The Nation Newspaper

Category: Columnists

  • Intellectual fraud is stealing your economic future

    Intellectual fraud is stealing your economic future

    •  The rich purchase the truth; the mighty take it; the poor must suffer it.

    War and ideas are the primary factors determining the cast and color of human history. A bad idea is often more dangerous than an army. A terrible idea, widely accepted, can inflict damage no weapon can achieve. To achieve military victory, an army must assert itself to subdue the foe. One who plants a wrong idea in the head of an adversary need not spend a drop of sweat. He can enjoy the luxury of watching his victim self-destruct.

    Because of the minatory quality of erroneous economic concepts, this column often focuses on this theme to warn against the indoctrination the world attempts against you. Money Power, the global elite, claims it wants you to prosper. They lie. Your prosperity would require they forget their economic mastery of you. Forfeiting their mastery means to forfeiting their profits and exalted station. Why would people whose economic creed is the utility of greed suddenly turn selfless to benefit weak and imperfect strangers? They preach you may reach prosperity only if you do as they say. They hire smart people to write books and craft elaborate theories to convince you about the veracity of their assertions. What they neglect to tell you is that the advice they provide you was not the advice they followed. The books and theorems they recommend you digest are such that you eating this select diet will nourish them more than it does you.

    In 2009, Ivy League economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff authored a book This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly. They also wrote a paper Growth in a Time of Debt. Both works contend slow economic growth always plagues nations with debt-to-GDP ratios exceeding 90 percent. Put another way, economic growth depends on national governments running no or low deficits. Their work becoming an intellectual chevron for the conservative elite worldwide, the two authors were instant darlings of the corporate media, the establishment intelligentsia, and international financial institutions.

    The authors proudly hawked their wares on CNN and other stations. The book received the 2011 Gold Medal Award from the Council of Foreign Relations, America’s most prestigious foreign affairs organization that heavily influences government policy. The book garnered accolades from USA Today as “One of the Best Books to Make Sense of the Financial Crisis.” Moreover, their paper has become one of the most cited economic short pieces of the past quarter century.

    The fanfare would not have been so disastrous had it been limited to this intellectual exhibitionism. Purporting to expose and explain financial folly, their works would be used to justify financial policy folly worse than any since the 1930s Great Depression. The IMF and EU would seize upon their work to cram fiscal austerity down the throats of the member states along the northern tier of the Mediterranean. England would voluntarily minister the loopy tonic to itself courtesy of a Tory government with the flinty predilection for believing anything that imposes hardship on the poor must be good. Governments around the world slashed budgets, believing this exercise in “fiscal consolidation” would miraculously unleash growth. They were correct.

    Several economic indicators did grow. The length of unemployment lines grew. The number of people living in poverty’s harsh domain grew. Business failures grew. The number of people who went without food, school and medical care grew. The number of people made homeless grew. The number of people who tossed themselves from windows or put guns to their head from sheer financial hopelessness grew. The living conditions of most residents in the austerity nations grew worse. These were the growth aspects of the Reinhart-Rogoff principle. In other words, the fiscal austerity their conclusion supported also caused the list of nations suffering economic recession or depression to grow.

    While the two authors raked in handsome payoffs for their work, people suffered and died because of their twisted contribution to economic alchemy. In an earlier column, I offered a brief critique of this and related economic works that seem to celebrate the prospect of cutting off money to the poor.

    First, the authors likely inverted the causal relationship between growth and debt. High debt ratios are not the likely causes of low growth. Low growth causes high debt more so than the obverse. If the authors had embraced the more accurate cause and effect relationship they would have arrived at policy recommendations materially different from the austerity they came to espouse. A more accurate view of causality would have led to the conclusion that high growth is the predicate to debt reduction. Sustained growth becomes unattainable when government spending is slashed at a time when the private sector remains too frail and fragile to expand by its own accord.

    Second, their research was dubious because they failed to differentiate between eras when nations were constrained by the gold standard and the modern era based on national currencies with flexible exchange rates. Today, most sovereign money is fiat currency. This currency is not pegged to gold. Nations have an unlimited ability to issue currency. Insolvency and default are not their problems. Such nations can always pay provided their bills are denominated in local money. Sovereign debt ratios may have been important in earlier times but are less important today. Thus, the USA Today award crediting the duo with explaining the recent financial crisis is a demonstration of well-heeled ignorance. If this duo adequately explained any financial crisis, it was not the one of a few years ago. It was one of a few centuries ago. Their book has little relevance to modern economics. At best, it is a work of economic history. As you read further, you might conclude it belongs to that arcane, little known literary genre, economic fiction. As a manual for modern economics it constitutes the abysmal triumph of prejudice and bias over truth and objectivity. Its solutions are akin to caring for a hemophiliac by bleeding him with leeches.

    Third, designating a 90 percent debt ratio as the breaking point smacked of intellectual caprice. No empirical evidence warrants this designation. This designation was not an objective finding intended to illuminate how things work. It was an arbitrary decision meant to advance a subjective purpose.

    These flaws render their influential work suspect. However, a more detailed analysis of their mathematics expose the work as an emblem of gross incompetence or outright fraud. After writing their book, Reinhart and Rogoff were highly reluctant to release their data. Today, the two probably wish they had behaved more like seasoned confidence artists who always destroy the incriminating paper trail. Had they not begrudgingly released their data, they might have gotten away with their delinquency.

    A few weeks ago, the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) of the University of Massachusetts published a document titled Does High Public Debt Consistently Stifle Economic Growth? A Critique of Reinhart and Rogoff. After a thorough scrubbing of the data, PERI concluded the duo’s thesis contradicts the information used to support it. In their work, the tandem asserted nations with debt ratios exceeding the 90 percent threshold suffered -0.1 percent negative GDP growth. In recalculating the data, PERI found Reinhart/Rogoff were wrong to the point of indecency.

    Reinhart/Rogoff’s research stumbled upon data showing high growth but highly indebted nations. The authors merely ignored these nations and tossed aside the associated data. This allowed the writers to continue on their merry way to the conclusion they preordained. Include these inconvenient nations in the analytic mix as PERI did, the tale is a different one. Nations exceeding a 90 percent ratio attained 2.2 percent growth rates. This pace approximated the rate for nations below the contrived threshold. In short, the threshold is a meaningless contrivance. The Reinhart/Rogoff thesis is good for nothing except to fill a waste receptacle.

    Truth has been revealed but will quickly be ignored because those who control the truth don’t want you to learn of it. Reinhart/Rogoff’s work will still be widely cited by the establishment and its agents. They want you to accept an untruth as truth. They want you to live by it although there is no real life to it or in it. Their work is a dead letter masquerading as a parade. Conversely, the astute PERI refutation will not make the front page. Its authors will not be guests on internationally televised talk shows. At most, their findings will be a short-run ticker at the bottom of the television screen. In the main, it will never be considered by policy makers who remain committed to Reinhart/Rogoff notwithstanding that the duo represents financial scholarship’s equivalent of Typhoid Mary and Blackbeard.

    For the damage done, the couple should be run out of town. Had they been physicians, they would be in court on charges of negligence. Instead, they still participate in the elite cocktail circuit as respected academicians.

    Their misconduct is not a fluke. It is part of a systematic distortion of the truth in the service of a financialist elite and ideology that abetted the destitution of billions of human beings in order to elevate the profits of a few hundred thousand people. In its paper Growth Forecast Errors and Fiscal Multipliers, even the IMF finally admitted austerity was a draconian cloud with a jaundiced lining.

    Following the Reinhart/Rogoff postulate, the IMF forced nations into austerity, claiming reduced governmental expenditures would stimulate growth. Reality has forced the IMF into a semi-public mea culpa. In this recent paper, the Fund acknowledged its woeful underestimation of government expenditures multiplier effect on economic growth. Due to its ideological bias, the IMF arbitrarily assumed a dollar of government spending would contribute less than a dollar to economic growth. This fiction enabled the IMF to press governments to cut their budgets. Under this scenario, budget reductions would not impair economic growth. Sadly, this scenario existed only in the IMF’s mind. It had no place in reality. The multiplier effect of government spending was of a magnitude significantly higher than the IMF’s assumption. Now, the IMF admits to a government spending multiplier of 1.5, meaning every dollar of government spending produces $1.50 dollars in growth. By any standard, this reveals government spending as an effective catalyst for economic growth. It also means reduced government spending would cause overall GDP to drop more precipitously than the cut in government expenditure. Thus, when the IMF muscled nations to reduce government spending, GDP growth would not occur. The tactic would precipitate a downward spiral, immersing whole nations in recession or worse.

    The EU apparently did not want to be outdone by the IMF and the Reinhart/Rogoff tag team. When shoving the misnamed “bailout” down the Cypriot throat, the EU claimed the impact would be negative growth of -4.9 percent over two years for the island nation. With the bitter pill now swallowed, the EU readjusted it forecast. The new two- year projection is negative growth of -12.6 percent. The difference is jarring. The first is staunch hardship. The second is sheer doom. To call this a rescue package is to invest in the humor of the gallows. The Cypriot economy will be compressed like an overripe pea smashed by a falling anvil.

    Objectively, the victims of this grand theft should be in hot revolt. Instead, they accept it as fate inescapable. They believe what they have been taught without realizing what they have learned enchains their minds with the densest of fetters.

    Despite the ample economic wreckage visible all around, most people embrace the elite fiction. Africa’s leaders are most taken by the formulas and theories of this mean elite. Too many of our people want to be accepted into the international club. They will sell both soul and nation for a rear seat at the festivities. They want to appear to understand the events vaticinated by the financial world’s high priests and their missionaries stationed in our nations. The extent to which we believe the disciples of austerity is the extent to which we have been led to lead ourselves to the slaughterhouse. To do what we are told is to seal our fate to its worst version.

    A fundamental economic truth is that nations with weak, collapsing private sectors must resort to government deficit spending to pull them from deflation’s gravitational pull. Innovative, targeted government deficit spending is the best and almost only resort for nations where the bulk of the population suffers chronic recession and high employment. It is an inanity to believe less money and reduced aggregate demand will blossom into greater economic growth. This only happens in books written by the like of Reinhart/ Rogoff. However, we don’t live in books. We exist in the real world. Until we learn this key lesson, real world prosperity will evade us just as much as the truth evades Reinhart/Rogoff, the IMF and EU.

     

    08060340825 (sms only)

     

  • Are there any signs or resources of hope in this troubled land (and this earth)? (3)

    Are there any signs or resources of hope in this troubled land (and this earth)? (3)

    I begin this concluding piece in the series with the very last paragraph in last week’s column which ended with three questions that will frame this essay. Here is the paragraph:

    We can be sure that no ruler in Nigeria will ever bring out the tanks and the troops to stop the vast throng of worshippers, the sea of humanity going to or coming from an MFM revival; as a matter of fact, this is something that would warm their hearts. We can also deduce from the two cases of Obasanjo’s “Third Term” bid and the Turai Yar’ Adua “palace coup” that when the masses intervene to clean up the mess created by our political class, the powers that be will also not bring out the troops and the tanks. Since they did so when the masses were on the move during the fuel subsidy removal strike, three questions arise. One: Which of these instances of mass movement and action constitutes a real source of hope for our country and its teeming masses of the looted and the disenfranchised? Two: Are these three different cases in fact unrelated? Three: What is the point in asking this sort of questions?

    My answer to these questions may surprise many of my readers and it is this: Each of these three instances of mass movement and action in Nigeria is potentially a valid source of hope for our country. Freedom is indivisible and hope exists on many levels and wears many masks. The true mark of democracy in our country and our world is that people must have the freedom to assemble, to march and to act in the public sphere for religious, ceremonial, festive or political reasons, as long as they do so without hindering or negating the freedom of others. For this reason, it is a very retrograde thing, a mark of the sorry state of our current experiment in non-military democratic governance for one kind of mass movement and action to be allowed while another kind is met with maximum use of force and intimidation. Let me put this contention in concrete terms.

    In last week’s column, I mentioned the endless sea of worshippers coming from a mass revivalist meeting of the MFM. To this I added the observation that no government, no ruler in Nigeria would ever dare to bring out the troops and the armored tanks to stop this endless throng of the faithful giving expression to their deepest faith and hope in God and divine grace, even if they stop the flow of traffic in a major city for two hours. To this we can add the fact that that all travelers on the Lagos-Ibadan expressway routinely encounter even a much bigger assemblage of communicants at the altar of religious epiphany at the “Redeem Junction”, an assemblage so vast that quite often all traffic on the most important artery of the national highway grid comes to a complete stop for hours on end. Again, we can safely assume that no government, state or federal, has it in mind to put a stop to this phenomenon that is probably without any parallel in our country or our continent.

    By contrast, consider this: In early January 2012, at the height of the very successful nation-wide strike against the removal of oil subsidies by the administration of Goodluck Jonathan, an equally mammoth procession of protesters that started at the Lagos State House of Assembly and headed towards the Gani Fawehinmi Park at Ojota was met by the troops and tanks of the 9th Brigade of the Nigerian Army that was personally supervised by the brigade commander, Brigadier-General Sani Muazu. Not only did the general and his men stop the march, Muazu, as reported in The Guardian of January 17, 2012, actually stated that once the government and the trade unions had declared that the strike was over, the protest march had become illegal and could not be permitted to take place notwithstanding the fact that this was a completely peaceful protest march that was led by legislators, academics and very prominent citizens.

    It is heartening to report that this extremely warped and stunted definition of the democratic legality of mass protests and marches in our country was vigorously contested by many prominent politicians and citizens, among them Governor Fashola of Lagos State. But there is more to this matter than verbal condemnation of the severe restriction placed by the Nigerian state on the freedom of the Nigerian masses to organize protests against the horrific conditions and realities that they face on a daily, even hourly basis. Let me explain what I mean by this assertion and in doing so bring the discussion closer to our fears and anxieties about the forthcoming state and federal elections of 2015 concerning statements that have been made – and are still being made – by many of our politicians that these may well be the last set of elections in the country we currently know as Nigeria.

    Basically, to me this state of affairs means that, once again, we are at a conjunctural moment in the politics of democratic governance in our country. There are three principal features to this conjuncture. We can deal quickly with the first two of these features. One: Only on the basis of another implosion will Jonathan get the nomination of the ruling party, the PDP; if internal democracy prevails in the run of primaries within the party before the general elections, he will not get the nomination for another term in office. But internal democracy has never been a notable feature within the PDP and we are not about to see a reversal of this defining feature of the party. Two: The other parties confidently expect that even with its looming implosion, the PDP will still rig the elections for the simple reason that it will use its incumbency and its control of the apparatus and the instruments of “legal” violence lodged in the armed forces to cow the opposition parties and the populace into submission. Against this, the opposition parties are readying themselves for a “final showdown”. Three: In neither of these two scenarios of the ruling party and the opposition parties respectively is the generality of the Nigerian masses, acting in their own interests, a factor of any real significance. Permit me to elaborate a little on this third feature of our conjuncture which, as I have observed, is, in my opinion, of far greater import than the other two features.

    The PDP, with its abysmally poor record in office, knows only too well that with the exception of a few places primarily in the South-south, it will never win nationwide on the basis of the popular support of the generality or plurality of the Nigerian masses. Furthermore, with its incumbency and its control of the apparatus and instruments of “legal” violence, the PDP is near absolute in sidelining the masses of Nigerians acting in their own interests. In contrast to this, the opposition parties are counting on the hope that the masses will not stand for another rigging of the elections and will rise up in revolt if the attempt is made once again by the PDP. However, in the meantime in the run-up to 2015, these opposition parties are doing little or nothing to prepare the Nigerian masses to intervene decisively in 2015 by taking up and fighting for their cause, their interests. In this, I think the opposition parties are putting their faith, their hope in the fact that every time that the ruling party has more or less imploded and brought the country to the edge of catastrophe, it has been the intervention of the Nigerian masses that has saved the day. In other words, one side, the side of the ruling party, has no place for the interests, the intervention of the masses of Nigerians across the length and breadth of the country; the other side, the side of the combined forces of the opposition parties, has only a very limited place for mass or popular intervention, this being on the day of judgment in 2015.

    As I reflect on these matters, my mind goes to an allegory in Shakespeare’s Coriolanus that is based on a fascinating analogy between the human body and the body politic. In this allegory which Shakespeare in fact borrowed from ancient Greek and Roman sources, all the other parts of the body – the head, the arms, the ears, the eyes and the tongue – stage a revolt against the belly on the bitter claim that, unlike each of these body parts that has a vital function for the health and well-being of the entirety of the body, the belly does nothing but simply consumes all the food that enters the body. In vain did the body protest that it does not merely consume everything that comes to it but actually processes all its intakes and converts them to nutrients that it then redistributes to all the other parts of the body. In their revolt, the other parts of the body withdraw from participation in transmitting food to the belly. Soon, however, they begin to wither, to atrophy because they find that each body part alone by itself cannot complete the cycle of consumption and redistribution that keeps all the parts of the body healthy and fit for performing their allotted functions.

    I have drawn attention to the fact that Shakespeare borrowed this allegory from ancient Greek and Roman sources. To this I must now add my feeling that Shakespeare’s Greek and Roman sources themselves were drawing on oral, popular sources that we find in almost every society and culture in the world in which a bloated stomach that is counterpoised to atrophied limbs is the ultimate mark of the diseased body, whether of the physical body or of the body politic. The kwashiorkor belly is of course the most grotesque mark of this kind of diseased body in which consumption has gone totally askew of redistribution. I don’t think I am overstating the case if I describe our current experiment in democratic governance since 1999 as a “kwashiorkor democracy” in which the collective belly of our political elites is a grotesque counterpoint to the shrunken, misshapen limbs of the masses of our peoples.

    Do I also overstate the facts if I say, ruefully, that most Nigerians in all parts of our country see nearly all our politicians and political parties in the image of the bloated belly that consumes everything and leaves nothing to the limbs, the other parts of the national body politic? The intervention of the masses of Nigerians across the length and breadth of the country is one of the few sources of hope for the country as we look ahead in anxiety and fear to 2015. For this hope to be realized, the work of preparing the masses for that intervention must begin now. Let us begin to see this not only in words but also in deeds, in policies and practices that make the crucial link between consumption and redistribution not a dream, not a fantasy on the horizon of the future but palpable realities in the lives of the vast majority of our peoples.

    Biodun Jeyifo

    bjeyifo@fas.harvard.edu

  • Nigeria: Before amnesty becomes amnesia

    Nigeria: Before amnesty becomes amnesia

    Had government gone the way of dialogue it should not have been difficult for it  to see the reasonableness of all that Malam Shehu Sani had been saying

    I will, forever, be proud of our web portal: ekitipnupo@yahoogroups.com, an Indigenous Think-Tank and Intellectual Round-Table, agglomerating no less than two thousand Ekiti compatriots, both at home and in the Diaspora and on which no single issue, however supposedly minor, concerning the state, in particular, and Nigeria in general, passes us bye.

    Witness the following remarks by two members of the forum, distinguished Professors in their own right, one of Chemical Engineering, and the other of Agric Economics, on the topic of the moment in Nigeria –Amnesty.

    First: ‘My heart nearly stopped beating yesterday when, listening to local Nigerian news, I heard that the Governor of Abia State was asking for amnesty for the 5000 kidnappers in his state, and that they should be paid compensation or monthly wages “like is being done in the Niger-Delta.”

    5000 kidnappers in Abia State alone? I asked.

    And already identified?

    And it was no April Fool, or an Onion radio station…

    Is this is a sick joke or what? What now does amnesty mean in Nigeria? How do you give amnesty to:

    1. Those who have not accepted that they are criminals that must be “amnestied”?

    2. Those who have not asked for it, even if they accept criminality?

    3. Those whose total number at a point of amnesty you have not identified?

    4. those whose stream of replenishment – after granting some amnesty that must be based on certain terms – you are not able to stem?

    I don’t understand it – ” – but this Orji’s request takes the cake.

    o mebiri emebi, biko nu…’

    And second one, on the same Orji macabre request:

    ‘We are gradually descending from being ridiculous to being insane, playing politics with everything including precious human lives. The logic, as warped as it may appear, is that if the northern leaders are getting money for their Boko Haram (terrorists), he can as well ask for his kidnappers too. After all, terrorism and kidnapping are both crimes and the funds to be used will come from the commonwealth – the theory of ‘whatever is good for the goose should also be good for the gander’.

    Preposterous, I dare say but then, is n’t this our friend of the popular shrine?

    Both quotes point to how serious, or otherwise, a country we are as well as what manner of leaders we have but , more critically, it calls to question our process of leadership recruitment which is as warped as we are rudderless.

    What then is amnesty?

    Generally, amnesty is defined as any governmental pardon for past offenses or crimes, especially political ones. Granting amnesty goes beyond a pardon, in that it forgives the said offense completely. Indeed, a key part of the definition is the fact that amnesty is granted before any trial or conviction so Asari Dokubo could not have been right with his postulation that “the government can only put in two things – exercise prerogative of mercy after a person is convicted or when a person is under trial to put a nolle Prosequi but you cannot see somebody and declare him a criminal and give him a pardon’.

    Amnesty has also been described (Tom Tancredo, for instance, a Colorado, U.S politician, and former Presidential candidate) as a terrible policy, as well as terrible politics because by offering it you are rewarding people for breaking the law.” Please note though, that this unrealistic G.O.P politician had American illegal immigrants in mind.

    Nothing demonstrates the wrongheadedness of President Jonathan’s amnesty offer than the following response by the Boko Haram leader, Abubjakar Shekau: “Surprisingly, the Nigerian government is talking about granting us amnesty. What wrong have we done? On the contrary, it is we that should grant you pardon,” and followed it up by listing what he called the state’s atrocities against Muslims.

    Were the Jonathan government serious, that was the point at which it should have realised that what the problem called for, was dialogue, rather than any sterile offer of amnesty. I have, on this page, been an unrepentant advocate of dialogue even when it was neither trendy nor politically correct to, as much, as mention it. I recently upped the ante by asking for an all-inclusive National conference at which Nigeria’s many demons can be objectively and critically interrogated.

    Had government gone the way of dialogue it should not have been difficult for it to see the reasonableness of all that Malam Shehu Sani had been saying, ad nauseam.

    Shehu Sani, prominent civil rights activist, who single-handedly interacted with Boko Haram up to a point former President Olusegun Obasanjo did not mind joining the chorus, has literally been having a dialogue with the deaf on the issue of Boko Haram. Before he respectfully declined to serve on the Jonathan Amnesty Committee, he had warned endlessly that the first step was to establish a credible link with Boko Haram through those who know the group and who they, in turn can trust. Given the literal ribaldry going on, Sani has ruled out the possibility of Boko Haram leadership accepting the proposed amnesty because you cannot give amnesty to a people who do not want amnesty. Said Sani, “First of all, government set up a committee whose members nobody knows -(that has since been corrected) – but he went on: “If you set up a committee with big people who do not have access to the leadership of Boko Haram, you are simply wasting your time.” He even doubts whether the cheer-leading Northern governors are in touch with Boko Haram at all. The last I remember, personally, were some groveling Northern governors, serving and past, literally on their knees, begging Boko Haram leaders, asking for forgiveness. The manner in which they pleaded, you would have thought they took any of Shekau’s many wives!

    Nor was Sani done. He alleged that the motivating factor in all this talk about amnesty is money –kudi – which some Northern leaders are already eyeing. And he cautioned: ‘the Federal Government must not dangle money before Boko Haram as money cannot solve the problem of Boko Haram. They have not made financial request and secondly they are not fighting because they need money’, he concluded.

    And I say it would be such a shame if these Northern éminence grise have forgotten so soon that, driven by religious fundamentalism, Osama Bin Laden thought nothing of his riches but how to cause maximum damage to humanity. He was known to have spent copious time in the desert where he had work camps and led a totally ascetic life style. How come any government would wish to grant these his ‘evil’ heirs, tonnes of money which would most probably end up in arms procurement and more havoc. (Evil – not my word, but that of respected Alhaji Bamanga Tukur of the Gen Murtala/Nigerian Port Authority fame, a happy throw back to the days Nigeria had leaders.

    The fact that highly regarded Dr Datti Ahmed, President, Sharia Supreme Council in Nigeria has also declined participation in the committee work says much about its reasonableness long term usefulness. Without a doubt this will also go the way of other actions and promises of President Jonathan, and here, power readily comes to mind.

    I will therefore respectfully suggest to Mr President to immediately disband this ill-advised Amnesty Committee, and in its place, commence two quick processes, namely, inaugurate an appropriate committee to commence a discreet dialogue and negotiations with Boko Haram leaders through those individuals they trust, and put in place, a tidy and efficient enumeration of ALL the victims of Boko Haram’s unmitigated terrorism with a view to cogently assisting them or their dependants . Government should also draw up a Marshall plan which will, unlike these loquacious governors, aggressively infuse real socio-economic development in Northern Nigeria which age long feudalism has brought to its knees. The plan should aim directly at tuning the youth around because they constitute the literally rootless, and mostly illiterate, field from which they recruit suicide bombers on the titillating promise of heavenly virgins.

  • The high costs of security and diplomacy

    The high costs of security and diplomacy

    US Secretary of State John Kerry was in the Middle East and South East Asia on a diplomatic shuttle with a security background recently. He brokered peace between Turkey and Israel, both allies of the US in the area. He later went to Japan and S Korea to assure both nations, staunch allies of the US in the Pacific, of American steadfastness in the face of an unpredictable and daily dangerous N Korea – in the on- going saga of threats and counter threats by Kim Jong un, N Korea’s youthful leader to pulverize neighbor S. Korea. Kerry had barely returned to his office when a bomb went off at the prestigious Boston Marathon in Massachussets in the US shifting US security priorities from nuclear threat to Homeland Security.

    Such is the volatile nature of security and diplomacy for the world’s leading nations in their resolve and duty to protect their citizens at home and abroad, no matter the odds. But then, the circumstances can be so unbelievably different or similar for the world powers and the other nations of the world, that one finds it difficult to accept that after all said and done, security is really the bottom line as each nation invariably insists. I will illustrate with some interesting examples.

    In Iraq this week the government executed 21 people after they were found guilty of acts of terrorism in Iraqi courts. In the UK, the government deployed 40, 000 policemen and women for the funeral procession route of the late British PM Baroness Margaret Thatcher last Wednesday April 17. In Nigeria the government has set up an Amnesty Committee for Boko Haram terrorists in spite of protestations from the Christian Association of Nigeria – CAN – whose members reeled out the statistics on the number of churches destroyed [200] and Christians killed -2500 –since the insurgency started. CAN noted that Boko Haram so far has carried out every threat it has issued with impunity. The supposed rationale or offered motive for each and every one of these events therefore form the kernel of our discussion today.

    Starting with the Kelly brokered peace in the Middle East, all sides seem to be beneficiaries and one cannot help wondering why the dispute over some Turks who tried to break the Israeli siege on Gaza got killed sometime ago, lasted this long. This is because Israel needs Turkey to keep an eye on Iran, a mutual foe of both, especially now that Syria is falling apart and Iran has offered a shoulder as expected, and the besieged Syrian leader Assad has warned the West that it would pay a huge price similar to the one the Soviets paid in Afghhanistan, in intervening in Syria. In the face of such bare threats and with the rump USSR, Russia, backing Syria all the way, Kelly’s Peace is a welcome development; a realignment and consolidation of forces of sorts, for the west in the Middle East.

    As noted earlier Kelly proceeded to calm nerves in Japan and S Korea but the N. Korean leader has really shown his hand in asking for lifting of sanctions before any dialogue with the US and S Korea. Which reduces the so called nuclear and security threat that had the west and even N Korea’s ally China fretting so much, to an economic threat of needed bread and butter for the impoverished citizens of N Korea. I expect the west to capitulate to N Korea’s demand in the interest of global peace. But then a strong but wrong global signal would have been sent to a nation like Iran, similarly under UN sanctions, to persist in its quest for nuclear energy on the excuse of needed electricity, in the now realistic hope, that when it has nuclear capability it can call for dialogue to eliminate UN sanctions. Either way global security is boldly threatened and diplomacy is seriously challenged and stressed extravagantly.

    With regard to the Boston Marathon bomb explosion, it is the way that the US President Barak Obama reacted in assuring Americans of their safety even though his security machinery had no clue as to the perpetrators of the bombing in the immediate aftermath of the incident, that impressed me. Obama first said that the bombing could not be called a terrorist act and people should not jump to conclusions. Later, he said after briefings by his security aides, that it was terrorism because a bomb had been used on innocent people. He gave kudos to the Governor and Mayor involved and expressed unflinching confidence in the local and federal security forces on the ground and assured all Americans that the culprits would be caught and face the full weight of US justice. That assurance was worth its weight in gold and lowered the high cost of security in the way it generated a spontaneous feeling of safety and security in Americans even though the terrorists have not been apprehended. Even a man apprehended later told the police that he was not the Boston Marathon bomber no matter the suspicion leading to his arrest after the bombing.

    You may need to compare the high net worth value of Obama’s assurance in the face of apparent insecurity, with the deterrence factor in the Iraqi manner of executing tried terrorists. There is no need to scoff at the Iraqis as they have a rich tradition and history on legal matters. The Coded laws of Hammurabi came out of Mesopotamia and that was ancient Iraq. Furthermore, as the way the Iraqis executed Saddam Hussein showed, Iraqis need to see the bodies of those oppressing or terrorizing them to really believe such murderous pests are out of the way and they – Iraqis – are safe. This really is a cultural issue. Which in a manner of ‘the end justifying the means‘, has the same soothing effect on the Iraqis as the Obama safety assurance strategy had on American citizens.

    The recent successful Thatcher funeral, in spite of threats from the trade unions and miners, was a tribute to the efficiency and understanding of the British security apparatus. You can say on Britain in the context of this topic that the British public has been given value for money for whatever the government has spent on diplomacy and security over the Thatcher funeral. The head of the Police in charge in London conceded the right of protests to those wanting to, and said this was necessary in a democracy and the police were ready, and they were, and I congratulate them as I did on the last London 2012 Olympics and also the successful royal wedding. On a lighter note though, let me advise those who thought that it was in bad taste to celebrate Thatcher’s death at Trafalgar Square as some people did, to have a rethink and visit the south west of Nigeria where obituaries announce funerals as celebrations of life. If after that they still feel such celebrations are in bad taste, then I accuse them of sheer ethnocentrism, no more, no less.

    Lastly, let me round up with the Boko Haram Amnesty for which a committee has finally been set up by the Federal government of Nigeria. Since Boko Haram has reportedly said it needed no Amnesty but should give one or a pardon to Nigeria instead, I think the fact that the government still deemed it fit to form the Amnesty Committee is in bad taste and is most unfair to the victims of Boko Haram terrorism. Anyway, will the formation of the Committee lead to a reduction of our security expenditure? The answer is no. Will the setting up of the Amnesty Committee assuage the feelings of those whose loved ones were killed by Boko Haram ? No.

    To me it is the duty of government to make the nation governable and safe for its citizens. This Committee appears to be an appeasement for a section of the nation over another and a bias for one religion at the expense of the other. Muslims in this nation have shouted to the rooftops several times that Islam is a religion of peace and that they condemn the terrorism of Boko Haram. Government should listen to them and do its duty to uphold their concern and belief instead of pandering to the tastes and anxiety of those who may have lost touch with their followers both in the corridors of leadership and power, wether cultural, political or socio economic.

  • My unsavoury baptism in the hands of Ogun bandits

    My unsavoury baptism in the hands of Ogun bandits

    Last Saturday, I did a piece titled ‘Still a Nation on the Brink of Jagajaga’. In the said piece, I tried to capture the extent to which the security situation in the country has degenerated, calling on the nation’s leadership to do more to secure the lives and property of Nigerians. But the ink had hardly dried on the paper when three gunmen attacked me and my wife.

    My wife, an employee of the Lagos State Government, was due for her promotion interview at the Centre for Management Development (CMD) in Magodo, Lagos at 9 am. Since she preferred to go in public bus, I thought I should convey her from our residence in Ota, Ogun State to Kollington Bus Stop in the Alagbado area of Lagos, where it would be easy for her to get a bus to her destination.

    She had actually wanted to leave home as early as 6 am, but considering the frequency of robbery incidents in the town since the clampdown on robbers and okada (commercial motorcycle) riders in Lagos, I told her to wait till 7 am, by which time the day would have fully broken and there would be no risk of any unseemly incident encouraged by the cover of darkness. How wrong!

    Unknown to me, the bandits that laid siege to the industrial town no longer had any respect for daylight. We had barely rode half a kilometre from our gates when three gun totting men waylaid us. The gunmen had overtaken our car on two motorcycles as we climbed one of the numerous bumps on the road, but we had sensed no danger as we took them for harmless okada riders in search of daily bread. But with the swiftness of an eagle, they barricaded the road with their motorcycles and before we could say Jack, two of them were in the middle of the road, pointing guns at us.

    “Stop there!” one of them hollered.

    “If you move, I blast your head!” the second threatened.

    The next thing we saw were the two armed men standing near the front windows and holding guns against our heads.

    “Where is the money?” they asked repeatedly, not believing us as we explained that we were not carrying any money. They opened the doors and started ransacking the car. They took our phones, wristwatches, jewellery and every material thing they could lay their hands on. They also frisked me, took all the money I had in my pockets and made away with my wife’s handbag, containing money, original copies of her credentials and other official documents. The robbers also bolted with the key to the car, leaving us stranded.

    I did not realise how lucky we were until residents of Akeja, the neighbourhood where we were attacked, began to tell tales of the den of lion the area had become. They said we were extremely lucky to escape with our lives and vehicle. They said that robbery attack in the area had become a daily occurrence, and, in many cases, the daredevil robbers shoot the car owners dead before escaping with their vehicles. Members of Bishop David Oyedepo’s Winners’ Chapel were said to have been particularly unlucky as the robbers had made it a duty to snatch cars from them every Sunday.

    A particular sympathiser sent me rolling with laughter when he said I must have been armed with a highly potent juju on account of which the robbers left without hurting me or my wife. Of course, I told him that if I were blessed with such supernatural powers, I would have been the one dictating to the robbers. I would have rendered an incantation that would make the three of them to lie face down. I would then fetch a cane and give each of them 12 strokes after which I would request for brooms from the residents of the area and order them to sweep the road until there would be no breath left in them.

    Yet by the time I got home and sympathiser after sympathiser related their horrible experiences with the daredevil men in different parts of Ota, I had to admit that my wife and I were extremely lucky. In fact, the evening of the same Saturday that we were attacked, a neighbour and pastor’s wife was also attacked by robbers as she was returning from a church service. In her own case, the robbers shot her in the leg as she became too afraid and was trying to run away. I also realised that robbers had forced three of my neighbours to abandon the houses they had built in different parts of the town to rent apartments in my neighbourhood.

    One of them, a widow, said her husband died from internal bleeding three weeks after robbers invaded their home and tortured both of them. She and her children abandoned the house and took an apartment in our area after learning about the security arrangement that was in place. There was also the case of a man attacked by robbers moments after he left the premises of a branch of a first generation bank where he had gone to withdraw a huge sum. Convinced that the cashier who paid him the money must have had a hand in the matter, he walked straight into the bank and demanded for his money from the bank official who, of course, feigned ignorance. As they were still arguing, the cashier’s phone rang, but he would not pick it. The phone rang again and the angry customer picked it. The voice at the other end simply said, ‘We have collected the money!’

    Sadly, the attitude of the police to the siege that armed robbers have laid to Ota, the industrial town that harbours the army of okada riders that fled Lagos, has been worse than lukewarm. Everyone complained that the police in the area had done nothing in response to reported cases of robbery attack. I have lived for more than 20 years in a part of the town considered by many as elitist, but not even once have I sighted a police patrol van!

    Some residents even believe that the police in the area know the robbers like the back of their hands, but chose to indulge them for selfish reasons. A banker neighbour told me the experience of his colleague whose phone was snatched under the flyover bridge in Sango-Ota. The victim called one of the bank’s police customers for whom he used to process loan and told him what had happened. ‘Don’t worry, you will get the phone,’ the policeman assured the banker. About 30 minutes later, the banker’s phone was sent to him in his office.

    There is yet the case of a couple attacked by robbers at their house in a part of the town. One of the robbers unconsciously called the name of one of the gang’s members during the operation. When the couple reported the matter at the police station the following day and told the police that one of the robbers was named Ahmed, one of the policemen said, ‘Oh, Ahmed. Don’t worry, we will arrest them.’ Of course, the police made good their promise to arrest the bandits, but the victims were shocked to see them roaming free three days later. They left the house they had built and rented an apartment in my neighbourhood for fear that the criminals might attack them again.

    Ota residents are rejoicing over the massive construction works the Governor Ibikunle Amosun administration has embarked on in the town, but their joy is dampened by thoughts of what would become of it when the construction works, which are bound to open up the town more, are completed. Like Lagos, the Ogun State Government will have to seriously monitor the activities of okada riders and hold their leaders accountable for unseemly incidents involving their men. Otherwise, the gains of Lagos will become the nightmare of Ogun. Why, I ask, must February suffer a loss for the gains made by January? Why?

  • Farewell to ‘Tina’

    Farewell to ‘Tina’

    ‘There is no alternative’. That was the constant refrain of the recently deceased former Prime Minister of Great Britain, Baroness Margaret Thatcher, to vehement protests against the punitive effects for millions of her vicious brand of neo-liberal capitalism. That is why she was nicknamed TINA. In a way Thatcher has been proved right by her demise on April 8. There is indeed no alternative to death. It must sooner or later be the fate of all human beings – mere mortals who, oftentimes, play God. But Thatcher’s inflexible and insensitive policies reduced millions to a living death before their physical transition even as a microscopic minority luxuriated in obscene opulence. The lesson of Thatcher’s leadership and legacy is that there must always be alternatives to socio-economic policies that promote human misery on an industrial scale. Many analysts have commented with approbation on the late Prime Minister’s strong, charismatic, aggressive and bold leadership. Surely, that cannot be denied. She was one of the dominant figures of our contemporary era. But strong leadership should not mean the absence of compassion especially for the weak, underprivileged and infirm. Compassion was a word that could not be found in Thatcher’s iron dictionary. She was aptly called the iron lady and compassion is not one of the attributes of steel.

    Like electricity, Margaret Thatcher had no feeling. I have a feeling that if you cut her skin, acid rather than blood would come gushing out. I have no doubt that the world is a poorer, harsher more hostile place because of the policies associated with Thatcher and her ideological soul mate President Ronald Reagan of the United States for over two decades. The current global economic crisis that has plunged millions into ruination is largely a fall out of the extremist neo-liberalism aggressively pursued by Thatcher, Reagan and their policy collaborators. In his book, ‘Towards An Inclusive Democracy’, the political economist, Takis Fotopoulos gives an extensive background into the emergence and character of Thatcherism as a dominant economic paradigm. Between the 1940s and 1970s, the dominant policy paradigm in industrial capitalist states was what he calls the ‘social democratic consensus’ i.e. the Keynesian interventionist state that sought to promote full employment through state manipulation of the market. It sought to bring the market under social and political control and envisioned a compassionate society. Its primary objective was the provision of social security, including education and health, for all from the cradle to the grave. Ironically, Britain was the cradle of this extensive welfarist agenda and it was inaugurated by a conservative dominated coalition government.

    Under the ‘social democratic consensus’, the state’s central role in the management of the economy was recognised. Such state intervention kept unemployment unprecedentedly low, promoted relative job security, ensured sustained enlargement of the labour market and engendered faith in continuous economic growth and expansion of the welfare state. How then did this ‘progressive’ consensus collapse leading to the emergence and triumph of the crude conservatism of the Thatcher years? Takis Fotopoulos attributes this to the economic crisis of the 1970s, the collapse of the Bretton Woods system of international finance and the growing internationalization of the global economy among other factors. The unsustainability of the welfare state thus resulted in the wild swing from the excesses of statist welfarism to the extremes of free market fetishism as symbolized principally by Thatcher and Reagan.

    Given neo-liberalism’s disdain for what was perceived as “excess democracy” associated with the ‘social democratic consensus’, Thatcher in particular took on the trade unions with a vengeance. She broke the spine of the powerful mine workers union. She undertook an aggressive deregulation of labour and capital markets resulting in massive unemployment and underemployment. Her frenzied privatisation of public enterprises resulted in the concentration of capital in fewer hands while she waged a sustained war against the welfare state and also redistributed taxes in favour of high income groups. No wonder Professor Noam Chomsky of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) noted that under Reagan and Thatcher-type neo-liberalism, “the rich industrial societies increasingly acquired a Third World outlook with islands of extreme wealth and privilege amidst a rising sea of poverty and despair”.

    Margaret Thatcher was a social Darwinist to the core. She believed in the survival of the fittest; the poor, weak and infirm could go to blazes. Society owed them no obligation. Indeed, she starkly declared that “There is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families”. Of this terrible atomistic view of human community, Jonathan Sacks notes in his book ‘The Politics of Hope’ avers that “It has given rise to a social order – or more precisely, to a social disorder- more bleak than any within living memory. Today, many parts of Britain and America are marked by vandalism, violent crime and a loss of civility; by the breakdown of the family and the widespread neglect of children; by an erosion of trust and a general loss of faith in the power of governments to cure some of our most deep-seated problems; and by a widespread sense that matters crucial to our future welfare are slipping out of control”. That is the legacy of Thatcher’s extreme neo-liberalism.

    Some commentators credit Thatcher and Reagan for the collapse of the communist block. That would appear to me to be a simplistic reading of history. Yes, the duo may have played a role. But communism actually imploded from within when, as Marx would put it the extant social relations of production in communist states had become an obstacle to the further development of the productive forces. In any case, whatever their faults, let us never forget the supportive role of the communist states in the liberation of Africa from colonialism including racist apartheid in South Africa. On her part, Thatcher was a staunch supporter of the racist regimes in South Africa and Zimbabwe. If she had her way, Apartheid would still be alive and well in Africa today. Let us also remember that the Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAP) that virtually destroyed Africa’s economies and made the 1980s a lost decade for the continent were products of the dominant brand of global neo-liberalism championed by Thatcher and Reagan. The cerebral columnist, Professor Ayo Olukotun has rightly wondered why our policy makers remain glued to these failed neo-liberal policies even when they have been thoroughly discredited in those countries that sold them to us. As we bid Thatcher good bye, let us also say farewell to the untenable doctrine of TINA.

    Kehinde Bamigbetan: Hope Alive

    As at the time of writing this, there was still  no news of the release of the kidnapped Chairman of Ejigbo Local Council Development (LCDA), Mr Kehinde Bamigbetan. Yet, there are high hopes that his captors are set to let him go. The outpouring of emotion following the shocking incident shows how much impact ‘Korky’ as his friends call him, has made in the polity within such a short period. His house in Ejigbo has become a Mecca of sorts with people from all walks of life trooping in to empathise with his distraught wife. The house itself is a symbol of modesty and simplicity, not noticeably different from any middle class structure in the area. That is a reflection of the radical, humanistic ideology that has always informed Bamigbetan’s politics over the years as a student unionist, labour activist and now progressive politician. For those who have worked closely with him, a keen intellect and remarkable coolness under pressure are Kehinde’s key strengths. Surely, by God’s grace ‘Korky’ will soon be back on the beat doing what he knows best – offering selfless public service. But then, this is a wake- up call for Lagos. The Centre of Excellence must not be allowed to become another kidnapper’s paradise. This is another sad reminder of looming state failure in Nigeria. God have mercy.

  • War and peace

    War and peace

    Terrorism is a tricky affair. It upsets everything. It triggers war, but war of a different sort. It is unconventional, a hit-and-run kind of thing, without pitched locations, with the enemy largely unknown.

    After the shoe and crotch bombers, the United States of America is now grappling with what is turning out to be the pressure cooker bomber. Since the week, Americans have been asking questions as a popular marathon race turned bloody on the finish line. Three people, among them a child, died while about 200 were injured, some terribly so, as two bombs went off in Boston, Massachusetts. Who did this? Why?

    Security agents have been doing overtime, turning up every scrap they can find at the scene, examining every clue. So far, as this piece took shape, they would not say anyone had been arrested, only that two people were suspects. They think some progress is being made.

    But that is thousands of miles away. Here, we have been battling with terror, even more requently. We have been at war, but war at peacetime, war with ourselves. While the Americans in the latest terror attack are unsure whether foreigners built explosive devices into pressure cookers and set them off in Boston, or fellow Americans did the job, we in Nigeria are certain that fellow countrymen are behind the insurgency before us, even though we are not ignorant of the possibilities of foreign backing.

    It remains messy, tragic and hopeless. The casualties are in excess of 1,000 since the insurgency began. Even that is conservative. At this point, no one can underestimate the capacity or capabilities of Boko Haram, the fundamentalist sect that will, at the least, be happy to Islamise the North. Its fighters have reduced churches to rubble and blown worshippers to pieces. They have spilled the blood of policemen, even rattling their headquarters in a most daring fashion. They have taken the fight to the military. They have introduced fighters who blow themselves up in order to blow up many others. The world knows this set as suicide bombers.

    Containing such a group is, in all fairness, difficult. They hit and melt away, then hit again, leaving you in horror and asking questions. Yet, the most difficult challenge in tackling the group is not its facelessness. Nor its unconventional tactics. Nor even its sophisticated weapons. It is the indecision and ambivalence of the Jonathan administration.

    As a Nigerian and as President, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan is deeply saddened by the blood tide occasioned by the insurgents. He wants peace. But as the commander-in-chief, how has he responded to the violence and flight of peace and unity in the country? That response has been anything but coordinated or cohesive. When the terror began, we heard the President say something that suggested his administration knew who the terrorists were. Then we started to hear that the perpetrators of violence would be fished out, and then again that the bad guys were even in government.

    The most remarkable discordance is the love-hate disposition of the President towards Boko Haram. We have heard our leader say he would not dialogue with faceless people. At some other point, we heard the administration was ready to talk even before the masks were taken off. A mediator was named, a location mentioned. On a tour last month of Borno and Yobe states, regarded as the strongholds of the sect, the President surprised many when he said again that dialogue was out of the question. Now, we have heard that the administration is ready to grant amnesty, considered to be several steps above dialogue. Dialogue is talk. Amnesty is pardon; it is forgiveness. The small worry is that Boko Haram is having none of it. It considers itself the aggrieved party, not the aggressor. Boko Haram does not want to be forgiven, arguing rather that it has the prerogative of forgiveness, if at all there should be any.

    In all of this, the voices of the victims are never heard, nor those of their relatives.

    The latest twist, we hear, has left the Jonathan administration stumped, halted in its tracks, some of his officers even wearing long faces.

    They should cheer up. Boko Haram has seized the bargaining power and the initiative. Now the government will beg its leaders to reconsider.

    It is an uncomfortable position for a president of a federal government. Even if concessions are made to insurgents, they should not be seen to be calling the shots. But guess what, the government should swallow its pride, go ahead and beg. If begging will stem the blood tide, why not? If begging will win the war and usher peace, by all means, let us beg.

  • Oshiomhole’s ‘suicide’ race

    Oshiomhole’s ‘suicide’ race

    PLEASE, permit me to disappoint you today, dear reader. No soccer. This column takes on other issues of national interest. A governor feels his Edo State counterpart, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, is set on a suicide mission with his registration for the May 4 maiden Okpekpe 10 km Marathon race.

    The Comrade is a renowned risk taker. He ventures where others quiver, largely because he weighs his options and takes the plunge with the strong conviction that he would excel.

    I have never sat down with Oshiomhole, but what I have seen during official visits is the struggle by his aides to catch up with him while walking. They virtually run to match the governor’s fast pace.

    What this shows is that Oshiomhole is fit; he is in good shape. But a marathon race transcends more than being fit. It is a function of such an athlete’s endurance level. Yet one won’t be surprised, given Oshiomhol’s background; he did odd jobs before heading for school as a kid.

    It is quite pleasing to note that Oshiomhole is training for the exercise. He is a man who takes things seriously; I want to believe that he would know when to stop because we love what he is doing in Edo State.

    One critical aspect of Oshiomhole’s participation in the race is that it will lure corporate firms to identify with the project. I won’t be surprised if the next edition becomes larger than this maiden race.

    The Olympic Games’ unique selling point rests with the fact that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is always tied to a particular city, which never remains the same after the Games.

    The Okpepke 10km Marathon would signpost development in this rustic community. The event will compel the organisers to rehabilitate the buildings leading to the finishing point of the race for look and feel. The residents will make brisk business; they will look forward to the event yearly.

    Okpepke’s hilly setting will remain etched in the minds of the athletes, officials and other visitors. They will take back pictures of the breath-taking scenes, the majestic of nature, back home and long to return.

    The neighbouring towns in Estako Local Government Area stretching towards Owan East, Owan West, Esan, not forgetting the spillover from the state capital, Benin-City, will be invaded by visitors and perception of Okpekpe and its people will change- most likely forever.

    The Okpekpe race could jumpstart a new awareness towards sports in the northern part of the state. It could also get Comrade Oshiomhole to seriously consider the rehabilitation of the Afuze College of Physical and Health Education, now known as the Pa Michael Imoudu College of Education.

    Afuze produced great athletes who won laurels for the state and Nigeria at international sporting competitions. It’s (Afuze’s) propinquity to Okpekpe will create the sports environment, where kids in those areas can assemble to do the sport of their choice. This noble activity would definitely take them out of crime and other social vices that they are prone to acquiring if they are not engaged properly.

    The college trained and re-trained the trainers, such that kids knew the rudiments of the sport that they showed proficiency in. Such early approaches to discovering talents provide the templates for all sporting bodies to plan for the bigger competitions. It also provides these bodies the data-base to collate the ages of the athletes, making it relatively difficult for them to falsify their ages.

    Need I remind the Comrade Governor who Pa Imoudu was? It is rather ironic that an edifice named after such a great labour union leader seems orphaned during Oshiomhole’s reign. I digress.

    Oshiomhole’s participation in the 10 km race should serve as the pivot for him to look at sports development in the state. Sports used to be synonymous with the defunct Bendel State. It is true that there are other pressing needs that our people desire, especially after the locust years of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    But with less than three years left in Oshiomhole’s second term, he needs to sit with his commissioner to look at the report submitted by the panel he set up to fashion out a blueprint for sports.

    The panel recommended the Sports Commission format, an industry run by experts not politicians who see the platform as one for post-election rewards, a place to rake in cash.

    We have been told by the organisers of the race that they have at least eight partners cum sponsors. The governor could engage the firms’ chief executives in discussions that would make them identify with one or two sports in the state.

    Okpekpe would be a success story because it is not depending on government money. Instead, the competition is driven by an adept marketer who understands the packaging of events to attract sponsors. The governor’s presence guarantees maximum cooperation from the government officials, most of who would have been cogs in the wheel, if the state government was financing the race.

    The hilly, windy road that the race would navigate has been constructed. The buses to convey the visitors have been bought. The ambulances are waiting. The streets lamps are there. Security would be exceptional, with the governor’s presence. Yet the government stands to gain more from the exposure arising from the race. The Okpepke Marathon is Edo State’s biggest Public Relations (PR) tool – to showcase its cultural, historic, archival materials, among others at no cost to the government.

    With the event shown live on two of Nigeria’s biggest networks (Africa Independent Television and Channels television), indigenes of the area who have not been there before will do a rethink. Investors who are sitting on the fence to witness the maiden edition will fall over one another for space, having seen the mileage that other sponsors have gotten from the exposures on television stations here and in the Diaspora.

    Okpekpe will create jobs for many people during the event, just as it will open a new vista for some of the locals who will finish in credible places in the race. Indeed, the lives of Okpepkpe people will be turned around for good.

    Oshiomhole has touched almost all spheres of human endeavour in Edo State – except sports. He constituted a 13-man panel to fashion out the new direction for sports. The report was submitted almost two years ago. Perhaps, the pomp and ceremony of the Okpepke race will remind the governor to implement the committee’s report.

    Recommendations of the Edo State Sports Development Committee

    In November 2008, a 13-man Sports Development Committee was set up by the Edo State Government to:

    . Prepare a blueprint for an all round sports development in Edo State and to restore the glory of Edo State in sports;

    . Suggest ways of revamping the Michael Imoudu College of Physical Education, Afuze, and make it functional and relevant to the overall development of sports;

    .Suggest ways of re-activating other sports infrastructure;

    .Suggest ways of resuscitating Bendel Insurance Football Club to regain its lost glory as the flag-bearer of the state in football,

    .Plan strategies for the state to attain not only first position in the 2009 National Sports Festival, but also to retain such dominance in subsequent festivals;

    . Come up with strategies for talent-hunt for sports development, and

    . Suggest any other way(s) that may enhance and galvanise the overall development of sports.

    The highlights of the recommendations of this committee are:

    (1) Establishment of a Sports Commission with an Executive Chairman and core of professionals to manage sports in the state and operate its new sports policy.

    (2) Redevelopment of the sports infrastructure in the state with a stadium in each of the senatorial districts and mini-stadium or sports centres in the local government areas. A task force should be setup for this purpose.

    (3) Reinvigoration of the directorate of school sports in the Ministry of Education.

    (4) Organisation of an annual state sports festival to be pre-ceded by the local government and senatorial sports festivals.

    (5) Organisation of annual school sports festival for talent hunt.

    (6) Redevelopment of the College of Physical Education at Afuze and its Games Village Facilities as well as expansion and diversification of its programmes.

    (7) Reform of Bendel Insurance Football Club under a new management to free it from the strangulating entanglements in order to return it to its past glory.

    (8) Regular and effective maintenance of all sports facilities in the state.

    (9) Ensure appropriate welfare and incentives for athletes, coaches and administrators.

    (10) Establishment of a monitoring and evaluation committee for the implementation of this report.

    Comrade Governor sir, Edo deserves to rule sports now, as it did in the Samuel Osaigbovo Ogbemudia years. Oba khato Okpere; Ise!

  • 2012 Hajj report

    2012 Hajj report

    It was another turn of accountability last Monday when His Eminence, Dr. Muhammad Sa‘ad Abubakar III, the Sultan of Sokoto and President-General of Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs, led a group of frontline Muslim Hajj Gurus including the Chairman of National Hajj Commission, Alhaji Musa Bello, to submit the 2012 Hajj report to President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan. The Sultan undertook the mission in his capacity as the permanent national Amirul Hajj.

    The report contained a number of issues ranging from last year’s preparation for Hajj; to cost of Hajj and exchange rate; to the issuance of visa; to airlift operations; to the movements and conducts of Nigerian pilgrims in Saudi Arabia; to the hiccup fortuitously caused by the Saudi’s new policy of ‘Mahram’ (a legitimate male company for every female pilgrim); to the number of deaths recorded during Hajj; to the issue of crimes and defection by Nigerians in Saudi Arabia; to the issue of luggage and final return of pilgrims to Nigeria.

    The report was a thorough analysis of the entire 2012 Hajj operation which included the challenges encountered, the new experience garnered, which could help in tackling possible future problems in Hajj sphere as well as observations and suggestions towards further improvement on the official performance of Hajj.

    Reacting to the report, the President praised the delegation under the leadership of Amirul Hajj and expressed satisfaction over the manner in which the immigration issue involving over 1,000 female pilgrims unaccompanied by legitimate male counterparts, as required by Saudi law, was resolved.

    He, however, expressed worries about the increased crime rate by Nigerians in Saudi Arabia as contained in the report and he indicated the government’s intention to take immediate steps in collaboration with the Saudi authorities to address the ugly trend saying:

    “I have noted the issues you raised; the issue of exchange rate, the rising crime rate by Nigerians who are residing there (in Saudi Arabia). He then asked the media to note that they (the criminals) are not people who went to Saudi Arabia for religious obligation, but Nigerians who are living in Saudi Arabia….I think we have to come up with your recommendation to see how we can work with the Saudi authorities to reduce that trend because it is bringing some stains to the image of this country, especially for those who will go to Saudi Arabia regularly for their religious obligation.’’

    Earlier in his speech the national ‘Amirul Hajj’ had listed the mentioned increased crime rate by Nigerians in Saudi Arabia as one of the recurrent challenges hindering the efficiency of Hajj operations. Consequently, the delegation recommended the revival of the Presidential Committee on Illegal Nigerian migrants in Saudi Arabia which was constituted in 2009, but never took off due to official bureaucracy.

    The delegation also requested the government to continue to provide the concessionary exchange rate for pilgrims as a demonstration of its support, goodwill and assistance towards Hajj operations and asked the government to assist the National Hajj Commission with more funds to complete the long abandoned Hajj reception centres otherwise called Hajj camps across the country.

    Thanking Mr. President for sparing time to receive the report, His Eminence, the Sultan said: “We wish to convey our appreciation and that of the entire Muslims in this country for your continued support and commitment to efficient Hajj by Nigerians just as we applaud your Excellency for the approval you granted for the concessionary exchange rate for the 2012 Hajj transactions and 55 per cent waiver on all charges payable as tariffs through government agencies. We have since commenced preparations for the 2013 Hajj operations and the Hajj Commissioner had already gone to Saudi Arabia to sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for this year’s Hajj operations”.

    Meanwhile, in a separate but related interview with newsmen, a member of the delegation, Alhaji Mujaheed Asari Dokubo, commended the leadership of the National Hajj Commission and that of the Sultan saying there had been significant improvements in the religious exercise with the leadership of the Sultan and the Commission. “I was a member of Rivers State Muslims Pilgrims Welfare Board for four years and I know the lapses that existed therein. Hajj operations, since the inception of the present National Hajj Commission, have been smooth. Our pilgrims are no longer waiting for months; they are no longer stranded at the Holy cities of Mecca, Medinah and Jeddah. The National Hajj delegation led by the Sultan of Sokoto has also put in a lot of efforts in making Hajj performance hitch-free. The Sultan is down to earth; he is very humble in his interaction with all the members of the delegation and the leadership of the National Hajj Commission’’.

    The history of Hajj performance in Nigeria is long and tortuous. According to a historical account relayed by Kabir Sani Anga in a schorlarly paper presented sometime ago, the earliest recorded pilgrimage from West Africa was championed by Nigerians. It can be recalled that the Kanem Bornu Mai, King Dunama bin Umme of the Sayfawa dynasty performed Hajj as early as the 11th century C.E. And in H. R. Palmer’s Diwan (1926), Mai Dunama was said to have performed pilgrimage twice between 1098 and 1150 and died while returning from a third journey from the Holy Land. Yet, Mai Dunama might not be the first pilgrim of the Sayfawa dynasty who embarked on such spiritual journey since Diwan also relayed the episode of the latter’s father, Mai Umme bin Abdel-Jalil (1058-1097) who died in the land of Masr (Egypt) on his way to or from Makkah.

    Many centuries later, pilgrimage continued in Sayfawa dynasty as documented by the great scholar, Muhammad Bello, who was also a son and lieutenant to the Islamic revolutionary, Shaykh Uthman Dan Fodiyo. He recalled the longstanding Islamic reputation of the Sayfawa in his book entitled ‘Infaq’ (translated in 1957) that Sayfawas’ ancient ancestors were good and devout Muslims who encouraged many pilgrims among the eighteenth century Mais of Bornu including Mai Dunama bin Ali, Mai Hajj Hamdun bin Dunama, and Mai Muhammad bin Hajj Hamdun.

    However, Hajj performance from West Africa through many centuries before the arrival of the colonialists was neither formal nor organised. The first seemingly organized pilgrimage caravans from Kano only dates back to the early nineteenth century when caravan businesses started in the city. According to the Kano Chronicle, the Islamisation of Hausa land began in the middle of the fourteenth century by Malian Wangara traders. Although Hausa land was at that time already on the pilgrimage route from the Western part of the Sudan, nevertheless, available historical accounts do not suggest any pilgrimage interest of the Hausa ruling class in contrast to the Mais of Bornu.

    As stated in Anga’s paper, when, eventually, a pilgrimage highway otherwise known as the Sudan route was open to Hausa land it ran from the cities of Katsina and Kano through Aïr (Agades), the Fezzan and Aujila across the Nile into Egypt. The leader of a caravan then was called Madugu under whom intending pilgrims congregated and travelled on foot to the Holy Land. In short, in Nigeria’s pre-colonial period, there was little formal organization of travelling to Hajj as the journey was usually undertaken at the discretion of private individuals and groups without formal documents like passport, visa and inoculation papers. Thus, arrangements of Hajj were often informally assigned to Madugu, on trust, who was usually an important personality such as a scholar, a wealthy merchant or a notable person who automatically assumed the status of the Amirul Hajj (Pilgrims’ Commander). That was the trend until the beginning of the 19th century when groups of pilgrims from the south, especially Yoruba Land where Islam had reached Ilorin, Oyo and some other notable cities partly through the influence of North African merchants and partly through Fulani jihad. They travelled northwards to Kano or Bornu in order to join the caravan heading for Makkah.

    In confirmation of this assertion, an early English explorer, Barth, who travelled to Kano in 1857, estimated the city’s population to be 30,000 but added that the figure doubled during the main caravan season of Hajj.

    At that time, pilgrims usually visited the rulers in the capital cities of the lands to solicit for alms and escorts for safety, in case of any danger on the road as they also requested for standard letter of introduction with the name of the recipient and the seal of the issuer. However, formal visits to the rulers were not always necessary. In some cases, well-to-do volunteers played host to the passing pilgrims while Ulama‘u (Islamic scholars) offered ‘du’a’ (prayers) for safety.

    Though the British colonial occupation of what later came to be called Nigeria lasted effectively for about a century from 1861 to 1960, the real colonial rule did not begin until 1906 when the British administration formally annexed the northern Nigeria to the British Empire and commenced direct rule therein. And becoming aware of the potentials of hajj in forging global solidarity among Muslims, the colonial government embarked on a tactics to curb the flow of pilgrims in order to protect their own interests in Nigeria. Through that tactics, strict rules were imposed to minimize the number of pilgrims while surveillance by escorts at strategic posts along the pilgrimage routes up to the Sudan was mounted. Such colonial policy was meant to discourage contacts among the various national and international segments of the global Islamic Ummah. Some of the measures introduced by the British colonial government were modern travel requirements such as passports, immigration control, health regulations and payment of deposits for services in the holy land. All these were hitherto unknown to the pilgrims.

    However, a positive aspect of those measures was the introduction of motorised trucks, buses and, finally, aircraft which served as comfortable mass transit. With time, as the pilgrims’ transportation facilities were making the journey easier and quicker for pilgrims, the British authorities became convinced that pilgrimage was not much of a threat to their rule after all. Thus, new travel formalities, combined with modern travel facilities, brought revolutionary changes to Hajj operations in Nigeria.

    According to Anga’s paper, a major boost came to Hajj by Air during the budget session of the Federal House of Parliament in Lagos early in 1953 when a member, Alhaji Abubakar Imam, tabled a motion for the establishment of a ‘Nigeria Office’ in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, to cater for Nigerian pilgrims. The motion was accepted with minor amendment and Imam was asked to submit a proposal on its actualization. As the motion was proposed out of concern rather than personal experience, Alhaji Imam decided to perform that year’s Hajj himself in order to study the real problems and report back to the House. He departed Kano on July 27, 1953 in a plane chartered by the Nigerian Pilgrims’ Aid Society Limited, which started operating in Kano in 1951. Nevertheless, the prosperous airline business did not stop Hajj by Road as both continued side by side through the 1950’s. However, by the end of the decade, Hajj by Road had started to decline as air travel became more popular, safer, faster, cheaper and less rigorous.

    Shortly after his return from Hajj in September 1953, Alhaji Imam made the following recommendations to the federal government: (1) an official appointment of a Commissioner to accompany the pilgrims yearly; (2) the establishment of a dispensary at the major pilgrims centres; (3) the provision of accommodation for the pilgrims in Mecca and Medina; and (4) the control of indiscriminate fee charges imposed on Nigerian pilgrims. He also recommended the recognition and commendation of meritorious services rendered to the pilgrims by officials and volunteers in Nigeria and Saudi Arabia. All the recommendations were accepted in principle. And for the purpose of implementation, the Government appointed a three-man Hajj delegation led by Alhaji Isa Kaita, a Northern Nigerian Regional Minister. The delegation submitted its report Northern Regional and Federal Governments in 1954 when there were only about 300 to 400 official pilgrims from Nigeria. Impressed by this development and coming face to face with the issues involved in Hajj operation, Alhaji Ahmadu Bello, the Sarduna of Sokoto and Premier of Northern Regional Government, became so much interested in Hajj affair that he led a four-man delegation to Saudi Arabia in 1955 to personally investigate Hajj conditions and to advise his regional government as well as the federal government on how it should be handled. The commission focused on several thorny operational problems such as the mutawwif (local guide), the agency responsible for guiding Nigerian pilgrims in the holy land, the absence of accommodation for Nigerian pilgrims, the lack of medical facilities, and arrangements for reception at Jeddah’s sea and air ports. Meanwhile, Alhaji Ibrahim Dasuki (who later became Sultan) was assigned to Kano as a pilgrims’ officer to assist Nigerian pilgrims at Kano airport on matters of Hajj operations especially relating to passports, visa, customs, immigration formalities, health requirements and foreign exchange. In 1958 the Federal Government of Nigeria became fully involved in Hajj operations. Its concern at this stage was the welfare of some 21,000 Nigerian pilgrims of uncertain diplomatic status in the Sudan as well as some other 20,000 West Africans of various nationalities but mostly Nigerians, who were facing deportation from Saudi Arabia. Consequently, the federal government appointed a goodwill mission under the leadership of the Sardauna to find ways of solving the problems of the Nigerian pilgrims in both the Sudan and Saudi Arabia. In this manner, the pilgrimage began to assume the characteristics of a high-level diplomatic delegation. Today, Nigeria is a frontline country in the performance of Hajj every year. More facts about Hajj operations in Nigeria especially the formal establishment Pilgrims Board at the federal or regional level may be written in details in this column soon.

  • Man in the mirror (10)

    Man in the mirror (10)

    Now that we are done fiddling with change, we are dying to articulate dissent like the emptiness that approximates silence; again. Like leadership we loathe, the language of our dreams and dissension has never been fathomed by us. Perhaps it’s because we allow our sentences and imports to trail off in confusion. Perhaps it’s because we swallow grief to express impotent will even as we vow to show that we too are blessed with discretion and character.

    But we have our inclinations too – wantonness, incoherence, shallowness and that fledgling impassivity that masks essentially, our recklessness and vile. Thoreau would call it a knack for folly. Russell would simply identify it as the manifestation of imprudence and lack of tact.

    I would call it suicide. For only the suicidal would entrust such sensitive things as the birthing of a “promising dawn” to professional undertakers accustomed to darkness and vile. We are still the little, little people with neither principles nor strength of character. That is why we bestow our mandates unto all manners of candidates – in a manner characteristic of ones who have been programmed to self-destruct.

    Forget our apologies for Goodluck Jonathan, Muhammadu Buhari, Nuhu Ribadu, et al, it does not matter who we root for; it’s the reasoning that excites our politics that should appall us.

    It wasn’t too long ago that we brandished our untiring love for President Goodluck Jonathan. Many revealed their passion for him just because his name is Goodluck. Others took a liking to him because he is purportedly “humble to a fault.”

    Then there were those who would die to see him retain his seat just because he hails from the South-South. They believe it’s the turn of the South-South to plunder our national purse. But the song has since changed. Now we are beginning to see that it is not enough for Jonathan to answer the name: Goodluck. We have begun to see that it takes more than Mr. President’s touted humility and inclination to “respect elders” and call “those who are older than him Sir or Ma!” even though “he is President,” to salvage our State. Let me not dwell on President Jonathan as there isn’t much to say of his candidature and administration. Any attempt to do so would be tantamount to squeezing the palm kernel seed for crude oil.

    And there was Buhari. Remember Buhari? It wasn’t too long ago that we labeled him an “extremist” and “terrorist,” among other things; just because he is a Muslim. Some claimed he was set to implement a northern agenda to Islamize Nigeria. And not a few people recalled perceived excesses and shortcomings of his regime – to this lot, it hardly mattered that the former military dictator recorded some commendable feats during his regime.

    Then he picked Tunde Bakare, controversial and self-styled cleric, as his running mate and suddenly, the rising wave of dissent against his candidacy quieted to a drone. Vintage Buhari. The Spartan general knew just how to shut his detractors up. Now the much dreaded “fundamentalist” has become the favourite of not a few Nigerians.

    It isn’t just that Buhari had to pick Bakare that should shame us but that he had to play the religious card in order to sway the opinions of even his most virulent critics in his favour, provides food for thought. We have chosen to ignore the fact that Buhari, for all his stature and promise could have done better in choosing a running mate. Even Buhari knows that. But the elder statesman was just being pragmatic. He needed to feed us a generous dose of our own poison.

    This emphasizes our lack of depth and dependable political philosophy. I do not blame Buhari. The tireless contender had to survive. It doesn’t matter that his choice of running mate, Bakare, resounds all manners of permutation neither does it matter that his action projects our personal politic as desperate and shorn of wisdom. The Spartan general is actually not as rigid as we thought him to be. And we aren’t as wise as we thought we are. If we were, we wouldn’t be taken by such cheap politic and stunt.

    And there was Ribadu; the candidate whose bid excited the worst of unexplainable bitterness and ill-will in various circles – basically because he did a poor job of connecting with people he sought to govern. Not a few people claimed“Obasanjo’s attack dog” was no saint. Many argued that he was hardly Nigeria’s equivalent the awaited Messiah. It is understandable that the ruling class and highest echelons of the civil service and the corporate business sector would rather perish than see Ribadu mount Nigeria’s most coveted seat; for it wasn’t too long ago that he became the brute in their recurring nightmares.

    It is even more understandable that a considerable percentage of the nation’s youths – particularly internet and advance fee fraudsters among others – would give their last breath to thwart the presidential ambition of Nuhu Ribadu. But that a great percentage of Nigeria’s youth would profess an abiding dislike for Nuhu Ribadu because of numerous reasons they are yet to pin-point, is actually very distressing.

    Some argued that he contested knowing he was incapable of victory. They claimed he only sought to register his eligibility in order to appear as a worthy candidate for the presidency come 2015. Then there were those that believed Ribadu deserved scorn simply because it is fashionable to do so. Indeed, every other Nigerian is always supporting and scorning a candidate because it is fashionable to do so. A great many of us are switching loyalties, candidates and political platforms as socioeconomics and political expediencies demand. Some have done so because their favourite columnists suggested it.

    The most pathetic amongst us however, are loving and hating one candidate above the other, simply because it is fashionable to do so. Yet for all the thoughtlessness we foster, we could be forgiven for whatever political anomaly we foster; even as you read, none of our contenders and self-styled Messiahs has been able to justify his claim to our mandate and seat of power.

    It is just one of many such ironies that their emergence has failed to imbue us with much needed conviction and trust we ought to repose in our preferred contender to power. The connection is what we need. Among other benefits, it accords us a peep into the soul of each contender in order to trust him or not. It also means familiarity and wounds and scars. It could make it difficult to look upon them and see them as the future.

    But wherever it exists, it makes it easier to forgive the worst they’ve being in order to hope on the best they could be. We have two years to the 2015 general elections. Within the period, we could seek out a worthy candidate, “A man of the people and truly for the people in a sane way” if you like. But still, we rally round the usual candidates, the usual perversions and dire sentimentalism. Come 2015, when we usher in more calamitous leadership than we have now, you and I shall be deserving of blame.