the nation-state. That modern and traditional leaders from the north spent more attention on the symptoms of Boko Haram’s grouse than on the cause–desire to Islamise the country– should send signals to the presidency about the need to think out of the box. Moreover, the fact that it took the federal government almost two years to read the riot act to this group needs to set the government thinking more critically about how to sustain the nation’s secularity beyond or despite Boko Haram.
    The action that is needed after the end of the physical combat with Boko Haram includes re-thinking the architecture of the country’s security. Ironically, the leaders of the birthplace of Boko Haram are the most mordant critics of calls for decentralisation and democratisation of law enforcement in the country. The long-drawn battle with Boko Haram in the last two years had drawn special attention to the inefficiency inherent in using a central police force to establish and maintain public order. Otherwise, it would not have been necessary to deploy the military to fight Boko Haram, as if it is a foreign enemy. As we look toward the final settlement of an avoidable conflict started byBoko Haram, let us not forget that no sane human being that has seen the benefit of western education would be so opposed to it. The forces that had prevented most of the young men in the terrorist group from having an opportunity to benefit from western education must be reined in once and for all.
    It may not be possible to come to a sustainable solution to the problem of managing a multiethnic and multicultural society and polity, without being ready to face the fact that citizens are fully involved in creating the constitution that guides the management of their lives. Boko Haram’s activities in the last two years provide a sufficient condition for a national conference.

  • Allay fear, not fears…

    NATIONAL Mirror of May 23 welcomes us this week with a few inaccuracies: “Police arrest car-laden (car laden) with 3,500 cartridges” The police arrested the car owner/driver—not the vehicle! Commonsense tells us that once the person behind such a toxic contraption is apprehended, the car ends up in the police station. Collocation demands thinking! With regard to vehicular application, police can seize, take away, whisk away/off a car, among other expressions—but certainly not ‘arrest’!

    “…it has failed woefully (abysmally), no doubt.”

    “UNIJOS inaugurates new Governing Council” Education Today: it could not have been an old council! Yet another headline faux pas: “Katsina to send more student (why?) to Egypt”

    “FG flags-off (establishes) 2nd phase of GES in South west (sic)”

    “Chinua Achebe: The end of an epoch making (epoch-making) writer (1930-2013)”

    Now all the facts, all the sides as we take the last contribution from the Back Page of NATIONAL MIRROR under focus: “But honours that the good professor would have rejected in his lifetime should not be hanged on his tomb as a mark of magnanimity from the state.” The past tense/past participle of ‘hang’ is ‘hung’; ‘hanged’ is only used when the context is ‘kill/be killed.’

    DAILY Sun Back Page of May 22 committed an offence: “…theirs remains one of the riskiest and least rewarding job (jobs) in the land.”

    “Achebe burial rites: Family, well wishers (well-wishers) pay last respect (respects) to literary icon in Anambra State” (Stv Morning News Scroll, May 23)

    SUNDAY SUN Opinion Page sub-article of May 19 headlined “Re: IGP, Manko: Are checkpoints back?—written by Tony Chigbo/08050494477—contained copious school-boy flaws: “Is the integrity, sense of judgment and competence of the IGP not worth more than half-page newspaper adverts?” Subject: a half-page newspaper advert (not adverts)

    “Should we not rather give kudos to these policemen who risk lifes (lives) and limbs daily to see that society does not grind to a halt?”

    “Living in this crime-infested and thriving community that is disgusting and demeaning…and doing nothing to stop or arrest the situation amount (amounts) to….”

    “…is not only hypocritical but out-rightly (sic) mischievous.” Get it right: outright mischief.

    “…is castigating same (the same) for saving the lives of the unarmed.”

    “CP Umar Manko should be spared unnecessary distraction (is there a necessary one?) from those who want to make omelets without breaking eggs.” Fixed (idiomatic) expression: (you can’t) make an omelette without breaking eggs. Note that ‘omelet’ is American English, while ‘omelette’ is British English.

    Finally from last week’s edition of SUNDAY SUN under review: “Chief Tony Chigbo, a public affairs commentator (another comma) writes from Abuja.” The foregoing is the recompense and karmic nemesis for sycophantic tomfoolery!

    “Taking the message of FOIA to the grassroot” (Leadership Feature Headline, May 22) Hallmark of leadership: grassroots

    DAILY SUN of May 22 goofed: “We are trusting in the Lord that you are not alone and He shall also not leave us alone even as we grief (grieve).”

    “Grab (sic) a copy of your soar away (sic) THE SUN on May 23, 2013 (a comma) for a 24-page special tribute on (to) this great man of letters.” ‘Grab’ means to take hold of someone or something with a sudden or violent movement. Is that what the reader should do? And this: soar-away DAILY SUN (not THE SUN). The publishers should be the most authoritative on this identity matter.

    The Guardian Front Page of May 21, among other pages, nurtured grammatical errors: “Reps (Reps’) panel threatens arrest of bank chiefs over (for or in connection with) tax remittance”

    “…Brig-Gen. Fatai Oladipo Alli, yesterday said that there will (would) be no hiding place for the insurgents, assuring that the military was battle ready to crush terrorists.” Who did he assure? Again, ‘assure,’ a transitive verb, must take an object.

    “…Governor Ibrahim Gaidam of Yobe State yesterday relaxed the curfew imposed in (on) the state by two hours daily.”

    “…the 120 terrorists were arrested when they converged in (on) Maiduguri to….”

    Still on THE GUARDIAN: “Govt allays fears (fear) as aviation workers end strike”

    “He said that the troops are (were) already interacting with locals and citizens….” Are locals foreigners? Where is thy conscience?

    “He said that troops were to be deployed to (in) the black spots….”

    “Fidelity Pharmacists Support Facility (FPSF)” (Full-page advertisement by Fidelity Bank PLC) My own prescription: Pharmacists’ Support. Technical: possessiveness in grammar. Let us keep our word because we’re Fidelity.

    “UNIBEN alumni lauds (laud) govt action to solve security problems” This should not be news at all!

    Now THE GUARDIAN BUSINESS Page: “Flying revenue collection intensifies (intensified) in Abia” Is the revenue collecting itself?! Sub-editors should not be afraid to use past tenses in headlines occasionally when it becomes inevitable like the above case.

    Yet another full-page advertisement slip-up: “It’s another ground breaking CSR initiative from Etisalat to further enhance (sic) and empower the telecoms industry.” Let us talk correctly: ground-breaking CSR initiative…and ‘enhancement’ does not require ‘furtherance’ even if it is serial.

    “Only family head, principal members can validly dispose family land (2)” Law Report: dispose of.

    Finally from the advertisement section of THE GUARDIAN under review: “Government College Umuahia Old Boys Association” In honour of Prof. Chinua Achebe (1930-2013): old boys’ association.

    Please note that ‘turn or stand something on its head’ is correct as against last week’s inadvertent declaration that ruled out ‘turn’!

  • That the children may live…

    That the children may live…

    This soulless nation has governors who take champagne for breakfast, lunch and supper. Yet, there are children with holes in their hearts who have to beg good hearted people for hand-outs

     

    To celebrate this year’s Children’s Day Anniversary, dear reader, we focus on the question ‘What do our children mean to us as a nation?’ The answer will determine how much we are ready to ‘Stop Violence Against Children’, which I think is one of the themes this year. All I can come up with is ‘Nothing!’ Hey, listen a bit, will you; just let me lay out my reasons for this. I suspect though that there be some among us trying to swallow me up with their yawn because the subject holds no magic for them. I forgive them.

    To start with, violence surrounds the little tots in this country from birth. Facts, figures and indexical studies have shown that Nigeria has one of the highest maternal/child mortality rates in the world. Indeed, it is so bad I am told that for every other breath I take, a poor mother somewhere is losing either her child or her life through labour. Now, if I can just hold that breath … Any hows, the world knows that the situation is indeed grave, and so does Nigeria, but what has the country done about it? Again, Nothing! Nigerian hospitals continue to snuff the life out of people because of broken down or non-existent vital machines, God Almighty continues to take labour deliveries while doctors and midwives continue to throw up their hands in despair crying, ‘Whatever happened to the Pied Piper of Hamelin?’

    Now, let’s move on. The world knows, and so does Nigeria, that Nigerian children are regularly used for cheap, and I mean very cheap, labour in this country, and what does the country do about it? Nothing! Each day, a little boy of no more than ten years passes in front of my house hawking his ware at the top of his voice. On bare foot. Indeed, he has become such a master of his trade that he has turned his hawking calls into song. Each morning, therefore, he goes ‘Com-m-m-me a-a-a-a-a-and bu-u-u-u-u-uy ma-a-a-a-a- pa-a-a-a-a-p!’ That sure takes me to only one conclusion: he should be in my choir because he sings tenor. Seriously though, children are killed, maimed, sold or kidnapped in this country because they are sent hawking each day by their mothers and fathers who are too indifferent to get up and fend for them. That is the kind of violence that has made many among us to take a very drastic action: we look the other way.

    Sometimes, though, looking the other way is not so easy because you soon find yourself suffering from neck cramps. We then do the next best thing, and that is to cringe before the situation. ‘My child, why are you hawking so early this morning instead of going to school?’ ‘I will go to school when I have finished selling this’, he replies. ‘But why must you be selling this so early?’ ‘My mother asked me to.’ Naturally, that silences those of us who are excessively greedy for information.

    I think though that the period of silence should be over right about … now. Listen to this tale. A monk joined a monastery of two where speech was forbidden because he wanted to devote himself to God completely. For a year, no one said a word in the monastery. At the end of that year, one of the monks spoke. ‘What month is this?, he asked. After another year, the other monk said, ‘November.’ Yet another year passed before the monk who spoke first said, ‘Pea in shoe is pinching. Worn it for three years.’ At that, the new monk packed his bags. ‘I’m going’, he said, ‘You two talk too much.’

    I think we have talked too much already on the status of children in this country, and none of it has brought any relief for my early morning pap crooner. He is still compelled to hawk wares (of no more than one thousand Naira) before he can go to school. Now, after crawling through the neighbourhood all morning, what do you think he’ll go and do in school? Sleep in class, like everyone else, that’s what. So, no thanks, no more talk. Now, it’s action.

    Let’s begin with the child’s education. It is time we enacted a law that makes school truancy a punishable offence to both parent and child. A young boy of about twelve that I know can neither read nor write because his parents need him more on the farm than in school. His father is too sick to farm, but he eats manageably well, thank you for asking. That law would not only compel every child to go to school but also stay in school. Every child must be given a chance to have meaningfulness in his life and hope in a future.

    While we are at it, let us also enact a law that says no child below the age of fourteen, including babies on their mothers’ backs, will be allowed to ride on commercial motorcycles (popularly called Okadas) or in the front passenger’s seat in a car while in traffic. If the country cannot enact laws to protect the child’s safety in traffic, however, at least let the IG give me the right to arrest such erring parents. I promise to use it carefully though I have one or two parents in mind.

    We would thank you very much indeed, dear government, if STREET HAWKING BY CHILDREN CAN BE BANNED BY LAW. Hawking on the streets is decidedly going out to meet violence. God alone knows the number of children who have gone missing from that exercise alone. Nothing justifies asking a little child to put a little tray of wares on his head and move from one neighbourhood to another hawking those things before he/she can have breakfast. That law would remind us all, literate and illiterate alike, that a child is entitled to reasonable food, shelter, education and clothing from his parents up to a certain age. Those are his rights. That law would also remind us all that having children is a great privilege. So you see, violence seems to surround our little tots everywhere in this nation.

    Yet, we have not mentioned domestic violence. We are lucky in these parts though; our communal living style effectively guards against the maniacal tendencies of psychopathic and sociopathic men and women masquerading as parents. For as long as that communal living is in place, the tendencies can stay in check. Now you see how useful the endless uncles and aunties are. Make room for them, will you, in that little bungalow of yours. Ah hem!

    The country appears to be waking up from its slumber though. Now, it has enacted laws against child labour and child slavery. The only thing is that now, it finds itself dealing with baby factories. The ingenuity of Nigerians appears inexhaustible, right?

    Pardon me, but what laws have been put in place to protect children who are handicapped, sick or with special needs? What laws are in place for children whose parents cannot meet the health bills of such children? There is no greater violence against these children than when we merely push a wheelchair in their direction and leave them to fend for themselves. The state needs to wake up to them.

    This soulless nation has governors who take champagne for breakfast, lunch and supper. Yet, there are children with holes in their hearts who have to beg good hearted people for hand-outs in the media. It is time to really mean it when we say the children are our future. We must work now, while there is time, to build the Nigerian child. It is time we gave our children life.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • 1914 amalgamation not as bad as often projected (1)

    1914 amalgamation not as bad as often projected (1)

    On 1st January, 1914, a giant country was born by the British and was named Nigeria. In geographical size and population it was bigger than its creator –Great Britain-a 356669 square miles land mass which is said to be the ‘size of United Kingdom, France and Belgium combined’. She had a problem almost from the beginning – the lack of family love: she suffers from what can be called hate-syndrome. Generally seen as a child of circumstance she has often been treated with scorn by her parents like an unwanted baby. However, in spite of such ill-treatment and other problems, the baby grew steadily, surviving all odds and hardship. Very soon- precisely on 1st January 2014 she would be 100 years old. In its wisdom, the Federal Government announced plans to celebrate the centennial existence of the country –an obviously remarkable feat. Unfortunately, that decision to celebrate such epochal stage of our history has generated much furor. The purpose of this essay is to show why it is good to celebrate one hundred years of the country’s existence. The 1914 amalgamation is not the evil it has often been painted by critics. It is the cradle of our nationhood.

    The criticisms have been based largely on two grounds, namely, the circumstance of birth and the poor performance and achievement of the country since birth. However, it is the circumstance of birth that seems to be more vociferous. Our position is that while there is nothing much to worry about the circumstances of our birth which is beyond us, there is much to worry about a life badly led after birth especially since independence. The latter was within our control to make or mar.

    This distinction is important for as AWO the sage popularized many years ago, it is not life that matters but the courage brought into it. The question most of critics have ignored is: what amount of courage and developmental imagination did the Nigerian Ruling Elites bring to bear on the fortunes of country since her independence in 1960? The obvious answer is not much and the obstacle is not with the circumstances of birth per se but poor upbringing due largely to the gross incompetence or inability of the ruling elites after birth. Blaming 1914 for our problem is thus wrong: it reflects lazy thinking and amounts to giving a dog a bad name in order to hang it. It is unfair.

    Hatred and prejudice-review of criticism of 1914

    The criticism of 1914 dates back to history of colonialism in the country and it is largely one of hatred and prejudice. The problem though is that the criticisms have never satisfied curiosity. They may explain partially how Nigeria came into being, and poor, but they don’t explain why the country has remained ever so poor, underdeveloped and persistently corrupt long after the attainment of political Independence. For instance a persistence criticism is that the 1914 amalgamation has been responsible for the disunity, under-development and poverty of the country. But instead of working hard to overcome such age-long identified problems and making the best out of our common inheritance, the elites have been busy blaming the circumstances of our birth, amassing personal filthy wealth and living in obscene opulence and continuing to mourn the death or eclipse of once upon a golden time of our forefathers. They romanticized the pre-colonial past as though all was golden and so provide excuses for passing the bulk and unconvincing reasons for the present day failures. In the process the real problems are left unsolved and the culprits are allowed to run away with their crimes unpunished and unchecked. Recent comments on 1914 reflect the old mark of prejudice which blames our problems on colonial factor but tends to ignore the present danger next door. This has not been helpful.

    To some of the critics, 1914 is evil – the source of all the country’s problems today including insecurity. As it were, there were no problems in pre-colonial Africa and each empire lived in peace, love and harmony till the arrival of the white man. But we know that this is not true. There were wars and insecurity even among people with common language as we can glean from the history of the slave trade or the Yoruba wars in the 18/19th century. To others, 1914 represents an act of subjugation by a foreign power and thus unworthy of celebration because according to them, it is not wise to celebrate one’s period of slavery or conquest. History is full of accounts of the rise and fall of empires from Roman Empire to Songhai, Benin, Oyo etc. The African experience is therefore not strange. The odd thing really has been the inability many of African countries including Nigeria to make the desired progress after freedom.

    Yet others have disdainfully referred to Nigeria as mere geographical expression, the ‘mistake of 1914’, colony of ‘strange bed fellows’, a colonial measure meant only to reduce colonial administrative cost and enhance British economic fortunes overseas, the cause and source of her continued under-development etc. These are some of the wrong ideas fed to citizens over time from colonial era to post Independence period by the elites which had made citizens resentful of their country thereby making the task of Nation-building extremely difficult- if not nearly impossible to prosecute. A major problem with dependency theory is the tendency to pass the bulk, blame others for their misfortunes and find excuses for present failures. In Nigeria it has made the cultivation of unity of purpose, patriotism, mutual coexistence, cultural and religious tolerance, morality in public life and other related values necessary for national unity and development very hard. Wrong and hateful ideas can be hurtful to any cause including Nation-building.

    According to Dozie Ikedife, who wonders whether the country was about celebrating failure or success, Nigeria is yet to attain economic independence, national unity and therefore improper to celebrate a ‘mere existence of a country’. However such observation ignores the longevity factor as well as the fact that nations do not build themselves. They are built and developed by people especially the ruling elites and being able to live together for 100years is no mean feat. The purpose of milk in mothers is to enable them to feed and nurture their babies healthily. The baby whose mother fails in her primary duty of feeding could have stunted growth, but should be grateful all the same for survival and long life. Nigeria is a like a baby that has not been nurtured well since birth and yet survived to be 100 years old in spite of all odds. Her problems are largely post-natal-the negligence and ineptitude of the ruling elites. So blame the elites for our poverty and economic backwardness and not 1914.

    In similar vein other writers such as Okoko have argued that the 1914 amalgamation is the bedrock of Nigeria’s problems, including ethnic antagonism, insecurity, infrastructural decay and lopsided federalism. How? To Okoko the antagonism that we frequently experience among the various ethnic nationalities is as a result of forced amalgamation. Thus we should ‘rather concentrate our efforts in forging a united country’ (The Nation centenary celebration 30/1/2013, p. 43). Again this is a human failure wrongly ascribed. The arguments are illogical and the anger misplaced. How can one lonely event of a hundred years old be held responsible for today’s problems such as insecurity, corruption, infrastructural decay, intolerance? Shameful: Nations are what men make them and antagonism is an attribute of man and not of geographical space.

    To Idowu Akinlotan, the centenary celebration is a warped project as amalgamation is a’ humiliating part of our history which irreparably damaged our self esteem’ (The Nation, January 7, back page). To Ropo Sekoni, it is a ‘bold attempt to commemorate the nation’s colonization’ (The Nation, 10/2/2013:16). To Segun Ayabolu, who sees the whole thing as a “centennial delusion”, the amalgamation was ‘the commemoration of military subjugation, cultural alienation, psychological disorientation and humiliation as well as economic emasculation of the well structured and organized communities that preceded the colonial conquest’. He, however, recognized that the amalgamation is an ‘undeniable important historical event’ (The Nation, 23/2/2013: back page). To Tunji Adegboyega, who believes that Nigeria once worked within the framework of amalgamation, he was not too sure whether to support or not the idea of celebration. All he knows is that the country once worked but not working fine again and were the idea to be subjected to a referendum, most Nigerian would have rejected the celebration of 1914(The Nation, 10/2/2013:17).

    The position of these authors can hardly be faulted except to note that what we are actually celebrating is not 1914 per se but the gift of life- 100years of togetherness as a ‘people’ the jerky or ugly circumstances of birth notwithstanding. Besides what makes it impossible to rebuild and firm up our self-esteem, build better institutions since Independence and why has prevented the country from working fine today? Let’s call a spade a spade. The problem here has largely been with the Managers of the country especially since 1960. They reversed the progressive gear and dampened the nationalistic and patriotic spirits for which citizen were better known before the attainment of Independence. The 1914 event is not as evil as often painted. While it has its many blessings, it serves no useful purpose to wish to white-wash our history or ignore its ugly aspect. The importance of history is its objective account and sound knowledge of the past and attendant lessons for the present. History teaches that one can be born low and poor and yet grow to be great and to enjoy long life and celebrate birthdays if one likes celebration.

    In a three- part article, published in The Nation that ended in its edition of March 14, 2013, Dapo Fafowora gave a historical account of the ABC of what one probably needs to know about the amalgamation, detailing its origin, thrust, problems etc. He left no one in doubt that though the amalgamation was not deliberately done to advance the interest of the Natives, it non-the-less remains an important milestone in the history of the nation. However I did not see how Amalgamation per se destroyed indigenous political and administrative system that was alleged to be ‘far more democratic and accountable’ than the colonial. This is because the African system and its leading operators had been put aside by the colonial conquerors long before the amalgamation of 1914. At least the partition of Africa of 1884/5 came before the amalgamation of 1914 which created Nigeria as we know it today. Still I agree with his view that the 100th birthday of Nigeria should be celebrated but not for a whole year. The government can review the program to make it smarter in order to avoid a boring, snoring party.

    According to Tatalo Alamu, there is a tinge of intellectual slavery in the whole event (The Nation..10/2/2013:3). To him, the 1914 amalgamation is not a ‘Nigerian event because the Natives did not give Lugard their mandate’. It is therefore not worth celebrating ‘by the descendants of those who were herded in like human cattle’. The ‘celebration and commemoration of one’s own enslavement is a classic instance of mental colonization and the most depressive example of Afro-Saxony in recent political history. By the same token, the Japanese ought to commemorate the arrival of Commodore Perry on their shores and the Chinese the seizure of Hong Kong’ In a subsequent edition of The Nation, Sunday, 21/4/2013:3) he shows the debilitating impact of mental/ intellectual slavery on society in form of ‘inferiority complex’. According to him ‘intellectual subjugation is the worst and most deadly form of conquest because it leads directly to spiritual, economic, cultural and political enslavement. With his old religion gone, his culture subverted, his traditional institutions decimated, his mode of knowledge production devastated, the African, unlike the Chinese, the japans and Indians requires a complete make -over to even minimally function’.

    The logic of the argument here is sound. However while I find the intellectual-slavery thesis useful to understanding what went wrong since creation day, it does not remove the fact that Nigeria somehow has lived a long life of 100years and that such longevity is a thing of joy. Would it be proper to ask a man say of 80years not to celebrate his birthday just because his mother was wicked or suffered much pains to deliver him in controversial circumstances? Suffice to add that we live in a competitive world where one man’s meat is another person’s poison. Japan may not like to celebrate some aspects of their history but Nigerian has chosen. It is a matter of choice and perception. Given our peculiar circumstance of many tongues where not many gave the country a chance of survival, one hundred years of living together in a tough, slippery, political terrain such as Nigeria is worth the drums of celebration. It is a remarkable feat where others such as India and Sudan which equally experienced colonial amalgamation failed.

    •Abhuere writes from Uromi, Edo State

  • Three scandals, a bifurcated president and a vision in search of a leader

    Three scandals, a bifurcated president and a vision in search of a leader

    During last year’s American presidential campaign, President Obama’s supporters expostulated that racist conservatives would moderate their opposition to the second-term Obama since he would be ineligible for a third stint. This claim served as the preferred incantation in conventional liberal circles and within the increasingly stolid black elite. The claim was oft stated not because it was true but because its proponents wanted it to be so. While beauty may lodge in the eye of the beholder, truth does not necessarily reside in popularly-held opinion.

    Far from airtight and more akin to a bucket of many holes, this fake amulet vanished quickly after the inauguration. During the election, a few observers questioned this conventional wisdom and were berated for their heresy. Subsequent events have told their tale. Vindicated are those who questioned convention. The points are raised not to embarrass or exalt any one but so that we may better understand the politics dynamics at hand to better glean what is to happen next, be it to avail ourselves to the approach of good tidings or brace ourselves for a coming storm.

    Those who believed Republicans would sheathe their weapons underestimated conservative animus. Discord and discourse regarding race stand as the most important traits of the nation’s political history. For conservative Republicans to relent in the hunt against Obama would be to forfeit their way of life and self-definition. It would be akin to asking them to inaugurate the local chapter of the Black Panthers or the Black Muslims. This was never in the cards.

    Conservatives want the President out of the White House not because of what he has done. The man has been a loyal servitor, catering to elite interests. He has done the objective interests of the racists no harm. Not seeking meaningful change in the political economy, he has been a custodian of the unfair way things are not a visionary attempting to turn them into the equitable things they could be.

    Conservatives detest President Obama for the future their racism makes them fear he represents. The very idea of a black leader, no matter how loyal, incites racist fear of rebellion and fire on the plantation. They need to stop Obama not because of what he may do but because of what may come after him.

    Should Obama succeed, other Black commanders-in-chief will come and they might not fit the pliable mold of Barack Obama or Colin Powell. One may have the humanitarian zeal of Martin Luther King or the progressive fire of Malcolm X. If this happens, all will be lost from their standpoint. Thus, they seek to end the procession before it gains unstoppable momentum. They believing turning Obama into an abject failure will make the nation abjure the very thought of another Black president for a long time to come. This is their obsession. It would be easier to coax a mule to bray the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” than to dissuade racists from this crusade. This psychology propels the current Republican trolling to simultaneously implicate President Obama in three current scandals. They seek to batter the man like a human piñata. Instead of using a blunt bat, their preferred instrument shall be the pickaxe.

    Those who read this column know I carry no water for President Obama. He is too fixated on quarter-steps and petite, half-measures given the situation at hand. As such, he has been a mellifluous troubadour for the powerful forces threatening to lay American democracy low while promoting military imperialism abroad. Yet, he is no worse that the rest of the political lot and comparatively better than most.

    Therefore, when the racists start playing the game of lynching-the-loyal-Black servant, the rest of us must stand at alert. Blacks must do this not because Obama is a savior; he is not. He unwittingly plays the role of a doorman for progressive Blacks as much as he does so willingly for conservative Whites. Progressive Blacks and racist Whites peer at each other across a great chasm. What is condign for one is grotesque to the other. Conservatives hope to crush Obama to preclude progressive figures from rising to national prominence. Black progressives must recognize that racist success in painting Obama as an abject failure could cripple Black political aspirations for a generation or longer. Given the generally threadbare condition of Black America such a pratfall would visit a disaster as heavy as that imposed by the premature abortion of the Civil Rights Era. Black progressives may not like Obama but they cannot stand idly as racists encircle him. They must lend targeted political aid not because Obama in and of himself is worth saving. They must do so because Obama is a symbol. He must be preserved from gross failure so that we can maintain the hope of a subsequent better coming along who holds closer to heart the interests of poor and working people, both Black and White.

    The initial scandal by which the racists seek Obama’s throat is the Benghazi consulate tragedy. The second involves the Internal Revenue Service. An office within the IRS placed conservative groups to a higher level of scrutiny before approving their non-profit tax exempt status. The third involves the Justice Department seizing the communication records of journalists in order to track down leaked classified information regarding terrorism. The three matters have a few common strands. Senior level officials erred in all three. However, the mistakes occurred at the department level. No evidence implicates the president. Yet, Republicans consistently howl that each scandal is more ominous than the Watergate scandal that felled President Nixon four decades ago. Taken together, the conservatives claim, the scandals represent the specter of American democracy being manacled by the nation’s fist Black president.

    Something sinister lies at the heart of the accusations. The racists portray the three situations as either nefarious criminal cover ups masking Administration incompetence or abject signs of an Obama assault against the fundamental tenets of American governance. The claims are outlandish but dismissing them as post-election distemper underestimates Republican mastery of racial politics. The Republicans don’t need to prove anything to achieve their objective. Their goal is to stoke racist ire by constantly harping on themes such as this Black president with a Muslim name and African father allowing four White Americans to fall to the sword wielded by crazed North African Muslims. The subliminal message is that White males, who once ran the nation, become endangered once non-whites take leadership.

    Republicans portray the IRS and Justice situations as evidence of a vengeful president unable to restrain himself from using the vast instruments of government power to target opponents. This supports the myth of Blacks lacking the self restraint necessary for leadership. The message is that a Black leader will impale democracy by turning a system that took two centuries to build it into a third world dictatorship within the span of a few brief but intensely decadent years.

    Against this backdrop, President Obama made two speeches demonstrating that he remains a conflicted man lacking a unified theme. One speech revealed him still trying to negotiate with and succor intractable political enemies at the expense of a Black community that so strongly supports him. The second speech showed glimpses of a man painfully aware America has been walking the wrong path too long and wary that he risked his personal legacy should he continue blindly along the trail set before him.

    President Obama gave the commencement address at Morehouse College, the school that produced Dr. King and other Black leaders. While talking to a largely Black audience, Obama was really giving reassurance to White America. The underlying message was that he served to keep the Black community in check despite their dismal, depression-like economic predicament. For him, the speech was an opportune defensive moment countering the Republican tirade that he sought to transform America into a big Kenya. For the Black community, the speech was an offense; but given the continued euphoria over his reelection, little offense was taken by most Black people. However, a growing number of Black intellectuals are starting to condemn the obvious presidential penchant for speaking down to Black people.

    To us, he preaches a harsh, strict sermon reserved for no other group. His address gave credence to the racial stereotype of Blacks being underachieving shufflers demanding favors instead of seeking fair opportunity to prove their worth. He said what White conservatives love to hear and wished they could publicly say without being labeled racist. Obama sought their favor by taking on the curious, incorrect responsibility of expressing their racist thoughts for them.

    Given that his Administration is being hurled against the jagged shoals by opponents who seek noting but to practice their racist creed against him, the height of irony was how the president soft-shoed around the issue of extant racism during his Morehouse address. In all, the speech was a subtle exercise in self-hate, an excursion unbecoming the first or any Black president. If he seeks greatness, he must stop using his own community as a whipping post. This practice does not speak of greatness. It speaks of opportunism joined by an ample sprinkling of political cowardice.

    The second speech was more visionary and statesmanlike. In this address, he raised the need to temper the fight against terrorism lest America mortgage its democratic soul in the effort to secure itself against terror.

    The speech had its blemishes. His defense of the drone bombing and targeted assassinations of key terrorist figures rang hollow. He can boast of killing bin Laden but to boast that the world is safer because of it is a questionable claim better left unspoken. The network bin Laden spawned has gained strategic foothold in more nations now (add Libya and Syria to the list) than when the man was alive. Moreover, the guidelines the President outlined for restricting civilian deaths from drones will likely prove ineffective because of the inhumane way the Administration determines who is a terrorist. (By their definition anyone within close proximity of a notorious figure is also presumed to be a terrorist. This included unarmed women and children.) Also, allowing the CIA to retain some of its drone program is a dangerous loophole. Overtime, the CIA can ramp its program without public scrutiny or knowledge of the escalation.

    Yet, the speech was a solid attempt to steer America from the overly militaristic approach it has adopted toward political terrorism. This implicitly acknowledging the threat cannot be answered by force alone. Statesmanship and wiser policy toward both friend and foe in troubled regions are necessary. This may prove to be the most important foreign policy speech the President will give.

    His harshest critics have already harpooned the speech as a slick attempt to divert attention from the triplet scandals. On this matter, President Obama deserves the benefit of the doubt. This policy shift was occasioned by something more than a wily effort to avert public attention from the scandals three.

    Perhaps President Obama had a foretaste of history and was startled by its bitter sting. He looked in the future and saw the future glaring back, asking why a Black man and a lawyer fully aware of the nation’s checkered history concerning injustice to non-whites would brand his name to a shadowy policy condoning the extrajudicial killing of American citizens without judicial review of the action. Such a policy is unprecedented and shall stain the legacy of any leader who vigorously pursues it.

    Even more profoundly, President Obama probably fears America is losing its moral balance by engaging in this amorphous, indefinite war against terror. A nation constantly at war with others becomes a nation not at peace with itself. Democracy becomes choked when placed in such hostile soil.

    America may be more secure now than prior to 9/11 but it is also more afraid. The spirit of the nation has shrunk. A nation that once prided its open national character has become petulant and suspicious. In the quest to cocoon itself from harm, it risks distancing itself from the virtues of liberty as well as from the practical and concrete achievements these virtues have helped wrought over the years.

    In the end, the usually detached Obama may have sensed this transformation of the American psyche and decided he did not want his name on it. Yet, this partially visionary stance on one issue, albeit encouraging, does not a good legacy make. He needs to invoke the same perspective to materially alter his domestic policies for it will be on domestic policies that his name will either be etched in stone or dragged through the mud.

    This past week a deadly tornado ripped through the state of Oklahoma. The sad event was a metaphor for the destruction of middle-class America. Conservatives and liberals harangue in bitter debate over gay rights, gun control and other emotive social issues. In so doing, they engage in major wars on minor battlefields. These social issues will never determine the fate of America. Nor will the war on terror. No modern nation or ancient empire has ever been brought low by gays undermining society or by fringe groups plotting sporadic violence against it. However numerous empires have been brought to destruction by the naked avarice of their elites.

    Overconcentration of money and power in the hands of an increasingly smaller elite has doomed republics and kingdoms alike. When the rich and powerful are allowed to become too much themselves, they seize control of nearly all instruments of government then impose laws that allow them to profiteer without risk at the expense of the many who are left without hope. Eventually, the people become thralls to debt. No matter how subtly camouflaged, debt is a sure footpath to a servitude incompatible with democracy. So it was in ancient Greece and so it is with modern America. In a certain sense, the quality of American democracy has more to fear from decisions taken in the boardrooms of its largest financial firms than from gay marriage on the domestic front or from violent jihadists abroad.

    The national security speech offers the slight hope that events may push President Obama toward greater recognition of the role he should play in both international and domestic affairs. He has taken a first step in the foreign policy arena. He must now shed timidity in the domestic arena and approach the transformation of the American political economy in bold strokes. Only then will he become the agent of change his campaign trumpeted. Until then, he remains correctly accused by progressives of false advertisement and falsely accused by racists for being a progressive.

     

    (08060340825 sms comments only)

     

  • Ngozi on my mind

    How time flies. Tuesday, May 28 is the first anniversary of the demise of Ngozi Agbo, nee Nwozor, a former Coordinator of the Campus Life section of The Nation.

    Just when I was expecting to get the good news of the safe delivery of her first baby, I got the shocking news that Ngozi, popularly known as Lady Campus, died during child birth. Typically, death sneaked on all of us who have come to admire the deceased for many things and took her away when we least expected.

    In the last one year, I have felt a sense of personal loss considering the professional relationship we shared dating back to 2004 when I first met her and some other young journalists at the defunct New Age Newspaper.

    Until she died, Ngozi never ceased to remind me, whenever she comes to consult or ‘trouble’ like she sometimes puts it, that she remained my ‘baby journalist’. Through the years, I watched her become an accomplished journalist who had a clear sense of mission in the profession and brought to bear on her work a high sense of dedication and desire to make an impact.

    When she went to work with Fate Foundation, a Lagos based Non Governmental Organisation, she distinguished herself and journalism was richer for it when she returned to the newsroom.

    Through Campus Life, Ngozi not only provided a platform for students nationwide to write weekly on campus issues in a national medium but mentored them to excel in their studies and personal lives as many of them testified in their tributes to their darling aunty who they must have missed a lot.

    That virtually all newspapers in the country now publish campus pages is a tribute to the success Ngozi made of the Campus Life pages which is a very unique concept with the students also having the opportunity to participate in an annual training and award for campus journalists.

    Ngozi was not the typical journalist who is not bothered about the impact of his or her writing. Journalism for her should impact on people’s lives and effect changes in the society. She did her best through Campus Life for which posterity will always remember her.

    At a time like this when we are reminded of the irreparable loss of Ngozi, I am consoled by the saying that men will die, but that their good works will not die.

    My sincere condolence to the husband, Agbo Agbo, and other family members is that although Ngozi is no more, her service to humanity through journalism lives on.

  • Beyond emergency rule

    Should President Goodluck Jonathan have declared a state of emergency in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa states in response to the protracted and horrendously bloody Boko Haram insurgency that had practically paralysed the north? The debate rages on fiercely despite obvious overwhelming nationwide public support for the measure. Yet, it is an exchange that is largely theoretical and can only generate more heat than light. I really think that the President had little option. The situation had degenerated almost irredeemably in the north and decisive action was called for. Indeed, irritated by the President’s inconsistent vacillation between tough talk and pacifying the mindless terrorists through the offer of amnesty, many had queried Jonathan’s leadership competence.

    They saw him as irresolute, weak, ineffectual and seemingly clueless. To worsen matters, the Boko Haram naturally perceived the reticence of the Federal Government as a sign of weakness. The extremist sect was thus encouraged to step up the tempo of its violence – seizing women and children, escalating its attacks on security agents and increasing the venom of its mostly irrational rhetoric. It surely would come to a point when any state worth its salt as the legitimate custodian of the monopoly of instruments and methods of coercion within a given territorial jurisdiction would be forced to defend its integrity and authority.

    As the President rightly put it in his well- written even if intemperately delivered address to the nation, the insurgents had virtually declared war on the Nigerian state. He thus had the constitutional and moral responsibility to restore normalcy, protect lives and property and maintain the cohesion of the nation. It is, of course, plausible as has been argued with considerable force in some quarters that the President could have taken all the actions in the three states without formally proclaiming emergency rule. However, I guess his military strategists wanted to score a massive psychological advantage over the insurgents by maximum show of force.

    Again, by its very nature, the envisaged scale of military operations in the affected areas would necessarily involve the curtailment of some basic rights which would only be tenable under emergency rule- a departure from normality. It is also not impossible that in the run up to the 2015 election, and President Jonathan’s undisguised ambition for a second term, the strategy in opting for emergency rule in the three states was to seize the opportunity to emphatically assert his authority and showcase the immense powers of Nigeria’s imperial presidency to overawe potential opposition.This seems to be a throwback to the regressive era of the Obasanjo presidency and a sad commentary on the state of democratic development in contemporary Nigeria. However, this does not obviate the fact that deployment of massive force had become imperative to rein in the insurgents and restore normalcy in the North. There must first of all be peace and security before democratic structures and processes can function for the benefit of the people.

    However, to argue that the tough measures that President Jonathan has taken to contain the Boko Haram insurgency are necessary does not mean that this entire situation could not have been avoided if the country had been steered in a completely different direction over the last 14 years of civilian rule. In other words the degeneration to emergency rule in parts of the north is a culmination of the failure of the Peoples Democratic Party to guide Nigeria aright since 1999. This is not just a failure of the Jonathan presidency. It is a result of the incompetence and lack of vision of successive governments in control of power at the centre since the inception of this democratic dispensation. The inevitability of emergency rule almost one and a half decades after the exit of the military is clear evidence that Nigeria’s malformed federal structure has virtually broken down under the watch of the PDP and there is the urgent need for the country to try leaders and parties with alternative ideas at the centre in the next polls. In the last election, many Nigerians claimed that they voted for President Jonathan and not the PDP. Now, it is obvious that the difference between the two is that between six and half a dozen. Both have sorely failed the nation as the sheer anarchy across the country today demonstrates.

    Now the people of the North East are forced to live with all the negative consequences of emergency rule including abridgement of human rights, possible military excesses and the conversion of democratic structures into nothing but hollow shells in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa. The large scale military action attendant on emergency rule will further affect the economy of the region negatively. Innocent lives will almost inevitably be lost and thousands of people displaced. The situation in the north further reinforces Nigeria’s unflattering negative image as an insecure entity headed dangerously in the direction of state failure. Surely, those responsible for the deterioration of affairs in the country to this extent must be made to pay the electoral price for their incompetence and irresponsibility. They must not be allowed to beat their chests heroically and claim the imposition of emergency rule as an achievement when their actions and inactions are responsible, in the first place, for the deplorable security and socio-economic situation in the country that fuelled the insurgency.

    For instance, is there any excuse why we have maintained the archaic and ineffective security architecture that has rendered most of our communities vulnerable to sundry criminal elements including religious extremists, cultists, armed robbers and kidnappers? Why do we still maintain a system where state governors are Chief Security Officers only nominally and lack the capacity to effectively secure lives and property within their respective jurisdictions? If we had more effective, decentralised policing at state level, couldn’t many of these criminal gangs have been nipped in the bud before they became veritable monsters? Why haven’t we since 1999 been able to organize a national conference to enable the component parts of the country re-negotiate a more acceptable pact for our mutual and more harmonious co-existence? Why have we not fundamentally restructured a federal system that, for instance, prevents the northern states from developing their rich solid mineral endowment for the benefit of their people?

    Why have we continued to implement the same ineffectual economic policies that promote growth without development, under-develop agriculture, undermine manufacturing and breed the mass youth unemployment that fuels criminality? How do we explain our inability since 1999 to generate up to 5000MW of electricity despite the colossal amounts that have been hurled at the power sector and the negative implications of this for the economy? Of course we can go on and on raising pertinent questions about the total mismanagement of Nigeria that is at the root of insurgency and the current unfortunate but inevitable state of emergency in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa states. Emergency rule will most likely restore law, order and stability to the affected states in the North. The massive deployment of irresistible force may ‘persuade’ the terrorists to be more amenable to dialogue. However, emergency rule or all the force in the world cannot lead Nigeria in the direction of fundamental, positive change that can liberate her potentials and result in rapid development, peace and stability. If Nigeria continues to be run the way she is currently administered, we will only be postponing the evil day of a more virulent, more insidious insurgency that will be even more difficult to contain.

  • Managing success

    We are an interesting country to behold. We make simple things look very difficult. We think more about ourselves than what we can contribute to our country. And this trend didn’t start today.

    The story from Germany ahead of the friendly against Mexico is disturbing. We are being told of our players seeking to play for clubs rather than our dear country. This is not the first time this has happened. And we are not capable of stemming the tide.

    We have thrown our arms up, but my fear is that we may have burnt our candles at both ends. I had thought that with the European season coming to a close, our players would assemble in Germany to plot the country’s strategies towards ensuring that we make the 2016 World Cup in Brazil.

    But that is not the story. Ahmed Musa has opted to play in the Russia Cup finals rather than participate in the Mexico friendly. Musa told the Super Eagles secretary that in the event that the Russia Cup final clashes with the Mexico friendly, he would play for his club.

    Could Musa have had the temerity to contemplate such a move if he were a fringe player in the squad? Is it not through Nigeria’s matches that he got the Russian deal? Is the Mexico friendly not meant to provide the platform for the players to understand themselves before the crucial 2014 World Cup qualifiers against Kenya in Nairobi on June 5 and Namibia in Windhoek on June 12?

    The flipside to the Musa story is what are the Mexicans doing for the game? Mexico’s big stars such as Manchester United’s Hernandez aka Chacharito, want to play the game. The Mexicans have three crucial World Cup qualifiers and they are in the Confederations Cup. For them, the Nigeria friendly is an opportunity to prepare for both tournaments.

    Stephen Keshi definitely needs God’s grace to have a full house of committed players for the Mexico game.

    Musa is not alone in the choice of clubs over country. Agency photographs showed John Mikel Obi and Victor Moses boarding the flight with their Chelsea mates to the United States. Obviously, they are out of the Mexico game.

    Moses, who played Chelsea’s last Barclays English Premier League game against Everton, is said to be nursing an injury, according to a letter purportedly sent to the NFF by Chelsea’s doctors.

    The question is: when did Moses sustain the injury? Was Moses not the person who headed down the pass that resulted in Chelsea’s goal against Everton last Sunday?

    We all saw him play the game. At no time did he fall down or collide with anyone. He walked off the pitch in celebration? Or could this be another conspiracy between the player and the club?

    Our players must stop insulting our sensibilities with their conduct. Chelsea couldn’t have listed Moses in their squad to the United States if he was injured. By the same token, John Mikel Obi can’t just wake up in the US to say that he is fatigued and can’t play the Mexican game. If so, what is he doing with Chelsea in the US? When last did Mikel play for Chelsea to necessitate the purported fatigue story he is selling? Did he not struggle to be fit for the Europa Cup final?

    Mikel’s history of boycotting games played on undulating pitches around Africa is legendary. When he didn’t play Chlesea’s closing stages games, I knew he would opt out of the game. I knew that he would not play the World Cup qualifiers because he wants to participate at the Confederations Cup, where he hopes to battle midfield supremacy with the bigger boys of the game.

    The story of Kalu Uche’s injury is weird. He even wrote to say that he was injured. Not one report revealed that he was. Is this his payback for Keshi for missing the 2013 Africa Cup of Nations held in South Africa? Kalu Uche is Nigeria’s highest goal scorer in Europe this past season. His injury would have been the biggest news. Anyway, let us see how Keshi fixes this “injury” puzzle.

    However, I’m worried about the silence from the NFF. Ordinarily, these unexpected withdrawals ought to elicit comments from it. Unfortunately, the NFF has cast an indulgent eye on the matter. Times past, it would have directed the players to report to Germany for the Eagles doctors to ascertain the veracity of their claims.

    NFF doesn’t want to interfere in this clay-pot-and-rat setting. It is leaving the matter for the coach to handle. I hope this doesn’t signal Nigeria’s ouster from the 2014 World Cup in Brazil.

    My fears are not unfounded because the boys could miss the stiffer of our two World Cup qualifiers against Kenya on June 5. And we would be in big soup because Moses and Mikel are the pivots of the team in the absence of recuperating Emmanuel Emenike.

    Curiously, the manner in which the coaches have handled players who played in the past has been awful. The coaches have made the players dispensable, such that no one would honour any late invitation.

    The dropped players sulked over their exclusion from the AFCON winning squad. This setting has tied the coaches’ hands in terms of seeking for substitutes, except they resort to the home-based. Therein lies one of the problems with our 2014 World Cup qualification ticket.

    If the coaches had cultivated the habit of talking with the players while with their clubs, it would have been easier for them to foil this late exclusion from the Mexico game.

    The coaches are shocked that the players didn’t give them any hint about their plans. How could they when their views are not sought before invitations are made?

    What is clear is that Keshi has lost the players’ confidence and trust. They are not ready to die for him. They feel he will dump them the way others were dumped, if their form drops. So, they would rather spend quality time with their clubs or proceed on their vacation.

    Perhaps, if Keshi had honoured the truce meeting scheduled in Abuja by the NFF before he left for the United States on vacation, the players would have laid their grievances on the table. All the issues would have been resolved and we would have had a fuller camp with our best players contending for positions.

    Keshi has assured us that there is nothing to worry about. I believe him because we have the talents. Yet the questions I want to ask Keshi are – when will the rebuilding of the Super Eagles stop? Won’t Keshi tell us some day that Moses is not in his plans? Will the Big Boss not shut out Mikel from the Eagles over this surprise change of heart?

    Eagles are suddenly a tournament team. They need to be in camp for long periods to gel. I had thought that the 14 days before the June 5 tie against Kenya would serve the purpose.

    Many people will argue that Moses, Mikel, Kalu and, indeed, others are tired from the season’s matches. True. How about those who are in the camp? Most countries eager to qualify for the 2014 World Cup in Brazil have scheduled warm-up games for their teams ahead of the qualifiers. Yet stars such as Frank Lampard are with Chelsea and would play in the friendly against Brazil at the end of the month.

    No ambitious country goes to a soccer war with her best players sitting at home. If they were injured, then their absence is tenable. Where they opt out of the country’s matches on spurious grounds of being injured only to star for their clubs, is a slap in our faces. And it is grossly unacceptable.

    If they knew that they won’t be available, they should have discussed their decisions with the coach before the list was submitted to the NFF.