The Nation Newspaper

Category: Columnists

Invisible Nigerians

A piece of news passed last week like a whiff. But I saw it as the whiff that precedes a resounding slap in the face. The finance minister, who likes to be called the coordinating minister of the economy, could not brook criticism. So she fired the so-called erring staff of the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) because he accused the boss of ethnic favouritism. We call that tribalism in Nigeria.

Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala likes to be considered a genius, and she carries a supercilious air of the world’s top economic technocrat. No wonder she wanted to be the top boss of the World Bank, even though she does not know that the Breton Woods institution inspires a philosophy that contradicts a developing nation such as Nigeria. Well, one would expect that having worked in such multicultural setting as the World Bank, she would be the last person to fire a person for exercising his right to self-expression.

She cannot say she is not a politician because we saw her on television sporting a PDP outfit at a rally even if she danced like a nerd. She has, on paper, deferred to the democratic tenet that flourishes in an atmosphere of discordant peace, where everyone can defy because we deify differences.

But that is not the real thrust of this column. She let a man, whose name is Yushau Shuaibu, NEMA’s spokesman, to go because he accused the minister of favouring her ethnic relatives. What strikes me is that a pattern is developing, and I am not interested in throwing blame. The pattern inhabits such names as Rose Uzoma, the former immigration boss, Azubuike Ihejirika, the chief of army staff and Stella Oduah, minister of aviation. All of them, including Okonjo-Iweala, belong to the same ethnic group, and they have been charged with a tribal tunnel vision.

The last of such stories came from the heart of the army when Major-General Ihejirika, the first Igbo soldier to head the army since Ironsi, was petitioned as looking only within his ethnic cocoon for choice positions. It was a tempestuous story, and the army chief blazed out a defence of his stewardship. But it had no such detail as to quiet nerves. He did not reel out statistics. Rather he lashed out at his accusers and imputed motives. The motives may be correct. The accuser was an Hausa-Fulani who was probably in jingoistic fury that his ethnic brothers had lost their prime as the avatars in the nation’s hierarchy.

Not many were satisfied, but the matter quieted. The army chief may have his points, but he did not take the patience to satisfy a variegated nation about the integrity of his stewardship. The aviation minister, Stella Oduah, also fell into the storm. But, in the same fashion as the army chief, her defence lacked the detail and balance that would sate an intellectual curiosity.

Shuaibu’s article excoriating the finance mistress did not give much detail. But the mistress of the economy ought to have acted with grace and not with the hectoring fury of an Amazon. What concerns me is not whether the allegations are out but that a hypocritical nation has allowed the grudges to fester. The fury has sublimated in the courtesies of silence, or what the Senegalese novelist Sembene Ousmane calls the perfidy of lies and hypocrisy of rivals.

We cannot forget that we dwell in a nation riven by ethnic duels today. The crisis in Plateau State between the so-called indigenes and settlers smouldered surreptitiously for years before it moved from community to a cumulus of fear and slaughter. Boko Haram is ostensibly a pious movement but all over it seethes the tribal angst. We cannot forget that the injustice that fomented the senseless killings of the Igbo in the 1960s followed pent-up resentments over what was the domination of the ethnic group in the civil service.

I have no doubt that this is not a nation, as Okoi Arikpo once said. We are a nation state. It is a nation of nations in which individual components pass the years in mutual suspicion. But we have lived together for over five decades and the concept of Nigeria is even a century. Yet we still live in the words of the American writer with the “haunting fear that someone somewhere might be happy” because of one ethnic group or the other’s progress.

If it is true that these allegations resound with facts, then we should not let them go under. Normally such matters ought to be scrutinised with thoroughness by the National Assembly in the fashion of the immigration boss who lost her job because it was true. If they are not true we ought to be satisfied by the report of a disinterested party and not the official line of the accused.

When the Hausa-Fulani held sway, the Igbo spoke vociferously about marginalisation, and this writer on many occasions invested ink in support of giving the Southeast its fair share. It is an irony that the same group should be in that position today.

The Hausa-Fulani did not apologise for holding the nation’s jugular, and we resented that then. Even President Goodluck Jonathan, who rode to power on the southern wave, is inspiring charges of pursuing an Ijaw agenda in the Niger Delta. When these charges are thrown, the cynical response is that it is their time. When will it be the time of fairness for Nigeria?

The United States has fought this prejudice for over a century, and it still rankles the nation in spite of installing a black president in Barack Obama. But we have seen institutional sensitivity in the nation. Charges like these cannot go without thorough investigation.

The Hausa-Fulani swaggered and we fumed. We do not want that to continue because to allow grudges to gather in the sewers of a nation’s subconscious is to postpone the day of duel that often is inevitable.

The Yoruba never complained of marginalisation until recently. They have cried that the present dispensation under Jonathan has pooh-poohed the nation of Kaaro ojire. They have lashed back that the Yoruba had the speaker slot, but how do you choose for a person what he should have. But is the position of speaker sufficient to sate a people with the second largest ethnicity in the land? That chops logic. However, I have often told the Yoruba that they brought marginalisation on themselves because they voted for Jonathan without insisting on the quid pro quo in such democratic investment.

What is clear is that we still live in a nation of idols. To simplify philosopher Plato, we have moulded idols. Here we have idols of the tribe, idols of the faith, and they all add up to idols of hate. Each tribal bigot continues to see, not Nigeria, but Hausa, Ibibio, Itsekiri, Igbo, Yoruba, etc. Others are invisible.

When I read the novel The Invisible Man by the black writer Ralph Ellison about how the black man was invisible in the United States to the white man, I had to witness it myself to appreciate the pithy truths of his narratives. You could enter an office with a white person, and a person who knows you both may greet the other person as though you were not there. I experienced this.

We have this in our country, and we act as though hell is other people, apologies to Jean Paul Sartre. It is time to crash the tunnel wall so we can see who sits on the other side.

April 22, 2013
A disintegration foretold

When our super patriots want to reassure us that predictions of Nigeria’s demise are grossly exaggerated, they argue from the position that a shooting war between the constituent parts – something in the mould of the Biafran Civil War – is highly improbable.

But if you reverse that to look at the disintegration scenario from the point of a badly constructed house collapsing in a heap, then it suddenly doesn’t look so farfetched. Before our very eyes the country is being transformed into a jungle where only the best armed can survive. From Bokostan in the North-East to the Niger-Delta creeks gunmen have overrun the place.

To the north, Boko Haram have with their crude bombs bludgeoned the might of the Nigerian state into submission. It’s a measure of the triumph of terror that today we are chasing after the insurgents – begging them to accept a generous amnesty, when it should be the other way round.

In Plateau State, the military Special Task Force (STF) is running around in circles trying to break the unending cycle of bloodletting. But for every attack they foil, there are five more cases of cold-blooded murder of hapless villagers – producing a grim and mounting toll in casualties, and widening the chasm between feuding tribes and communities.

Last Monday in Lagos, unknown gunmen snatched Kehinde Bamgbetan, chairman of Ejigbo Local Council Development Area (LCDA), riddling his SUV with bullets in the process. As at the time of writing this he was still in the hands of captors who were demanding $1 million for his release.

That same week, the police paraded some sorry fellows who confessed to the kidnapping of the mother of Finance Minister, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala. Among the suspects was a former servant in the palace. Those two were just a few of a litany of kidnapping stories that have become daily fare in newspapers.

Where amnesty for Boko Haram or the exploits of daredevil kidnappers are not dominating the headlines, the latest exploits of our army of armed robbers fill the gap. A couple of weeks ago some of them laid siege to Nigeria’s highest profile gateway – Murtala Muhammed International Airport – killed a couple of policemen and bureau de change operators, and carted away millions in foreign currencies.

In many cities, areas that used to be safe havens have now lost their innocence. In Lagos in recent weeks, robbers have roamed free along the Lekki corridor – paying courtesy calls at places like Victoria Garden City. At about the same period, a Briton was snatched as he stood outside his residence on Victoria Island.

Increasingly, authorities at federal, state and local government levels are discovering that areas over which they can assert proper control are shrinking by the day.

Large swathes of border territory between Nigeria and Cameroon, and the countryside up north, have become no-man’s land where Boko Haram militants roam free and kill at will.

In this veritable Bokostan being a government official is no guarantee of security. Last year, the insurgents took potshots at a residence of Vice President Namadi Sambo. Not too long ago, the country home of the Adamawa State Deputy Governor, Bala James Ngilari, came under attack with fatal consequences.

The one region over which the government loved to gloat that it had restored order – the Niger-Delta creeks – is stirring once again. Two weekends ago, some gunmen who may or may not be members of a resurrected Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND), ambushed and killed 12 policemen in a contingent providing protection for a retired militant who had come to bury his mother.

Until now, it was fashionable in analysing security challenges facing Goodluck Jonathan’s administration to blame it all – especially in Bokostan – on disaffected politicians who had vowed to make Nigeria ungovernable for the “interloper” president from the creeks. But to continue to credit what is unfolding across the country to this bunch is to ascribe to them powers that they don’t have.

It is equally tempting to blame the crisis on poverty and the parlous state of the economy. But that again will not tell the whole story because for all the talk of the state of things, the Nigerian economy is much bigger and more muscular than it was 10 or 15 years ago.

If poverty was really the issue here, then no one will be able to walk around because all those living below the poverty line will be carrying guns, knives, machetes and slingshots – robbing their neighbours.

Again, poverty doesn’t explain the Boko Haram phenomenon. In fact, in all their grievances they never mention poverty, but rather speak of Sharia and avenging themselves against Christians over imaginary injuries.

Poverty alone doesn’t explain the rash of kidnappings sweeping the land. These crimes are often executed by gangs who have been at it for a while and have developed a taste for easy millions and the good life. They may have been propelled initially by lack, but greed has since taken over as motivator.

What we are seeing is the result of the relentless erosion of societal values which started in the 80s, and was encouraged by a succession of clueless military juntas and civilian administrations.

We cast aside all the things that organised and stable societies everywhere value – hard work, thrift, honesty and modesty and replaced them with a celebration of vulgar wealth and ostentation. Politicians and persons in public office are only too glad to announce their arriviste status with obscene displays of opulence.

While they are at it, universities remain shut for the better of a year on account of disputes over salaries. Pensioners who have served their nation for upwards of four decades are dropping dead on verification queues, while those who should care are taking care of themselves.

By our actions we emphasise that the only thing that counts is cash and its ostentatious display. We send the wrong signals to young people and are aghast when they grab pistols to hasten their access to riches.

We are raising a generation of kidnappers when all we feed them is a diet of games shows and reality TV that sell the fantasy that mind-boggling millions are just one dance step away. Moral instruction is a no-no; and history is just that – history – in many schools and homes.

Our national football team wins a tournament and the president, governors and sundry moneybags go crazy doling out millions, lands and exotic cars. When last did someone in leadership honour the best student in mathematics or physics in Nigeria with millions, and choice land in Abuja? I cannot imagine the British Prime Minister opening the vault and handing out gold bars to footballers even if England wins the World Cup!

The difference? The values we celebrate. The further we drift down this road, the more we cement our internal collapse. The answer is not in ephemeral solutions like state police or the creation of another security apparatus. It is for Nigeria to return to the basic values upon which decent societies are built. It requires leadership. The president and his team can take the lead if they have the will, and if they care.

April 21, 2013
Boston Marathon bombings: Another family tragedy

After what seemed like eternity, the two brothers alleged to have planted the bombs that killed three people and injured more than 180 others at the finish line of the Boston Marathon on Monday have been apprehended. The older of the two, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, reportedly died in a shoot-out on Friday morning, while the younger, Dzhokhar, 19, was arrested in the evening after a manhunt that shut down the Watertown section of the city. Though the two brothers hailed from Dagestan, a Russian republic that shares borders and, to some extent, religious ideology and militancy with Chechnya, they had migrated to the United States more than 10 years ago and lived there legally. This fact was probably responsible for why President Barack Obama said the government would be seeking answers to a lot of questions concerning the background of the two brothers and why they suddenly took to militancy. The US will get all the answers it wants if the severely injured Dzhokhar survives.

Though Anzor Tsarnaev, father of the two brothers, believed his sons were framed, there is no doubt that for him and his wider family this is both a family and generational tragedy. In fact, their home country and fellow Dagestanis are already primed to disown the bombers. When it first appeared that the Boston bombers were linked to Chechnya, that country’s President was quick to disclaim the fact. He suggested that American investigators should look into the Tsarnaev brothers’ upbringing in the US for explanations on their radicalism. Said the Chechnya President, Ramzan Kadyrov: “Any attempts to draw the link between Tsarnaevs (even if they are guilty) and Chechnya are in vain. They grew up in USA and their views and beliefs were formed there. One needs to seek the roots of evil in America. All the world should be fighting terrorism together. We know it better than anyone else. We wish all those who suffered to get well soon and we share the feeling of sorrow with Americans.”

But if Dagestan and Chechnya could promptly disown the Tsarnaev brothers, their anguished family would not find it easy to do same. Not only have the brothers brought the family name to national and international opprobrium, the scale of the brutal assault in Boston is bound to make many seek explanations for the two brothers’ radicalisation both in their family and in the US as a whole. In addition, the impact of the bombings and the many lives they have wrecked, not to talk of the novelty of the attacks, are certain to keep the unfortunate incident in public memory for a long time. Nigeria and the Abdulmutallab family face the same humiliation every time there is a mention of the Christmas Day bomber.

It will be recalled that under the influence of Yemeni members of al-Qaeda terror group, a 23-year-old Nigerian, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, with plastic explosives strapped to his underwear, attempted to blow up an American aeroplane over Detroit on Christmas Day in 2009.

Shortly after, on January 10, 2010, this column attempted an explanation of the Abdulmutallab problem. The analysis raised a number of issues that are today even more pertinent as the world ponders the tragedy that has just befallen the Tsarnaev family. An excerpt of that piece is reproduced below, and though it was published before the northern part of Nigeria exploded in violence, it anticipated Boko Haram militancy. If only the North had listened.

AbdulMutallab meets Gavrilo Princip,

January 10, 2010

“…Notwithstanding our defiant posture and wounded pride, the fact is that we have been foolish and hypocritical in our approach to urgent national issues such as religion, culture, ethnicity and politics. Unfortunately, all these issues have impacted negatively on the country to the point of producing monstrosities like Farouk. Terrorism is not exclusive to any religion, just as there is no single cause of terrorism. But in the case of Farouk we must go beyond the fact of his schooling in Togo, London, Dubai and Yemen to find out what predisposed him to acute explosion of rage and violence. There are many like him who schooled abroad even at a tender age and who shunned hateful ideologies. American psychologists may be able to piece together the jigsaw and come out with answers to what went wrong with the young bomber…

“When he was 19 years old, Farouk had expressed the frightening and myopic opinion that he fantasised the waging of another major Jihad in which Islam would achieve victory and establish a world empire. It never occurred to him that even if that happened, that victory could not be sustained for all time. But with such foundational belief that forceful proselytisation was permissible, which sadly many clerics in Nigeria hold to be true, it was a matter of time before he became a tool in the hands of demagogues. It is a fact of our recent history that many violent proselytisers, many of them quite ignorant of Islam, and some of them hiding behind politics attempt to create an immiscible broth of religion and politics. Conventional explanations that suggest fanaticism and violence result from poverty must be examined again in the light of Farouk’s wealthy background so that the North can begin to rebuild confidence and establish an atmosphere where peace and harmony reign.

“Given our past experiences the wise political option should have been for Nigeria to move in the direction of robust secularism in which the state would hands off religion. This has not happened partly because many states cannot seem to make up their minds over the instinctive theocracy of their fantasy, as Farouk indicated, and the stability and realism that secularism offers in a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society. Except we deceive ourselves, Middle East is in turmoil because countries in the region are locked in a battle between secularism and theocracy, and between contending factions of theocratic sects. Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, among others should serve as examples of the dangers an increasingly vulnerable Nigeria faces. We must not assume that these problems will vanish automatically.

“Disturbing as the backlash against Nigerians abroad is, the answer is not in the hysteria that has gripped the country, nor in the clumsy attempt to distance ourselves from our young compatriot. Whether we like it or not, Farouk is our son, and though by his education he is a citizen of the world, he is still our son. His family values might have failed to tether him to reality, but we must not ignore the fact that those values served his other 13 siblings well. Most families often have one black sheep anyway. It is the poor luck and personal tragedy of the urbane senior Mutallab that his errant son chose the world stage to display his waywardness. We must also not ignore the fact that the unhealthy mix of politics and religion in the North has engendered more religious violence in that region than anywhere else. And we must not downplay the danger of disintegration which our refusal to do something urgent and drastic about the unhealthy mixture could precipitate.

“We may not have all the answers regarding the transformation of Farouk from a gentle and pious boy into a suicidal and venomously spiteful man, nor it seems does he himself. But we must begin the search. The magnitude of his fantasy and the sheer scale of his ignorance should tell us something about ourselves, our family values, our politics and the long years of pussyfooting over religion…”

Anzor Tsarnaev, father of the two Boston bombers, said his children were framed, pointing out in particular that his younger son “is a true angel.” According to him, “Dzhokhar is a second-year medical student in the US. He is such an intelligent boy. We expected him to come on holidays here.” That may be the much he knew about his sons. The question parents must ask themselves is how much they know their children, or whether in fact they know them at all, given the penchant of the young ones to always spring a surprise. This column also examined this treatise on April 1, 2012 when it responded in this place to the deplorable tweets written by Liam Stacey to the huge consternation of his distraught mother. Hereunder is an excerpt of that column to help instigate a fresh appreciation of the subject in the light of the incredulity and grief of the Boston bombers’ father.

Liam Stacey’s racist tweets and the dilemma of parenting, April 1, 2012

“…Recall also that I once wrote about the Abdulmutallabs here. Except you are a parent, you may never fully appreciate that family’s sadness and horror as their son, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, attempted to bomb an airline over Detroit on Christmas Day in 2009. The tragedy of realising that they had raised a son who embraced terrorism was bad enough in a worrisome way, for the eyes of the whole world, and the even more censorious and withering look of their countrymen was truly damning. But much worse is the continuing tragedy of watching helplessly as that son stays in the limelight for the wrong reasons, tormented by the destructive finality of long years in prison, his life completely wasted, as are the hopes and investments of the family on him. It is impossible not to feel the family’s pain.

“Imagine, therefore, what horror befell the British family of the Staceys last week, as their son, Liam, hugged the Twitter limelight for the wrong reason, trolling the tweeting public with deeply nauseating racist remarks on Fabrice Muamba, the Bolton footballer who collapsed on pitch during a soccer match with Spurs. Liam, a Swansea University biology student, explained in court that he trolled under the influence of alcohol, but he did not quite convince anyone his racist tweets did not reflect what he harboured secretly in his heart. As he was being tried and sentenced to 56 days in jail, reports indicated his mother wept bitterly, ashamed of the negative publicity her otherwise mild-mannered son had attracted to himself, and the fact that he had achieved notoriety that would haunt his present and future, truncate his education and career, and ostracise him in civilised communities everywhere for a long time.

“No family is so strong and so cohesive as to be immune to the consequences of the obnoxious behaviour of its member. Increasingly, as the Twitter generation is showing, younger people are coming under the inordinate strains of modernity. Such strains sometimes manifest in the digital and communications revolution, in music, particularly rap and hip-hop, and in many other modern trends such as the shifting concepts of family, parenting, urbanisation, and the ideology of culture, economy (business) and politics. The problem is of such magnitude that families now depend on miracles and happenstances to keep themselves together and establish some semblance of order and harmony…

“But the greatest challenge facing parents is not how to obviate the stupidities of their children, but how to raise children whose view of society is balanced, children who are neither misanthropic, like petty criminals, sadists and serial murderers, nor moral monsters who grow up unable to differentiate between the healthy predilections of a political and religious ideologue and the antinomian excesses of terrorists and extremists who espouse ethnic or racial genocide…

“The challenge of any parent is to develop a continuum of coherent and relevant worldviews anchored on the key elements of lofty principles, great character and unimpeachable morality. That template of ethical continuums must, however, be such that members of the family, particularly the children, can express and fulfil their individualisms in ways that do not threaten the family or the society. It is never easy, especially because generational shifts and conflicts often periodically impose new and sometimes taxing realities upon families. But the danger of not establishing a family paradigm upon which children could anchor their lives and ideas is to create a vacuum in which all manner of ideas and cultures would thrive, many of them anti-social, and others inimical to the image of the family and the wider society.

“To prevent the sort of tragedies Liam Stacey and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab brought upon their families, the first priority for any family is to set a tough code of ethics for themselves. Top on the list of that code, of course, is character, that most difficult and yet most beautiful of all virtues that inculcates a sound philosophy regarding the sanctity of human life, courage in the face of adversity, intelligent appreciation of issues, and a sound knowledge of one’s purpose in life. If a parent does not set this code for his children, and does not do it in such a way as to make the code adaptable to the present and the future, strangers, perhaps with malicious intent, will do it for them. After all, it is the sum of positive family values that determines how stable and prosperous a society becomes…”

In the next few days or weeks, we may get a better insight into what radicalised the Tsarnaev brothers and motivated them into becoming mass murderers. Does it have to do with their conversion to Islam? If so what kind of preaching were they listening to, and who were influencing them? Or does it have anything to do with Dagestan’s campaign for independence or the sufferings of Chechnya? Whatever the reasons, the Boston bombings place greater urgency on the need for more realistic, adequate and intelligent parenting.

April 21, 2013
Rutam house of gaffes!

The Guardian Front Page Lead Story of April 16 nurtured lexical falsehoods: “…were in Wase on Friday (a comma) last week (another comma) for the restoration of peace and normalcy in (to) the council.”

“That last week (week’s) attack on Wase….’

“…three persons were reported killed in Kanana village in Langtan South by unidentified gunmen in their resumed hostilities.” Jettison ‘unidentified’ from the extract—these callous blokes are never identified or known. Spare readers the trite embellishments that are fast becoming components of Nigerian lexicon. (Vide the next sentence)

“It was learnt that unknown gunmen on Friday night….” Beyond the ‘unknown gunmen’ thrash, a reputable newspaper should obligatorily inform readers of what ‘it learnt’—not hazy and indolent reportage.

“The sleeping and isolated Maza Ward in Jos North Local Council was also attacked….” Plateau crises: sleepy—not sleeping—ward!

Reporters should avoid these juvenile expressions: ‘It was gathered’/’It was further learnt’/’Sources informed our publication that….’ The foregoing and more demonstrate reportorial slothfulness! Go straight to the point.

“Reports say that the gunmen….” Why not ‘Accounts have it that the gunmen…?’ It sounds odd for a publication that is reporting an event to be saying ‘reports say….’!

Still on The Guardian Front Page: “BA plane develops fault, grounded at airport” Where else would it have been grounded? At Rutam House of The Guardian? To ground an aircraft is to stop it or the pilot from flying: All aircraft were grounded yesterday until the inclement weather cleared.

“…they condemned the airline officials for keeping them in the dark as to the real cause for (of) the delay.”

Now The Guardian Editorial of April 16 which contained four solecisms: “…the judiciary to whom (which) they look (look up to) for succour or redress has also turned to a haven of sorts for the looters.”

“Corrupt public officers (officials) do not worry about their arraignment in court anymore.” Except in rare extra-judicial circumstances, the only place for arraignment is court. Once someone is arraigned, it means that they were taken to a court. So, ‘arraignment in court’ is ‘under-bridge’/’bend-down’ English literature!

The last entry from The Guardian Front Page under review: “Anenih and his entourage arrived at Obasanjo’s Hill Top, (sic) Abeokuta residence at noon and held a three-and-half hours (hours’) closed-door meeting with Obasanjo.” The meeting was held behind closed doors—there is nothing like ‘closed-door meeting’!

Point of grammar: If the noun that follows a percentage of is plural, use a plural verb after it: Only a small percentage of people are interested in politics in Nigeria.

Last week’s unpardonable oversight: “This is why in the developed world, (sic) creation of jobs is used as indices (an index) of measuring the health of the economy.” (NATIONAL MIRROR, April 11) Singular: index; plural: indexes or indices. Thanks to the eagle-eyed readers who noted this. I saw it shortly after I had hurriedly sent in my column, almost late. Apologies all the same!

Yet another slip-up: “…the level of unemployment generated on a monthly is key in information for the government.” (Source: as above) A rewrite: …the level of unemployment generated on a monthly basis or monthly is key for the government.

MY SMS PORTAL

“DEAR Mr. Wabara, your observation about the expression ‘all nooks and crannies’ in your column last week is inaccurate. The expression is perfectly correct. Note that although idioms, such as ‘every nook and cranny’ are fixed expressions, they are nevertheless not only malleable in certain contexts, they also have non-idiomatic equivalents. The expression in question—all nooks and crannies—is not idiomatic at all. It is an acceptable, ordinary, plural equivalent expression of that idiom. Please, refer to Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary 8th Edition Page 994. Kind regards.” (Dr. Garvey Ufot/07061248849)

MY response: I did not say that ‘all nooks and crannies’ is an idiom. ‘Every nook and cranny’ is the idiom used informally in reference to ‘every part of a place.’ The fact is that idioms and some entries are fixed/stock expressions that cannot—no matter the circumstance, privilege or poetic licence/liberty/freedom—be adapted, re-phrased, amplified, embellished, vitiated or tampered with in anyway if it is formal/standard/official writing no matter the context. ‘A beehive of activity’ cannot become ‘a beehive of activities’; ‘under the weather’ (when someone is ill) will never change to ‘in the weather’; ‘meeting behind closed doors’ cannot be transformed as most Nigerians do (‘closed-door meeting!’)—the list is endless. So, ‘every nook and cranny’ remains right as opposed to ‘all nooks and crannies’! The plural nature of ‘all nooks and crannies’ cannot make it synonymous with ‘every nook and cranny’. Let me mention here that the painstaking work I do in this column is research-based, which does not, however, mean that I am infallible. Nobody is. I cherish superior arguments and contributions based on foolproof knowledge—not half-baked ones that will draw me back, unnecessarily, please. The 2010 Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary 8th Edition you referred to (page 1001, not 994) is old! The example it gave which obviously misled you is a different, non-idiomatic context: ‘dark woods full of secret nooks and crannies’! I use the 2012 edition of Longman Advanced Dictionary of Contemporary English (New Edition), among others. There is nothing like equivalence in idiomatic applications—idioms are independent and stand alone! Dispassionate and cerebral critiques are welcome—not jaundiced hypercriticisms!

I thank you, Dr. Ufot.

April 21, 2013
Boston bombings: Obama for third term

Did you hear the US president speak? How did you feel?

In an emergency like the Boston bombings of April 15, one should naturally feel sad that some demented minds could go to the extent that the bombers went, either to settle scores, or for whatever reason. One wonders what point they wanted to make, and whether the victims were supposed to be their targets. Some say that is the way of terrorists. Even if I grudgingly concede that to them, I cannot understand why governments have to be caught napping all of the times in such emergencies, and we then have a situation where it seems there is no one in control; or at best, that it is the terrorists that are in charge. Since the world is now a global village, I was privileged, like millions of others all over the world, to watch the Boston bombings almost live, as well as the reactions of the relevant authorities in the United States to the ugly incident. One cannot but be reflective about the way the tragedy was handled. There was no undue panic; first responders – police at all levels, emergency workers and all, did their job admirably. It was as if they had been expecting the blasts.

But, perhaps the most fascinating thing about it all, to me, was the way President Barack Obama responded to the crisis. I am not an American. Yet, when, on Monday we were told that Obama was going to address the press on the incident, I was resolute not to go to bed until I have heard him speak. Millions of other Nigerians did same. Despite the fact that we were far from the scene of the bombings, we were still interested in what the US president had to say. Obama was pregnant and we were anxious to see what he would give birth to. After such an incident, any American president would be. And it was almost certain Obama was going to say things one could connect with.

We were not disappointed. In just three minutes or so, Obama was done; he had said all that needed to be said: We cannot say where this is coming from, at least immediately, and what the motive could be. Compare this with the 2010 bombing in Abuja in which 12 people were killed. Hardly had the crime been committed than our President, Goodluck Jonathan, came out to say who the criminals could not have been. It has turned out that that same person who heads the militants the president vouched for is now serving jail term in South Africa for the crime.

Then, Obama sympathised with the victims and their relatives. Finally, he assured that America would not rest until those responsible for the crime had been brought to book. Obama might not have used our ‘gazette’ expression: ‘We are on top of the situation’, but Americans knew their government was ‘on top of the situation’. And coming from a man with Obama’s pedigree, there was enough assurance that the evil doers would not go unpunished. Americans believe him; they know that when their president promises, he delivers. It is only a matter of time; those responsible for the bombings would be unmasked and made to pay for their crime. As we write, suspects are being trailed. This is the kind of thing that gives hope to the citizenry and makes them take their government seriously.

Even before that short but great address, you could see a business-like Obama. His mood depicted the magnitude of the pains he was going through. Three Americans killed and over 150 others injured in a single incident was just too many. As he sat with two officials in the White House monitoring developments, none of them made the mistake of smiling, not to talk of laughing. I do not know how many people noticed this. In Nigeria, you must see some top government officials laughing in the midst of such calamity. If you doubt me, check your record. Each time I see such a thing, I ask myself: Oh God, why are we like this? But I quickly adjust when I remember that we have been adjudged the ‘happiest people on earth’. So, there is nothing wrong even if we express pleasant feeling wherever and whenever, as if we have inhaled an overdose of laughing gas.

Again, when Obama delivered his speech at an interfaith service at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in Boston on Thursday, a speech described by the Business Insider as ‘both solemn and uplifting’, he left no one in doubt that he is not a president that is prepared to be delivering such graveside orations all the time; rather, it was a terse warning to the criminals, the “small, stunted individuals” responsible for Monday’s bombings at the Boston marathon: “Yes, we will find you. And yes, you will face justice, Obama said. And he meant it.

When he described Boston in personal tones, you could still find the panache of a president in control; when he waxed philosophical, you will still notice the confidence of a president who is truly in charge. When he gave hope, Americans believed him: “you can bet” the 118th Boston Marathon will be run next year on Patriot’s Day.”We may be momentarily knocked off our feet, but we’ll pick ourselves up. We’ll keep going. We’ll finish the race,” Obama said. His words are like an oracle’s; because it is almost certain the event will hold as he promised if Christ tarried in coming. There is a great world of difference when a leader assures his people that all is well, yet that leader holds himself up somewhere, while asking the led to ‘go about their lawful duties’. Those who went on such ‘lawful duties’ and lost their lives and limbs to Boko Haram are not likely to benefit anything when the terrorists get their own pill, amnesty.

When Obama went to Boston, he had no cause to remind the people that he did not have to be there. If he ever had such slip of tongue, both he and his party are finished; pure and simple, because votes count in America. He knew it was his responsibility to be there, to see things for himself, comfort the victims, and condole with the relatives of the dead. That was part of the reasons why Americans elected him; they need someone on whose shoulders to lean on in emergencies. It is not all about balls and foreign policy. Charity must begin at home. Obama’s speech in Boston was commended even by failed presidential candidate Mitt Romney who described it as ‘superb’.

Perhaps the most annoying thing is that in spite of the fact that Obama has done so well, it has not occurred to anyone in America to call for third term for him. Here, sycophants sing the praise of lazy people, many of whom by incomprehensible means of fortune find themselves in positions of authority, and start promoting them for more terms even before they complete the first year in their first term. President Jonathan has just given his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) a marching order to ‘bring into the party’s kitty 32 of the 36 states in the country in 2015; that is nine more than the party presently controls. The first question that readily comes into mind is what makes the president think he is such a particularly attractive product. What can the president point at as his achievements to make him the toast of Nigerians in the 2015 elections?

Obviously, the PDP is like the person who is counting billions in his dream, he had better be told to work harder so that he would not die of hunger. But the president and his PDP can keep on dreaming. After all, dreams are free; but votes are sacred.

Second term! Second term!!

April 21, 2013
Salvation on earth: Two exemplary paradigms (1)

The Argentines are having a ball. This column sees no reason why they shouldn’t. In Diego Amanda Maradona and Lionel Messi, they have two of the greatest footballers that the world has ever produced. The mesmerising Messi is currently the world’s best footballer, and like the prodigious Maradona at his prime, he could waltz or blitz his way through a battalion of defenders with the ease and facility of a goldfish in water. The sheer ecstasy of watching these two is the ultimate in orgiastic visual pleasure.

But there are even more profound reasons why the Argentines should feel cool with themselves. The Catholic world has just elected its first ever Argentine Pope. Ninety five per cent of Argentines may be devout Catholic, but before now moving the headship of the papacy to the pampas or the whole of Latin America for that matter appeared a long shot in the dark. Now it has happened.

In addition to this is the economic and political transformation going on in Argentina . Slowly but quite discernibly, Argentina is turning the political and economic corner. In recent decades, Argentines could only live on the glory of the country’s golden age in the last quarter of the nineteenth century leading to early twentieth century. Decades of brutal military misrule and grinding economic misfortune had sapped the energy and confidence of the people.

It is also perhaps wondrously and intriguingly symbolic that Margaret Thatcher, Argentina’s greatest modern tormentor, should choose to answer the final call at the very moment of Argentinean revival and renaissance. The boulevards of Buenos Aires flared up in jubilation and ululation as the news broke that the nemesis of the nation had joined her ancestors. Famously libeled as a nation of Italians who speak Spanish but think they are English living in Paris, the Argentines appear to be finally rediscovering themselves.

But it is not just the Argentines who are headed for a starry ascent. Virtually the entire continent of South America seemed to be witnessing a continental rebirth and rejuvenation. From Panama to Peru, an entire continent is being shaken and dragged off its rutted and gutted grooves of complacency and sloth. Leading the pack is Brazil which in a decade has lifted more than 50 million people out of poverty into middle class self-sufficiency.

Brazil’s dramatic economic transformation and looming ascendancy as a global power have won grudging respect and concession from the USA. Brazil’s president, a pragmatic disciple of the iconic Lula, has been invited for a full state visit to America, the first time in about two decades that a Brazilian leader is being accorded such a honour by the US.

The entire world is watching the developments in Latin America with curiosity and bated breath. This prodigious human emancipation and stunning optimisation of humanity’s capacity for self-transformation is not the result of a sudden religious conversion or the benevolence of some ancient Aztec or Inca god or goddess. Neither is it as a result of a slavish and sterile imitation and uncreative adaptation of other people’s culture. It is a tribute to the power of visionary and original ideas to re-engineer human society.

Anywhere in the ancient and modern world where human society has taken a huge leap forward, we can be sure that some original and transformative ideas are behind the stunning advancement on behalf of all humanity. This was what happened with ancient forms of writing in ancient Egypt and old Babylon, the idea of democracy and revolutionary warfare in the Greek and Roman empires, seafaring in Ancient China, the concept of nation-state in the Iberian peninsula, the Industrial Revolution in England, modern philosophy in France, modern warfare in Germany and the revolutionary refinement of the nation-state paradigm in the US.

We can add modern exemplars like Singapore which broke the binary spatial distinction between the First and Third worlds through the brilliant ideas of one exceptional individual and of course the new experiment in the brotherhood of all humanity irrespective of race and religion in post-apartheid South Africa which owes its inspiration to the humane intellectual genius of a man called Nelson Mandela.

As armies of contending ideas wage relentless battle, all that is solid often melts into thin air. The ideas that finally lifted the Dark Age for Europe came from the Muslim world in its most visionary period and in particular from the conquest of Constantinople by the Ottoman Turks which led to the exodus of philosophers, thinkers, writers and other cutting-edge contrarians to mainland Europe. In their dark and devious schema, Western historians and intellectuals often project the Dark Age as a period of global human degeneration. But this is not so. It is a clever attempt to foist a unique European fiasco on the rest of the world.

By the beginning of the tenth century, the Chinese nation was arguably the leading human society. Its sea-going vessels were described as huge clouds in the sky as a result of the size and sophistication of their masts. Extant artifacts in the Mombasa Museum in modern day Kenya suggest that Chinese sailors had visited the place around the sixth and seventh centuries. But it was around the tenth century that a vicious power struggle lasting for centuries broke out between the mandarinate and the Imperial Chinese feudal court.

At the very period when China should have opened itself to receive fresh ideas from the rest of the world, it closed itself off. A long period of national decline ensued. Chinese eyes finally opened when the British, from about eight thousand miles away, seized Hong Kong. The Japanese Imperial Army added insult to injury when it invaded and subjected the Chinese to atrocious cruelties. The Boxers’ Uprising was a protest against national humiliation as well as an incipient rebellion against the feudal order. The turmoil eventuated in the Chinese Revolution.

We must now return to our original quarry. Why is it that Latin America is experiencing an economic and political resurgence and rejuvenation while African countries, with the exception of a notable few, are gripped by stark stasis and collective retrogression? We need to establish two historical theses. First is that the religious standing and spiritual state of any society is a reflection of its intellectual stage and mental development and not the other way round. Except in moments of revolutionary crisis, all religions rely on the power of faith rather than the power of ideas. Just stick to your belief system and forget about fancy stuff which may be the handiwork of Lucifer. Unfortunately as Norman Mailer, the rogue American novelist and thinker, famously posited, there may be some devils working for God.

See where Martin Luther and the discovery of printing dragged the old Church? And see where the Latin American Liberation theologists were dragging the whole concept of salvation before the Imperial Catholic church pulled the plug in a brilliant intellectual counter-insurgency coordinated by the inevitable and cannily cerebral Cardinal Ratzinger, the first modern Pope on pension.

The second thesis is so simple and self-evident that it amounts to an intellectual scandal when it escapes our intellectuals. It is that the mode of conquest and colonial rationalisation also conditions and in the last instance determines the fate of human emancipation from the ravages of colonialism. Colonisation also has its rich and dark ironies. The first wave of Iberian modernity which allowed the Portuguese and the Spaniards to seize the South American continent was merely a dress rehearsal for the full blown Euro-American modernity that was to follow.

So is it that while the Iberians could match the later day colonial masters in the department of colonial cruelty and physical coercion, they were mere toddlers when it came to intellectual sophistication and sheer capacity for psychological intimidation. For example, the Spaniards relied on raw firepower and epochal physical cruelty in their conquest and subjugation of the old Indian empires. At that point in time, only superior technology in armaments separated the two civilisations. In fact the Incas were ahead in terms of social order even though they practiced human sacrifice on a Fordist scale.

But neither the Spaniards nor the Portuguese could come up with the sociological cum philosophical intimidation behind the French concept of the colonial subject as an “evolué”, or the intellectual coercion behind Lord Lugard’s infamous “dual mandate” which forcibly steamrolled the economy of the colonised into the metropolitan orbit in a crude rehearsal of modern globalisation. And this is not discounting the intellectually ordered millennial messianism that informs the very notion of American Exceptionalism.

With this background in mind, one can now see why it was easier for the Latin Americans to overcome the contradictions of Iberian colonisation. Raw physical conquests often beget raw physical resistance. It is easier to acquire knowledge of firearms than to acquire the firearms of modern knowledge in a context of unequal exchange. The Iberian conquest spawned several armed rebellions which began almost immediately and became the bloody trademark of the continent for the next 300 years and still counting. In the process, the people developed a heroic culture of militant self-belief and zero tolerance for tyrannical rule.

We can also see why intellectual subjugation is the worst and most deadly form of conquest. It leads directly to spiritual, economic, cultural and political enslavement. With his old religion gone, his culture subverted, his traditional institutions decimated, his modes of knowledge production devastated, the African , unlike the Chinese, the Japanese and the Indians, requires a complete makeover to even minimally function. But even to achieve this requires that he must first overcome the massive inferiority complex engendered by centuries of intellectual slavery in which he has been made to realise that he is surplus to the requirement of humanity. It is akin to being faced by a circular firing squad.

The foregoing also explains why Latin America has thrown up an original riposte to Roman Catholic orthodoxy in the form of Liberation Theology while Nigeria and Africa have come up with an even more showy and stagy version of American prosperity preaching. Both are variants of Liberation theories. But while Liberation Theology preaches individual striving on behalf of communal salvation which is achievable in this world through relentless struggle, Pentecostal/Prosperity doctrine preaches individual salvation through self-liberation from want and poverty which is also achievable in this world through the cultivation of the right attitude. Both have their uses and points of convergence and divergence.

With due respect, the Pentecostal theory of human liberation cannot begin to compare in classical erudition, intellectual rigour and sheer philosophical élan with Liberation Theology. But that is neither here nor there. Both have their practical values and ideological efficacy. While Liberation Theology is in strategic alliance with insurgent groups hoping to bring down unjust and tyrannical states in Latin America, the Pentecostal Church, at least in Nigeria, appears to be in alliance with a delinquent state which it helps to maintain order and stability by transferring to itself part of the state function of providing solace and succour to its citizens. For the fanatical adherents, this is not just an opiate but the oxygen of life itself. Needless to add that it is also an anti-revolutionary carbon monoxide.

This column does not pretend to enjoy a monopoly of wisdom. It remains an interactive session in which readers are encouraged to talk back. Since this is a very weighty matter which involves the destiny of the Black race, readers are invited to ventilate their views before the matter is brought to conclusion in a few weeks’ time.

April 21, 2013
Requiem

Just call her Angel of the morning. She came, she saw and touched the lives of many. May the gentle and generous soul of our own heroic Diva of Ekiti dawn, Funmi Adunni Olayinka, rest in peace. Snooper mourns a great fan of this column and a devout follower of the saucy antics of Okon. She was refinement, good breeding and civility personified, ever so polite and courteous, ever so solicitous of one’s wellbeing. In a crowd, she would go out of her way to ask after the crazy cook.

The world is a stage indeed. The last time Snooper saw her she was dancing on the stage to the mellifluous music of the Highlife maestro, Victor Abimbola Olaiya. It was at the Lagos City Hall on the anniversary of Olaiya’s 60 years on stage. Little did we know that while we were celebrating one icon, another was bidding the stage a long goodbye. The delectable damsel was a paragon of beauty and noble virtues.

Avid readers of this column should remember that last September when snooper complained and moaned endlessly about spending his last birthday alone in bed amidst a crushing avalanche of books, magazines, journals, periodicals and quarterlies, she promptly responded by sending some rare gourmet’s delight from Ekiti with the stern instruction that it was not for the proletarian palate of the Okons of this world. Alas, both delicacy and delinquent disappeared in a midnight heist the like of which has not been seen before. It was a beautiful soul in a beautiful body. May her kind soul rest in peace.

April 21, 2013
The Thatcherian Spirit

I have always thought that the best job is one that involves travelling all over the world and reporting all you see for the media. Just imagine: you are paid to feed your eyes with the most beautiful sights, indulge your palate with the most delicious dishes, relax your body with the most sensuous experiences, and still have your salary waiting for you. Is that the life or what?!

Don’t know much about her but the life and political times of the former British Prime Minister, Baroness Thatcher who died earlier this month, have always fascinated me. So we are going over to Britain today to see what lessons we can learn from her, hoping that someone will cover my expenses.

I believe Mrs. Margaret Thatcher provides a good example for us in Nigeria of what to do or not do with public office. She is said to have started early in politics, from the 1950s, yet, she never allowed herself to be cast in any political frame other than that of a reformer. Till she left office, she never stopped seeking how to change people’s perceptions, carve a comfort zone where people and the government could meet, and to forge a higher level of Statecraft.

Funny thing. I have lost count of the number of times I have been referred to as ‘Thatcher!’ for being a little forceful. But that’s nothing. For ages now, any woman who so much as gives an order in the slightest of peremptory tones is also instantly branded ‘Thatcher!’ Make no mistake, that is not meant to be approbatory; it is actually a complaint. Obviously, only a male is allowed to give orders; so I say, let’s see how much male order can make a pot of soup.

To the people in Britain, the former Prime Minister stands for many things, most of them controversial mainly because she undertook policies that put the interests of Britain on top of a few of the people’s comforts. She took Britain on for Britain’s good. Need I draw the contrast to our country for you? Aren’t we surrounded by a president’s office, state governors’ offices, local government chairmen’s offices and all kinds of offices preferring to sit atop state funds instead of really being on top of situations? Ha!

There are so many lessons to learn from this Thatcherian spirit, the iron lady’s no nonsense approach to governance. To begin with there was her unalloyed, unparallel and unquestionable allegiance to everything Britain. Her patriotism not only gave her momentum, it was her enablement, her strength, her push. Leaving Britain better than she found it was her goal.

In the course of that, she did make some mistakes. For instance, she was said to have admitted that the public uproar that followed her stopping free milk in a section of public schools was not worth the political cost. So yes, she was human, but a realistic human. She stated: ‘… It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also help to look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations.’

Naturally. People anywhere are more interested in what they can obtain from the government. While most people have an eye to lifting up their country through patriotic actions though, any blind man can see that Nigerians, au contraire, jostle for ‘positions of power’ to be able to embezzle and don’t care a fig if the place dries up after them. This is why practically all our public institutions and infrastructures have collapsed.

Then there is the matter of her famed frugality. Oh boy, this is certainly not for Nigerians. According to reports, she is said to have even paid for her ironing board while in government. Once, when a governor in my state had to leave the government house on account of expiry of term, he not only went with everything in the blessed house, even his towns’ people came to his assistance by literally sweeping the place dry on his behalf. Their rationale? ‘Government house belongs to everybody. This is our time to eat. We don’t know when it will be our turn again, so let us pack as much as we can now o.’ Oh well, who can beat that kind of logic?

Then there’s Mrs. Thatcher’s resoluteness to make a difference. Her history shows that since going into politics, she has been the author of so many policies. True, many of these policies have not gone down well with her peers and country men and women; she nevertheless, has made her mark in education, politics, economy, European Common market, and other social concerns. Obviously, she was single minded in any and everything she did. This we really could learn. Just look at us in Nigeria. We not only sit on top of national funds, many of us in politics have no idea what we are there for. To most Nigerians, being in government is an invitation to ‘come and eat’, so now we are busy eating the state dry. Most of us think that governance is all about acquiring all the women (if we are men), or all the diamonds (if we are women), or all the houses (if we are both) there are in this world.

Listen people, I remember reporting here once what one of the richest men in the world said. When asked how many houses he owned, he replied, ‘just one’. Then he explained that it was a lot easier to pay hotel bills for one or two nights in cities here and there when he travelled than to look after two houses. What does one need two houses for? Yeah, what on earth do Nigerians have to go hankering after one hundred houses for? The spirit of competition? A decidedly destructive one that surely is!

Let me tell you what unhealthy competition does. Once, two men found themselves in a fierce tussle for the obaship of their little town. One was already the Oba and the other wished to unseat him because everyone agreed the Oba was very wicked and no one liked him. However, no one could do anything about their dislike except this man. The Oba hopeful then consulted the best, oldest and wisest medicine man he could find to make for him a magic powder or concoction that would unseat his rival. But the wily Oba loved his seat and watched it carefully. He had every powder to counter any his rival could bring. Obviously, the medicine man’s powder did not work.

Quite desperate now, the hopeful had to do some thinking, and to do that, he consulted an old wizened man to help him. One fine morning, the Oba woke up and found a mound of human waste in front of his palace. Since he knew he did not do it, it had to be from his enemy. So, they want to try me eh, he thought as he stormed back inside to fetch his most potent retaliatory powder. This he proceeded to sprinkle on the mound in great malevolence to ensure that whoever produced it would not live to see the next day. Looking up, he saw his only enemy smiling in front of him, and that one made only two statements as he turned away, ‘The waste is yours. I followed you into the bush to bring it back’.

So, folks, that is what competition does: No one wins, neither the victor who finds his soul stooping to conquer nor the loser who may be made to descend into the earth. Rather than compete to amass mounds of unneeded state funds, let us adopt the Thatcherian spirit. It stands for patriotism, frugality, resoluteness and great achievements. It will help us learn to put the country first and ensure we live through posterity.

April 21, 2013
God bless America

For days, I have been following with great interest the developments in the Boston Marathon blast in the United States in which three persons died and about 180 were injured.

Again, America, the world’s most powerful nation literarily came under attack. Though not of the magnitude of the 9/11 attack, the incident reinforced the danger of terrorism globally despite the efforts to curb the disturbing trend.

An otherwise peaceful event which has held annually for years turned tragic just when some of the runners started crossing the finish line. While one of the suspected bombers was killed in a shootout, there has been a massive manhunt for the other as at press time.

My heart goes to the victims of the attack and their families. One can only imagine the agony the victims are experiencing considering the components of the bomb that sprayed nails, ball bearings and other metal fragments into the crowd. I listened to the head of the medical team in one of the hospitals where the victims are being treated and remember him talking of a number of amputations that have been done to save lives.

I am still haunted by the smile of the eight year old Martin Richard who was killed while standing by the finish line with his family when an explosion tore through the area. Richard’s mother, Denise, suffered a brain injury and his 6-year-old sister, Jane, reportedly lost a leg.

It’s difficult to understand why some people will choose to cause grievous harm to others to make whatever point they have or protest against anything. We can only hope that the security agencies will get to the root of this particular case and prevent a reccurrence.

One particular thing that has struck me about the whole incident is how the efforts of the first responders, rescue team, medical team and others have been repeatedly acknowledged by all, including President Barrack Obama.

Unlike in our country, their ‘heroic sacrifice’ did not go unacknowledged. They must be very proud of themselves and will not hesitate to rise up to the occasion if they have another opportunity to do so.

America and other developed nations have a way of demonstrating that the life of every of their citizens matters through the way the governments respond to crisis. This is what is evident in the handling of the Boston blast.

In an incident in which only three persons died, the response at all levels has been massive. President Obama has not only spoken on the matter, he has been part of the special service for the victims during which he assured that the bombers would be found and held ‘accountable’.

In order to get the only two suspects, security agents have launched a manhunt for them with the Boston city almost shut down. I have been intrigued by the amount of information that has been shared with the public by the security to get the suspects. The access given to the media during the operation has been incredible. The willingness of the people, including their families, to speak on what they know about the suspects is very commendable.

There is indeed a lot for us to learn on how to handle situation like this. The lessons must not be lost on us as we join the world in sympathising with America over this unfortunate incident.

April 21, 2013
Democracy without choice?

The words that are needed from political parties are words that assure voters of a level playing field for all parties

Apart from the traditional definition of democracy as a government of the people, by the people and for the people, one abiding dimension of democracy is that it is a system of government that is driven by choice on the part of the electorate, the traditional owners of any democratic nation-state’s sovereignty. Looking at Nigeria’s democracy two years before the 2015 election, it appears there are serious challenges to the choice aspect of democracy in the country.

What is on the electoral horizon barely two years before the 2015 election is a politics of fear or fear mongering. Before President Jonathan came to power in 2011 on his own steam as presidential candidate of the PDP, Nigeria’s political space was free and agog with political campaigns by several presidential candidates that got narrowed down to three candidates from three distinct parties: PDP, ACN, and CPC. However, there was no clear manifesto from the party that brought President Jonathan to power. The closest to a plan of action on his part was the promise of transformation. Transformation was a word that was attractive and even intoxicating to voters, who had lived for decades under various military and civilian rulers that did not bring noticeable progress to most citizens.

For anybody to promise transformation in a country with about 20,000 kilometres of tarred highways, with a railway without coaches; with houses and factories powered by generators; with an educational system on its knees; and with a security architecture unfit for a federation of nationalities; it was as good as promising a government of miracles. Millions of voters crossed party lines to vote for President Jonathan, the presidential candidate of the PDP. It will be uncharitable to say two years on the throne that the rest is history on politics or ethic of transformation.

Now five years away from the 2015 election, President Jonathan’s party men are effusive in the use of vocabularies that are reminiscent of President Obasanjo’s characterisation of the 2007 election as do-or-die. Vocabularies attributed to the President and leaders of his party smack of fear mongering. Instead of giving Nigerians any indication about what PDP is committed to do for Nigerians between now and 2015, PDP leaders are deliberately heating the polity with military diction: capturing 32 states; accepting the challenge of the 2015 election as war, etc. It is not democratic to give voters any reason to be afraid of elections.

Furthermore, at the national level, efforts by opposition parties to merge and give the electorate two major political parties to choose from in the next election are perceived to be frustrated by the ruling party, at whose door step opposition party leaders put the blame about the sudden emergence of political parties and organisations with the acronym APC. The effect of the perception that there are invisible government hands behind the birth of several organisations to snatch the acronym APC from the party to emerge from the merger of ACN, CPC, and ANPP is that there are politicians that are afraid of new parties that are big enough to give the ruling PDP stiff competition in 2015. If a new party with the right size and spread to challenge the ruling party is frustrated in any way, it is the voters that are disrespected. Democratic political competition for votes is generally one that is driven by ideas and performance of parties in competition for citizens’ votes. President Jonathan has promised many times that he wants to be remembered as one president that has encouraged free and fair election. Free and fair election is not just about what happens in polling booths or at vote counting stations; it is also about readiness of party leaders to present their ideas and records of performance to the electorate while leaving the voters to make their choice without intimidation, coercion, or cajolement of opposition parties.

The country needs to hear what each political party has to offer as vision, strategies and policies to achieve direly needed change. It will need a political party that is not afraid of coming to terms with Nigeria’s diversity, not a party that sees development and unity as synonyms. Voters need to hear from political parties that are willing and able to address the problem of infrastructure head-on, without having to blame power outage on too much or too little water in the dam or no natural gas to power the turbines, etc. Voters are waiting to hear from all parties that have plans and methods for addressing the problem of limited spaces for thousands of post-secondary students that desire to obtain tertiary training, instead of the millions of students that now roam the streets in search of visa to North America, Britain, Australia, South Africa, and even Ghana in search of university education. The Nigerian electorate will need to see from all parties willing to rule Nigeria in 2015 blueprints for reducing the number of able-bodied young men and women that roam in the millions the streets or offices of unemployment. Voters need to hear from all political parties what plans they have for preventing the death of 1,000 Nigerian children from malaria every day.

Millions of Nigerians who asked for political re-structuring of the federation are still craving to hear from political parties that want to work towards purposive unity among Nigerian nationalities through a programme of equal opportunity for all citizens and all cultures; of equity and justice in revenue allocation; fiscal federalism; sustainable appropriate security architecture for the country; infrastructure renewal that covers the whole country; free and compulsory education for the first twelve years of schooling in public schools; strategies for achieving nation-wide religious tolerance and harmony; unapologetic attitude towards any form of terrorism, etc.

These are some of the issues that voters are craving to hear political parties and their leaders address with honesty and sincerity, not bellicose words that evoke two years before 2015 the picture of war and blood. The words that are needed from political parties are words that assure voters of a level playing field for all parties, respect for the rights of all parties to contest for power; and respect for citizens’ right to choose the leaders they desire.

April 21, 2013