The Nation Newspaper

Category: Saturday

  • Deterrence, security and democracy

    Operation  Python  Dance  by the Nigerian  Army   in   the Eastern   part  of Nigeria   is  on the surface  a mere  military  exercise  to put the troops in a state  of  combat  readiness.  But, in reality,   it is  a clear   signal  to insurgents and secessionists  in that  environment  that  the government is in charge of the security of the Nigerian state  and will  crush any challenge  from any quarters  in the vicinity in that regard. It  is the Nigerian state  attempt  at deterrence  and I welcome and support it.

     This is because a government  in any  nation,  is any government that can exclusively regulate  the legitimate use of physical  force  in enforcing its rule within a given territorial  area and the Buhari  government  has just  shown its  hand  in the east  this time  as it  has done in the North  East  with Boko  Haram  up  till  now. You  may  even  say  the government  has bared its fangs discriminately  in the east and has avoided  the murderous herds men  raiding and destroying  farmlands in the North Central and  South  West,  but  that does  not detract  from  the fact   that at least  for once it has raised its hand militarily to stem  the rising  tide of secession that is fast  creating a state  within a state  in the Nigeria polity.  That  action or  Operation  Python  Dance  and  similar  military   exercises  have raised pointed   questions in other political systems globally as to the   real   duties of the military  and people have wondered aloud  on  the efficacy  of creating security through the deployment of soldiers on the streets  to protect the populace  and   deter  trouble   makers.  Indeed  the question  has been  raised in   NATO  nations    and the EU   IN  recent  times on whether such  troops  on the streets  are targets or  deterrent  to  terrorists, secessionists and insurgents. Questions are  also  being asked on the  whittling   capability  or  danger  of such street  deployment on the state of battle  readiness of such  troops and  the Nigerian Army cannot be an exception in that regard too. But  then  security  is necessary  for  the Nigerian  state  to maintain stability and safety  of the life and property  of Nigerians according to the Nigerian  constitution and the rule of law  and that  essentially is what Operation Python  Dance  is all  about  and I  agree  with its stated  objective and the spirit of  its enactment  and execution  so far.

    Let  us  now  take a peep at other parts  of the world  where challenges to the state and its structure have occurred and how such  challenges have been  handled. Good  examples   this week  are    Catalonia,  in   Spain  and  Pakistan where  the Supreme  Court turned down  an appeal  that removed the politically powerful Prime Minister Nawaz  Sharif  from  office for  financial  misconduct  traceable to the global  Panama Papers  that   revealed recently   that   several  corrupt  politicians had  offshore accounts in the Caribbean Islands.

    In   Spain  the state  of  Catalonia  appealed  to  the King  of Spain  King  Felipe and  the PM  of  Spain, Mariano  Rajoy to  allow  dialogue  and not halt the Catalonia state decision  to hold  a referendum on Independence  which the  Catalonians  have slated  for October 1, this year. The  King  of Spain  reportedly  stated recently at a state  occasion  that the Spanish  constitution can  take care of any   potential  rupture of the Spanish   nation, through its  constitution. The  PM  on the other  hand has commented  severally  that the  Spanish  Constitution  makes  Spain indivisible and  the government  prosecutors  have started  preparing cases against the Governor  of   Catalonia  and Mayor  of  Barcelona the   biggest city in Catalonia involved in the proposed referendum  for Catalonia  Independence  expected  to hold on Oct  1.  The    Spanish  PM  has declared   the referendum  illegal. But  the secessionists  are  adamant  and have gone on organizing and  planning the Independence  project in such a way  that public servants will  not be involved so that they do not compromise  their  neutrality  and loyalty  to the Spanish  state. Yet  the secessionists are  going ahead and their  leaders,  Catalonia’s Governor  Charles  Puigdemont and Barcelona Mayor  Ada  Colan  made this memorable statement  this week – ‘We  call  for an open  and unconditional  dialogue. A  political  dialogue based on the legitimacy we  all  have,  to make possible something that in a democracy  that   is never a problem and even less a crime; listening to  the voice  of the people.‘

    What  is   instructive  and   important   here  is that the leaders of  the   Catalonia  secession referendum claim legitimacy and monopoly  in hearing the voice of the people yet  are challenging  the power of the Spanish state  in going ahead after the PM of Spain  has declared the referendum illegal. The  Catalonian  leaders  must  be prepared for the consequences  of their actions for 0ct 1   which    the   legitimate  central  government has declared illegal. Going ahead with the Independence referendum makes them disobedient of the Spanish  constitution which makes Spain indivisible. One  can  only wait to  see  what will  happen as I do not see either the King or the PM bending the Spanish  constitution  to accommodate the Catalonia referendum of Oct 1. Which  means something   has to give somehow  and we can expect something like  Operation Bullfight  Dance very   soon in Spain ostensibly  along the line of the Nigerian  Army  Python  Dance  going on in  the  East  at  this  moment.

    The  Supreme  Court in Pakistan has shown clearly  that in a democracy, no  one, no matter  how  democratically  popular  should  be above the law. That  has been shown  in the way it  has removed  the politically  powerful former PM Nawaz  Sharif  from  office some time ago and  has  gone  on to confirm the  dismissal  by throwing away the appeal this week. Nawaz, to show  his durability, power   and    impeccable   democratic  credentials, has put in  place  his choice of a leader  as his replacement. This  is because  his party has majority in both Pakistan’s  legislature. But  justice  has been  served and the rule  of law has prevailed.

    What  Nawaz  Sharif has  been punished  for   by a  court  which  does not care whose ox is gored is instructive. He  did  not disclose a salary he was receiving from a relation’s account and even  though the Court  earlier  found  him  innocent of the Panama Papers scandal, it ordered  fresh  inquiries  of his vast wealth  and that threw  up  the incriminating deal  that led  to his removal  as PM. The  Court  also  found his daughter he was grooming to succeed  him politically  guilty of corruption  and therefore  ineligible to succeed him politically in future  in Pakistan’s  highly  volatile  politics.  That  is definitely  a good  sign that Pakistan’s  politics  is fast  weaning itself  of corruption  that has bedeviled it in recent times   and has always been an harbinger for military intervention in that  Islamic state’s  nuclear charged   political  environment.  Once  again long live the Federal  Republic of Nigeria.

  • Diversity, diplomacy and confederation

    It  is becoming obvious that the world as  we know it is going to change for good  or bad whether  we like it or  not.  I am  not talking about the  doomsday  gibberish, the  religion  end of the world salvation blackmail or even the big bang computer that did not   turn up  as highly predicted  in 2000. I am  saying that this world is changing before our eyes  and there is nothing that we can  do about it.  Actually   that   was what   the Change  Management    experts   were  saying when   they  said  that the concept was an  oxymoron    and  that  change    was not manageable. Well,    the  hurricanes  in  the US  and the Carribeans    have shown  that nature  can  be disastrous   and   unmanageable   even  if predictable. In  terms  of the above topic   global  change   has shown  it has no   masters  from any part of the world. I, for one have decided to enjoy the spectacle  and  I  ask    you    henceforth   to enjoy the amazing and unfolding     global  panorama    on this  page with me.

    Let  me first start   with   some sort  of anecdotes  before  unfolding the attendant masquerades. On  the world  stage North  Korea being vilified  by the US was given a podium in another nation jointly calling for restraint from the US whose president this same week said  he had  not ruled  out the military option in dealing with N Korea’s nuisance global nuclear threats  and missile  tests . In  Nigeria it took a woman  minister to bell  the cat  and set the ball  rolling for  the 2019  presidential  election. Just   as  the Yorubas  called  for a Confederation and    labeled  it Regionalism because  that sounded historical  and less pugnacious   in the pursuit  of Restructuring. Which  happens to be the latest political  digression  from the declared  war on corruption  by the Buhari  Administration   since  assuming  power  in the 2015  presidential  elections. In   the US  the  former  presidents  have come together  to support a 15.2 bn dollars   relief  fund to support  victims of the Hurricane  Harvey  that wreaked havoc in the  US  recently  to show  the American  people  that they still  care even  though they  are out of office.  They    have   shown  that   out of sight is not out of mind and that really  counts where human management and  public responsibility   matter   as it  should,  in any polity.

    Starting with  N Korea it is apparent  that no  one really  knows  how the dreadful  charade  would  end.  It would  appear  however  that  Russia  is making merry  with the American  embarrassment  over  the entire  issue for clearly malicious  if diplomatic reasons . At  an Economic  Conference  attended by N Korea’s Minister in the  Russian city  of  Vladivostok  this week, the Russian  president spoke  along side the Japanese PM Shinzo  Abe  and the S Korean  President  Moon Jae  -in  and asked   the US  not  to play into N Korea’s  hands by  putting pressure on NK    with   President   Putin   warning  that  ‘its  counterproductive  to inflate this military  hysteria, as  this leads  nowhere. ‘Which  actually   is highly skeptical  and mischievous  especially  with regard  to the company of world leaders  he was in whose nations are on the front line with  N Korea.

    Japan  has seen  N Korea shoot  missiles over its air space in violation  of international  law in recent times  and S Korea is  carrying out war games   with  US   war   planes on its border with N Korea with  live ammunition,  which N Korea   claimed  are provocative   and are  responsible  for its nuclear  threats and tests. Yet  S Korea’s  new president was elected a few months ago on a platform  of peace  but  has  no choice if the US decides on the military  option. Is  the Russian  President Putin speaking his  mind and speaking for S Korea? Does  that mean that S Korea is shifting alliance  from the US to Russia in the Korean Peninsular’s   volatile  and war prone diplomacy?   The  same questions  can  be asked of the Japanese PM present at the occasion. Moreso as the NK Minister  for External  Economic  Relations reportedly said  there that –  ‘the US should by all  means keep  in mind the nuclear status  of our country which owns nuclear and hydrogen bombs and intercontinental  ballistic  missiles‘.

    It  is apparent that the US in the absence of the military option  can  only  seek  sanctions to  call  N Korea to  order but that can only make that rogue nation more desperate and dangerous  for global  peace. In the past sanctions  have given way to economic aid in the time of the grandfather  and father   of the present youthful NK leader. But  he  has shown he is a different and implacable  proposition as a leader. Just  as the Americans  and their European  and Pacific allies  have discovered  that they  have an equally unexpected  proposition as the leader of the American  people to contend with in global  diplomacy   and international  relations.  More  ominously  for the US  and  its allies is the fact that the new US  president is at war  with the molders of public  opinion  in the US and that is affecting his  conduct  of foreign  policy  and diplomacy.  President   Donald  Trump  has had  to play  to  the gallery  in dealing with both domestic  politics and international  issues  and nowhere  was that more apparent than in the way  he calmly  told  the  press  that the military option  was not ruled out in N Korea.  He  has  labeled the CNN as  fake news  and has   thus  murdered sleep   in the  news media  estimate  and like Macbeth  in Shakespeare’s  play, he will  not sleep  again.  Not  on Russia, and  definitely  not on NK. And  the issues  involved  will  not be appraised dispassionately  as required in both diplomacy and politics at  home and abroad in the US  because  both the US media  and their president  are  looking at issues  with jaundiced  eyes  filled with mutual  hatred  and  sheer  hatred for each  other. This  has created the unusual  political effect  and decision  of the new US President to start  campaigning  for  reelection  in four  years  time  because  he felt his fight  with the media can  only be sustained   by  the tweet  technology  that brought him  political  fame  and power  and he needs  the rhetoric  of election  campaign.   This    is   to  enable   him  face a press  out to get him on Russian meddling  in 2016 US elections by  denting his legitimacy  in the pursuit  of that goal. In  all  these  American  diversity as a nation  of migrants, its diplomacy  and much  vaunted  political  culture   of free speech  and human  rights  are being  sorely  tested  while the world  worries  on the results.  Meanwhile  the Russian  leader  puts  spanners  in the works  for  a  US  that has put Russia  under   economic  sanctions    for  various  transgressions  of International  law especially  in  Ukraine and   quite   recently  for  hacking US  presidential  elections. Surely  the end is far from  being in sight and  the future   is most  unpredictable   for the US  and  its  new unconventional   president.

    In Nigeria the next  presidential  election  is slated  for 2019  but  a cabinet  Minister  has set  the ball  rolling  by   declaring that  she would support  another  undeclared  candidate  other  than the incumbent president whose  appointment  she is still  enjoying. The  Minister  is Aisha  Alhassan, Nigeria’s  Minister  for  Women  Affairs and  Social  Development who  said  there  was no going back on her announcement to support former Vice  President Atiku  Abubakar  in the 2019  presidential  election. Let  me   say   here    that   I doff  my hat to the lady  for  her bravery  and bluntness. She  said the president told her that he would only  go  for one  term  of office  and he expects him  to keep  his word. Well, the president is not dead  and can put the records straight  and  do  the needful. But  this gallant lady  has dared  the lion  in its den  and is still  a Minister. She  reminds me in terms of audacity of the president’s  wife who  cried  foul  that her husband  has been  surrounded by strangers  and that people  who did not campaign with him  are  being given important  political  appointments.

    It  appears  that in Nigeria it is only  women  politicians  who  have  the balls  to  speak obvious  political  truths which  the men  have lost the balls or guts  to say out  on important issues.  I  remember  the play  Aikin Mata  which I took part in at  the Great  Ife  whose  title means’ Women At Arms  ‘directed by former  Kwara  State  Governor  Cornelius Adebayo and  his  colleague,  now  a famous  professor. Indeed Nigerian  women  are  at arms  and they  cannot  be kept in the kitchen  for much  longer.  Certainly   Aisha  Alhassan   has blazed  a trail  like  our  First  Lady  and  I   commend  both  sincerely   for speaking their mind and    walking   gingerly    where  angels  fear     to tread.

    Finally  the Yorubas   have met in Ibadan  their former regional  government    capital  and asked  for  a return to regional  government along  the line of the 1960  and  1963  constitutions.  The   Yorubas always know what  they  wanted  but have  not been  able to get  it,    and  that  is leading Nigeria  from the front seat  since  they  think  education  their  main ethnic  talent  makes  them  capable of doing this  . Yet  they  lag  behind in modern Nigeria power  politics  because their  only   leader, the sage Obafemi  Awolowo  wanted  them  to lead  a bigger  Nigeria than that of Nkrumah’s  Ghana  and  did  not leave the contraption called Nigeria  when  the   West   had self –  government in 1958. Now  in 2017  Yorubas  are  calling for a Regional  government  but  are making the claim  for  a Confederation  and  I  feel  that is not brave enough . What  is wrong with a Confederation if  we must restructure?   That  is the  big ‘bold question  to  be asked  and Yoruba  leaders  should seize the bull  by the horn  and put the question  on the table  once  and for  all  for  consideration by the  Nigerian  polity.  We  do not need another Moremi  from  Ife  to  unravel  us from  the forced  marriage of  1914   and the  military command structure  that  has served Nigeria  so  lopsidedly   as  a  slip   shod  federation  since  1960,   purely   to  the benefit  of those ‘born  to rule‘  in their  very  mistaken  estimation. Once  again  long live the Federal  Republic  of Nigeria.

  • The arrogance of power

    The arrogance of power

    Beyond superficialities, is there really any fundamental difference in the attitudinal dispositions and behavioural orientations of Donald Trump, President of the world’s pre-eminent democratic, economic and military superpower and that of Kim Jong-un, absolutist leader of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea)? They seem to be both pathetically infantile in their mindsets even though Trump is over 70 and Kim in his thirties. Both men exhibit the impulsiveness, lack of restraint and seeming obliviousness to danger characteristic of juveniles despite the immense power they wield in their respective countries and the severe consequences their actions could have for global peace and security.

    There can be no doubt that nuclear weapons in the hands of a brutal, capricious dictator like Kim Jong-un, who rules without any form of checks and balances is undesirable and portends grave danger for the world. Yet, Trump is daily proving Hillary Clinton right when, during the campaign, she warned that a man who resorts to tweeting at the slightest provocation could not be entrusted with custody of the country’s nuclear buttons. He is pugnacious, abrasive, temperamental and unpredictable. Despite the restraining influence on him of America’s deeply entrenched democratic institutions that guarantee effective checks and balances among the various arms of government, Trump still poses a serious threat to international order, harmony and stability.

    During the campaign, Trump had promised a less militarily adventurous US foreign policy if elected pointing out that his opponent, Hillary, from her record as Secretary of State in President Barak Obama’s first term, would be a trigger happy President. He has, however, discovered, like many of his predecessors, that the exhibition of America’s fearsome military might, mostly against disproportionately weaker targets, is a sure way to boost an incumbent’s sagging popularity at home. Thus, Trump’s authorization of the launching of 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles, each conveying over 1,000 pounds of explosives, against targets in Syria in April for the most spurious of reasons helped to divert attention from his many domestic troubles as he was widely applauded even by his fiercest political adversaries as a strong and no-nonsense President.

    It is thus not surprising that under Trump, the relationship between Washington and Pyongyang, always edgy at the best of times, has degenerated badly with the world confronted with the real possibility of nuclear conflagration on the easily combustible Korean Peninsula. Obviously echoing President Truman’s grim warning to Japan before the nuclear obliteration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the Second World War, Trump has casually warned Pyongyang that “North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen” adding, for emphasis, that the US military is “locked and loaded”.

    The diminutive North Korean dictator and his people have, however, remained unruffled and obstinate. The Pyongyang regime has continued to carry out nuclear tests to the consternation of the international community particularly with its latest claim of capability to deploy hydrogen bombs against targets in South Korea, Japan and even the US mainland. In return, Trump has responded not only with incendiary rhetoric, but the US has intensified joint military exercises with South Korea while mobilizing the deadly warship, USS Michigan, a Trident submarine and some of its most lethal nuclear weapons in the peninsula.

    If one relies for information solely on mediums like CNN or, to a lesser extent, Skynews and BBC, the impression would be that Kim Jong-un is nothing but a crazy dictator simply obsessed with possessing nuclear capability or that North Koreans unaccountably harbor hatred and bitterness against the US. However, a free US-based progressive online magazine, truthout, has been running a series of objective and highly educative articles on US-North Korea relations that facilitate better understanding of what is all often simplistically dismissed as Kim Jong-un’s erratic and eccentric behavior.

    It is impossible to understand North Korea’s seemingly suicidal obsession with acquiring nuclear capability, even against the wish of America with the latter’s awesome military might without situating it within the proper historical context, which the mainstream American media, truthout laments, hardly does. For three and a half decades, the Korean people had suffered under and fought fiercely against Japanese colonial rule.  However, with the defeat of Japan by the US and the Soviet Union at the end of the Second World War in 1945, the two super powers simply divided the Korean Peninsula into two with the US taking Seoul and the Soviet Union, Pyongyang. From servitude to the Japanese, the Korean people now faced domination by two military powers and became a frontline theatre of the post World War II Cold War between the two superpowers.

    This led in 1948 to the creation of two separate states in the territory – the Republic of Korea (South Korea) under US dominion and the Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea (North Korea) under the control of the communist bloc. The situation soon degenerated into war between North and South Korea between 1950 and 1953. Although all sides in the war committed terrible atrocities, North Korea, even by US military accounts, suffered horribly.

    According to a report on the war published in ‘truthout’ by Robert Cokoehher, “The bombing was long, leisurely and merciless, even by the assessment of America’s own leaders. ‘Over a period of three years or so, we killed off – what – 20 percent of the population’, Air Force General Curtis LeMay, head of the Strategic Air Command during the Korean War, told the Office of Air Force History in 1984. Dean Rusk, a supporter of the war and later Secretary of State, said the US bombed ‘everything that moved in North Korea, every brick standing on top of another’. After running low on urban targets, US bombers destroyed hydroelectric and irrigation dams in the later stage of the war, flooding farmland and destroying crops”.

    At least three million North Koreans died in the war. If General Douglas MacArthur, commander of the US troops had his way, many more would have perished as he had proposed that dropping “between 30 and 50 bombs” over North Korea under cover of darkness could end the war in ten days. ‘truthout’ quotes Historian, Charles K. Armstrong, who, writing in the Asia Pacific Journal, states: “The Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea government never forgot the lesson of North Korea’s vulnerability to American air attack, and for half a century after the Armistice, continued to strengthen anti-aircraft defenses, build underground installations, and eventually develop nuclear weapons to ensure that North Korea would not find itself in such a position again. The long term psychological effect of the war on the whole of North Korean society cannot be overestimated”.

    North Koreans are said to be deeply nationalistic and fiercely believe in their country’s right to independence and self determination. This has nothing to do with whether they like Kim Jong-un and his government or not. Rather, they have strongly entrenched memories of how much they suffered under the Americans in the Korean War.

    Of course, Trump lives in his own world blissfully oblivious of reality. He speaks cavalierly of raining fire and fury on North Korea. Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama before him all contemplated pre-emptive strikes against North Korea but heeded wise counsel that the cost would be too high. According to an expert “Such a conflict would threaten not only 22 million North Koreans and the 44 million South Koreans, but could also engulf the US, Japan, China and Russia in a nuclear war”. Although a staunch ally of the US, South Korea, under its progressive President, Moon Jae-in, has explicitly rejected any war on the Korean peninsula. The country would be in the direct line of North Korean offensive if war breaks out.

    ‘truthout’ quotes Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican- South Carolina) as saying that “If there’s going to be a war to stop Kim Jung-Un, it will be over there. If thousands die, they’re going to die over there. They’re not going to die here. And (Trump) has told me that to my face”. It is a pity that America’s democratic process allowed the ascension of a man capable of such shallow thinking to the apex of authority in the world’s most powerful country. Apart from rejecting direct diplomacy between Washington and Pyongyang, which the latter is not averse to, and actually achieved a degree of success when tried in 1994 and 2000, the Trump administration has dismissed as an insult the suggestion by Russia and China of a “freeze-for-freeze” strategy.

    This would entail North Korea freezing its nuclear and missile testing while the US and South Korea would end their annual joint military exercise. Nothing would appear to me more sensible and pragmatic towards de-escalating the tension in the region. Contrary to the assertion by the US Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, that North Korea is ‘begging for war’, it appears to be the US that is ‘lusting for blood’. Despite her awesome military arsenal, the US will not be immune to the severe consequences of the Korean Peninsula slipping into war. It is critical that America wields her power with wisdom, not arrogance.

  • Buhari: After the Eagles match

     Pictures don’t lie, as they say. But with the advent of the photoshop technology, we are compelled to take a critical look at pictures for details to be sure that what we are seeing are real. In this case, however, there wasn’t any reason to doubt whose photograph it was. President Muhammadu Buhari didn’t want any distraction. He wanted to see things first hand, obviously unaware that his picture was being taken. What intrigued this writer was that the President saw the game to the end. The closing stages were nervy.

    He sat alone, watching Super Eagles fight tenaciously for the point which the team secured on Monday night against the Indomitable Lions of Cameroon in Yaoundé. The game ended in a pulsating 1-1 draw. President Buhari showed he understood where the citizenry’s passion lied. It is a welcome development. I’m sure that the players, coaches and indeed soccer-crazy Nigerians would have been bowled over seeing the picture of President Buhari watching the game.

    I’m sure that Buhari will sustain his desire to be part of Nigeria’s soccer history now that it is looking like we will become the first African nation to qualify for the semi-finals at the Russia 2018 World Cup, after beating the Zambians in Uyo on October 7. On that day, Mr President, the Zambians will be free to exit the qualification series for the sole ticket in Group B, with a whiplash. It would also be the icing of the cake if the President can watch the game live in Uyo.

    Since the picture of President Buhari watching the Eagles was splashed on some front pages, I have tried to figure out what went through his mind as the game rolled through its 90 minutes. I am sure that the President has seen the windows of using sports, especially soccer to change the perception of the world towards Nigeria. The revelation that the President is willing to pay the Eagles N5 million for every goal the players scored against Cameroon inside the Nest of Champions Stadium in Uyo is thought provoking, given the derelict sporting infrastructure around the country and the seeming neglect our sports ambassadors face while preparing for global sporting competitions.

    If Nigeria had a befitting stadium in Abuja, perhaps the President would watch the game unannounced, boosting the players’ morale. Nigeria spent billions to build the Abuja Stadium before hosting the All Africa Games with pomp and ceremony. The premises is in ruins. The fields for other sports have been overgrown with grass, enough for cattle to graze. The indoor sports halls are abodes of rats and reptiles. No hyperboles, Mr President. The cracks on the walls will widen with time for, these animals to reside. This isn’t an attempt to ridicule Sports Minister, Solomon Dalung, because the rot in the Abuja Stadium predates his tenure. Need I list how we can turn the premises into a business hub? That will be for another column.

    It is good that President Buhari is seeing things by himself. It means that he recognises sports as the biggest public relations tool available to the government. It is also the most effective vehicle to mobilise the people to embrace his change mantra. Indeed, in other climes, the revenue from sports is enormous –enough to loan the government, if the right structures are established with enabling laws to strengthen the confidence of the foreign investors to do sports business with us.

    President Buhari’s renewed interest in sports as captured by the picture will reinforce the corporate world’s interest for sports, knowing that their contributions won’t go unnoticed. This is what the big players in our economy are waiting for to support sports. Those sports-loving firms who support European sports will be challenged to contribute their quota to our sports development. These firms will ease the burden of sponsorship, which is wholly government here, like Aiteo and Akwa Ibom State Governor Udom Emmanuel are doing with our football. Already, the President has seen that money motivates our sportsmen and women. I won’t blame them because the life span of any athlete doesn’t exceed 20 years, barring injuries. It is what they get now that they will use to prepare for their retirement as amateurs in their chosen sport.

    It is important to say here that many countries began their Russia 2018 World Cup quest after the Brazil 2014 Mundial. We are three years behind, largely because we spent those times bickering, culminating in several court cases, which almost incurred FIFA’s wrath. In fact, Mr. President, there is a pending legal issue which scuttle our appearance at the Mundial, although a few people are saying those in court don’t have a case. We hope so.

    With nine months to the Mundial in Russia, there is the urgent need for the Presidency to challenge the sports minister to organise the Russia 2018 World Cup dinner with the corporate world, where the President will challenge the blue-chip companies’ owners to contribute to Nigeria’s quest to lift the World Cup next year.

    The Russia 2018 World Cup dinner with the blue-chip companies can be extended to the 37 states to reawaken corporate sponsorship of sports around the country. Government alone can’t fund sports. It must involve the business community like it is done elsewhere, which must be told what they would gain from such sponsorship packages, even if such support forms part of the firms’ Corporate Social Responsibility (CRS).

    Eagles are the biggest brand to market. But the brand’s image has been dented by the needless controversies at the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF), arising from the change of leadership at the Glasshouse. Nigerians are sour losers and most of them aim to destroy our football when they are edged out through an election. No firm, Mr President, will leverage its good and services in any parastatal burdened by crises and unproven allegations of corruption.

    This Russia 2018 World Cup dinner with the private sector shouldn’t be another Presidential Task Force (PTF), which has been a distraction in previous competitions. The excuse that a body sourced for the cash and should be allowed to disburse it is wrong. After all, we have the EFCC and ICPC to do their jobs, if there are cases of sharp practices in the disbursement of cash raised.

    Members of previous Presidential Task Force divide the players and coaches against the NFF chieftains. Thank God, we will qualify without qualms. Soon, the hawks will seize the platform to source for cash and introduce another committee. It shouldn’t happen. Of course, the President won’t approve a government delegation of officials who hardly watch games but go on shopping sprees.

    Your Excellency, we must draw a line between what is for the players and coaches and what the country stands to gain beyond participating at the Mundial. We have been to five World Cup competitions, unable to point at the benefits of our participation. The government should invite the hierarchy of the players and coaches to a meeting where details of their entitlements are spelt out with all the parties satisfied.

    It is unthinkable for players and officials who have been rewarded in every game from the qualifiers through the main games of the World Cup to hold us hostage, asking for their share of Nigeria’s entitlements from the gates and other cash benefits from FIFA.

    Our players in collusion with their coaches held us hostage demanding a share of what belongs to the country. It was a tug-of-war in France in 1998, for instance. They didn’t train before the second round game against Denmark. Nigeria was beaten 4-1 by the Danes. Again, in 2014, our players and coaches refused to train before the game against France at the Brazil 2014 World Cup. The Jonathan Goodluck administration brought in $3.8 million to settle them. In fact, the players, coaches and backroom staff spent the day before the France game sharing the cash. It showed in their lacklustre display against the French who won 2-0.

    The Eagles can’t be paid for games won and drawn yet they expect to be given what we earned from the turnstiles and other marketing benefits. Is this what operates elsewhere? I don’t think so. It is unethical. After the Mundial, we should compute our gains and losses, even though the benefits of having our players move to Europe subsequently is the essence of the qualification.

    Your Excellency, this is the most problematic area of our football, which is chiefly responsible for our absence from two consecutive Africa Cup of Nations.

    70 hearty cheers for  Mrs Dolapo Coker

     Today is my 57th birthday and I thank God for the good health. I look forward to this day with happiness every year. My late mother Abigail Isevba Ojeikere (mehen nosen Abigail) shared the day with me.

    I didn’t want to write about my birthday, but I changed my mind when another elderly birthday mate (I dare not put his name here otherwise he will strangle me) introduced me to another September 9 beauty, Mrs Dolapo Coker, who turns 70 today. You will agree that three scores and ten is the biblical requirement which could be increased.

    It is my wish that Mrs Coker lives to celebrate as many years as the Lord wishes for her. Happy birthday Madam. Emi a sopo e.

  • A conundrum unfolds in Kenya

    A conundrum unfolds in Kenya

    N his reaction to the annulment of the August 8, 2017 Kenyan presidential election, President Uhuru Kenyatta exhibited his real African self: a split, dual personality. The poll had been annulled by the Supreme Court, which ruled that the transmission of the poll results was not in accordance with the provisions of the constitution. The court, by a 4-2 split decision, had ruled that:

    1. As to whether the 2017 Presidential Election was conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Constitution and the law relating to elections, upon considering inter alia Articles 10, 38, 81 and 86 of the Constitution as well as, Sections 39(1C), 44, 44A and 83 of the Elections Act, the decision of the court is that the 1st Respondent failed, neglected or refused to conduct the Presidential Election in a manner consistent with the dictates of the Constitution and inter alia the Elections Act, Chapter 7 of the Laws of Kenya.
    2. As to whether there were irregularities and illegalities committed in the conduct of the 2017 Presidential Election, the court was satisfied that the 1st Respondent committed irregularities and illegalities inter alia, in the transmission of results, particulars and the substance of which will be given in the detailed and reasoned Judgment of the court. The court however found no evidence of misconduct on the part of the 3rd Respondent.
    3. As to whether the irregularities and illegalities affected the integrity of the election, the court was satisfied that they did and thereby impugning the integrity of the entire Presidential Election.

    After the annulment, which followed the case brought by Raila Odinga’s National Super Alliance (Nasa), President Kenyatta’s first instinct was to submit to the rule of law. “It was important to respect the rule of law even if you disagree with the Supreme Court ruling,” he said gravely. “Your neighbour will still be your neighbour, regardless of what has happened. My primary message today to every single Kenyan is peace. Let us be people of peace.” But after catching his breath a little later, he fired a vicious broadside on the judges when he addressed a rally in Nairobi, the country’s capital. Describing the judges as crooks, he accused them of malevolently deciding to cancel the election. He then went on to issue a dire warning to the chief justice, David Maraga, that the annulment he authored had transformed him (the president) once again from president-elect to president, implying that he had full powers to possibly deal harshly with the judges. “Do you understand me? Maraga should know that he is now dealing with the serving president,” the 55-year-old president said ominously. “We are keeping a close eye on them. But let us deal with the election first. We are not afraid.”

    Most Nigerian analysts have focused almost exclusively on the lessons contained in the Kenyan annulment for the Nigerian judiciary. The analysts rightly draw attention to the abject reluctance of the Nigerian Supreme Court to upturn presidential elections in the past even when it became glaring that the rules of the game were not respected, and plaintiffs had competently underpinned their arguments with condign proofs. The apex court in Nigeria, they snorted, had found the inventiveness to create a whole new range of lexicon to excuse their cowardice, including talking of ‘substantial compliance’ and other jurisprudential contrivances such as legal and procedural technicalities to validate clear and dangerous political anomalies.

    Other commentators speak of their sadness about how irresponsibly Nigerian judges, particularly on the apex court, forfeited their chances at setting a legal precedence for Africa, one which in annulling an election would help enthrone and strengthen democratic practices. The Nigerian apex court, they argued, had that chance in 1979, but it wilfully threw it away when it admitted the fallacious political arithmetic argument of twelve two-thirds of a state. Since then, they said, the apex court in these parts had sustained a despicable tradition of never annulling an election on the unstated excuse that it was inherently destabilising. By a combination of fear and perhaps lack of surefootedness, the Nigerian apex court thereby surrendered the continental leadership mantle to other more ambitious jurisdictions, this time, kenya, in the same way they had become accustomed to surrendering to Ghana and other polities leadership in the practice of democracy.

    But what really counts in the Kenyan example is not so much the courage of their Supreme Court, as enviable as that was to other African countries, nor of the accuracy of their judgement, as indisputably as it seems; what appears to matter much to the continent is the idiosyncratic reaction of the Kenyan president to a matter which, if he had sensibly exploited it well, would have brought him honour and much acclaim. The reaction showed up his dual personality, a dualism certainly not alien to other African leaders. Indeed, it can be argued that as far as humans are concerned — and African leaders are no exception here — the instinct to distinguish right from wrong and the temptation to embrace either of the two depending on the subjective mood of the moment is deeply embedded in everyone. That African leaders often invariably choose wrong rather than right is perhaps the major controversial issue bothering the continent.

    It is striking that President kenyatta at first acknowledged the salience of the Supreme Court judgement, even admonishing his countrymen to submit to the dictates of the rule of law as well as to keep the peace, before doing a volte face and submitting to his primordial and atavistic instincts. So, the problem is not that President Kenyatta does not know the right thing; the problem is that he lacks the discipline to do the right thing, and the patience to carefully work towards leaving a great legacy of nurturing democratic institutions even when they cost him a lot. It is important to praise the Kenyan Supreme Court for finding the boldness and courage to annul the election. That uniquely iconoclastic move must never be understated. But it is far more important to finally understand that the war between good and evil that raged in the mind of the Kenyan president emblematises the malaise afflicting the continent’s political leaders.

    After forswearing his own private counsel to respect the rule of law and keep the peace, President Kenyatta sadly embraced a contrary point of view by insulting the apex court justices and threatening to unhorse them. As if he needed to remind Kenyans, he told the market rally in Nairobi that he was still the president and had the power to do something about the obstreperousness of the four justices. It did not occur to him that by swearing at the justices who voted to annul his victory he had drawn a dividing line between the six justices, and indicated that the four were evil and the two who upheld the election were good. Yet, he did nothing to controvert the basis of the judgement nor to establish that the justices were induced: all he did was indicate that because the judgement went against him, then it had to be wrong and evil, and the justices who threw his election out must have done it on purpose.

    President Kenyatta is an example of the problem with Africa, of leaders so arrogant that they must always have their way, of leaders who foolishly weave their destinies inextricably with those of their countries, of leaders so intellectually and emotionally diminished that they fail to see the significance of even allowing themselves to be wrong and wronged in order to strengthen their countries. From Cape to Cairo, as many African leaders had illustrated in times past, and are still doing today unremittingly, there appears to be little hope of finding among them great men with purpose and farsightedness who sensibly appreciate their own limits and estimate the infiniteness and eternality of their countries. In the many controversial legal cases the Nigerian Supreme Court grappled with, it had no sense of that history as critically as the Kenyan apex court has demonstrated.

    It is a shame that President Kenyatta has spurned an opportunity to associate with the regnant philosophy of his country’s apex court, especially in view of an election next month many pundits gave him the chance of winning fairly easily. Now that Kenyans know him for who he really is, a man made of straw and with no restraint and vision, it is left to them to determine whether they would still give him their votes on the scale he seemed ready to attract when he first lauded the courts for their sound and iconoclastic judgement.

  • Calling Nnamdi Kanu’s bluff

    Calling Nnamdi Kanu’s bluff

    Nigeria has serious security challenges like virtually every other country, even the most prosperous and powerful, in our troubled world. Africa’s fabled ‘crippled giant’ contends with severe developmental debilities that are inexcusable given her human and resource endowment. Existential conditions for the vast majority of Nigerians are among the most dire and dismal on earth even though a minuscule number of her citizenry number among the world’s most opulent global citizens. But is Nigeria a failed state? Has the territorial space she occupies been declared an ungoverned and lawless jungle? Has the Nigerian state, in Marxian terms, ‘withered away’? The last time I checked, there is a legitimate government currently in power in Nigeria. There is a legally constituted authority that holds the sovereign mandate of the majority of the electorate in polls held in accordance with the country’s extant constitution.

    Of course, it is only natural that her diverse constituents will hold divergent views of Nigeria depending on their peculiarities, proclivities and inclinations. For some, she is a country whose extant structure is cast in granite, non-negotiable and eternally immune to any form of change. This is an unrealistic perspective. There are those like Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB), and emergent imperial monarch of Igboland, who dismisses Nigeria as a vast zoo. For him, Nigeria is a barbarous terrain from which he desperately seeks to extricate his people via secession. Unfortunately for him, the extant Nigerian State, which for now has the legitimate monopoly of force and cohesion within its territorial jurisdiction, says no. In his post medical-vacation national broadcast to the nation, President Muhammadu Buhari effectively told those with secessionist aspirations that he has no mandate to oblige their wish.

    Although his speech may not have been as profound, tightly reasoned and logical, Buhari’s message to his ‘dear citizens’ was akin to Abraham Lincoln’s to the aspiring secessionist Southern slave-owning States in his March 4, 1861, inaugural address as President: “In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered under heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most solemn one to “preserve, protect and defend it”. Lincoln urged the secessionists to consider the very real possibility that “the certain ills you fly to are greater than all the real ones you fly from”.

    An active participant in the Nigerian civil war, Buhari is of the cast of mind that that conflict resolved Nigeria’s national conflict for all time. He is wrong in the sense that cohesive and viable nationhood can only be sustained by never ending dialogue among the diverse peoples of a complex polity like Nigeria that allows for continuous necessary structural and behavioural adjustments. He is right, however, in the sense that the current constitution makes provisions for changes in our governance institutions, structures and processes in accordance with the will of the majority and following clearly stipulated procedures. There are those who attribute our current socio- political and economic tribulations to the deficiencies of the extant 1999 presidential constitution. But that was the same way our errant political class abused and perverted the 1963 parliamentary constitution leading to the collapse of democracy and the descent to civil war. The fault lies not in our constitution but in our selves.

    Adopting a no nonsense approach to the Biafra secessionist advocacy, the Buhari administration charged Kanu to court and clamped him in jail for alleged conspiracy to commit acts of treasonable felony and other related offences. Among other activities, Kanu  whose IPOB upstaged the earlier Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign Republic of Biafra (MASSOB) led by the now sidelined Ralph Uwazurike, was behind the clandestine Radio Biafra illegally broadcasting incendiary and divisive messages across Nigeria. There are those who contend that the Buhari administration should simply have ignored Kanu; that it was his perceived ill- advised prolonged incarceration that has turned him into a folk hero in Igboland.

    But then, this is a controversial view. Ignoring Kanu’s combustible vituperations could also have unsavoury consequences for national unity, peace and stability. Without the extremist activities and provocative xenophobic vituperations of IPOB, for instance, it is unlikely that the misguided groups of Arewa youths would have given the criminal and illegal ultimatum for Igbos to quit the North further worsening national tension and trepidation. We can learn from history here. The genocide against the Igbo in the north following the January 15, 1966, coup was indefensible. It was illogical and irrational to hold an entire ethnic group responsible for the actions of a few coup plotters even if the key leaders of the putsch were Igbo and majority of their victims’ non-Igbo. But there was a background to this.

    According to the pre-eminent political scientist, Professor Billy Dudley who was then teaching at the Ahmadu Bello University (ABU), for instance, in his classic, ‘Instability and Political Order in Nigeria’, “Outside the university, the practice of Ibo men holding up Northerners to ridicule had become a common enough experience. Pictures of Nzeogu with one foot over the corpse of the slain Premier of the North, Sir Ahmadu Bello, symbolic of the downfall of the North and the ascendancy of the East and the Ibo, were to be found on sale in the markets in the North”. That is why it would be extremely unwise to allow characters like Kanu a free hand to pursue their dangerously destabilizing antics even though that is no excuse for the impunity of the so called Arewa youth groups against whom no action has inexplicably been taken.

    Ever since he was granted bail on stringent conditions on April 25, Kanu has violated his bail conditions as if the Nigerian state is non-existent. He has attended rallies consisting of crowds of more than ten people contrary to his bail terms. He has granted countless press interviews again in utter contempt of his bail conditions. This has prompted the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation (HAGF), Alhaji Abubakar Malami, to approach the Federal High Court, Abuja, seeking an order revoking Kanu’s bail as well as directing his being arrested and committed to custody pending trial.

    Condemning the HAGF’s action, the President-General of Ohanaze Ndigbo, Chief Nnia Nwodo, said “I am amazed that the distinguished attorney is prepared to contest the superiority of the provisions of the constitution on fundamental human rights of movement and freedom of association over an erroneous judicial proclamation violating those rights”. I am not aware that Chief Nwodo has become a duly constituted court of law to pronounce magisterially on the erroneousness or otherwise of a judicial proclamation. Until a court of law voids the IPOB leader’s bail terms, he is bound by the law and cannot be allowed to get away with impunity. Kanu himself has publicly threatened that anyone who dares re-arrest him will die. What informs such delusionary arrogance?

    But then, does the Buhari administration have the moral authority to call Kanu’s bluff? Does it have the ethical integrity to assert its ‘stateness’ against such lawlessness? I doubt it. If today, President Buhari calls a meeting of his security chiefs, the majority of those in attendance – the Minister of Defence, Chief of Army Staff, IG of Police, Director General of the Department of State Services (DSS), Chief of Air Staff and National Security Adviser will be all northerners. The only exceptions will be the Chief of Defence Staff and Chief of Naval Staff who are the only non-northerners in the security leadership hierarchy? How can anyone expect fairness and objectivity from such an ethno-regionally skewed security structure in a plural federal polity like ours?

    Furthermore, the same HAGF, who wants Kanu re-arrested and tried for conspiracy to commit acts of treasonable felony has embarrassingly said that the Arewa youths who gave Igbos an ultimatum to quit the North before retracting their threat cannot be arrested and made to face the law because of ‘security implications’. Beyond this, Fulani herdsmen continue to commit genocidal acts against farmers and host communities across the country without the slightest reaction from the security agencies. Where is fairness? Where is justice? Where is equity? How can anyone credibly call the impetuous Nnamdi Kanu’s bluff?

  • Victory is sweet

    Victory is sweet

    I’m tired of writing about the National Sports Commission (NSC). Please don’t remind me about the Ministry of Sports formerly known as the Ministry of Youth and Sports, especially those who have headed the bodies either as chairmen or sports ministers. Since 1999, 14 politicians have headed the body with nothing to show for it, except a gale of controversies and our sports ambassadors being walked over at events or denied entry visas to countries where competitions’ dates have been known as far back as four years.

    What we hear when our athletes face such embarrassment are jives thrown at the foreign country’s embassy chieftains as if we don’t know the process of getting such entry visas. In fact, most of these embassies in Nigeria are right in denying our contingents visas because they are faced with lists that have 20 athletes, for instance and 50 officials with different nomenclatures. Our federations’ officials forget that countries that are hosting events are given rules governing such competitions. Such rules contain the composition of a country’s squad and the ancillary staff. Since most sporting events are media events, accredited journalists are given waivers. Officials who belong to the particular sport’s international and continental bodies get waivers too since they have roles to play there.

    Anyone outside the designated few must subject himself to routine documentation to qualify for entry visas, especially with the prevalent global security problems. Perhaps, the ministry should have an international department like we have at the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) for entry visas instead of this tardy method of issuing note verbal as a saving grace for our administrative ineptitude.

    The ministry’s structure is responsible for the disconnect between the centre and the states of the federation. Growing up at Government College Ughelli in the 70s,one saw how the 37 states, Abuja and the National Sports Commission sent coaches to spot and train talents in the six geopolitical zones.

    The coaches met talents in the hinterland because the school system embraced sports in its curriculum, which eventually threw up all the sporting activities between schools and then the states. Indeed, there was a synergy between the schools and the Ministry of Education, acting on the instructions of the state government. Some governors, such as the late Samuel Osaigbovo Ogbemudia of the old Bendel State, created models that increased the supply line of sportsmen and women, who represented the country. Ogbemudia’s model was copied by other sports-loving governors. This setting created several sports centres with certain states having a monopoly of games. Lagos became renowned for table tennis, swimming and cricket, Bendel mastered athletics, boxing, judo and gymnastics, to mention a few states.

    The dearth of grassroots competition immensely affected the hosting of the National Sports Festival because most of the governors saw the event as a waste of cash and would rather use funds for sports to do things which in their opinion, will give them votes at the next election. The few governors who liked sports opted to host the National Sports Festivals with one aim – to win; not to provide facilities that would be used for future competitions.

    These self-seeking governors chose sports in which their states had comparative advantage over others. This way, the gradual death of such technical events as swimming began. It got so bad that a former sports minister alleged that blackmen don’t win swimming competitions because of their body physiology. The former minister forgot that many Nigerians won swimming events in previous All African Games.

    Swimming was removed from the National Sports Festivals on the ridiculous excuse that the states couldn’t afford pools, chlorine (can you beat this), divers etc. What is the essence of the festival if not to discover talents? It is sickening to be reminded that the last festival was in 2012, an event which was biannual, hosted with pomp and ceremony.

    With the death of the festival, our administrators opted to comb Europe for Nigeria-born athletes to represent us. Is anyone shocked that 80 per cent of the Nigerian women who won the Africa basketball trophy in Mali last week reside in America? Truth is these girls cannot represent America because of the glut of talents there. Basketball is like a religion in the US.

    Our administrators are not just inept; they have no regard for the athletes once they are ageing. It will shock many readers of this column to hear that Blessing Okagbare has quit athletics with the Athletics Federation of Nigeria (AFN) chieftains are unperturbed. She won’t encourage her kids to do sports. If they do, she will stop them from representing Nigeria. This has been the trend with our sports ambassadors and their kids and grandchildren.

    It is good to hear that the government gave the basketball girls N1 million each for winning the trophy. But many are wondering when the government will receive the physically challenged athletes who won several gold, silver and bronze medals at the 2016 Paralympics Games held in Brazil.  Again, pundits are miffed that Adekuoroye, who is the second best wrestler in the world in the 55kg weight, hasn’t met the President. Adekuoroye is hurt that her feat, which happened before the basketball feat, has been treated as a no-event. A world championship less important than a feat recorded for the first time in the tournament’s history for an African? In which sphere is Nigeria rated the second in the world?

    I won’t join the motley crowd lampooning the ministers. Whoever appointed them didn’t consider sports as a tool for social reengineering of the country. Yet, sport is the biggest Public Relations (PR) tool that any government can use to reshape the perception of people about Nigeria.  Can someone please drive President Muhammadu Buhari around Abuja, for instance, anytime the Super Eagles have a game anywhere in the world? Mr President, for free, the streets will be deserted. Everyone will be glued to his television set. Take the pains, Mr President, to drive close to any viewing centre. When Nigeria scores sir, you will be awed at the thunderous ovation from the spectators. Shouldn’t the government key into such an industry that unites the people? I digress.

    Nigeria’s topography encourages sports development. Plateau State’s landscape can match what we have in East Africa where long distance runners are found. But our administrators are lazy and unable to task our coaches to exploit the setting in highlands in the North. Will you blame these administrators? I won’t. In the past, coaches and indeed administrators get into national focus based on what they have achieved in their states. So, that national level in the past comprised men and women who had distinguished themselves either as administrators or athletes, who on retirement became coaches.

    These people know the rules of their sports and their contributions are driven by their love and passion for the game, not necessarily the drive to line their pockets with estacode. The coaches understand the dynamics of the sports. They also know how to groom new talents since they know the catchment areas of the sport.

    Sports died in Nigeria with the introduction of free education in the 80s because sports fields and facilities were eventually built up to accommodate more students. Schools now have arms up to letter z, even if such classrooms don’t have windows and doors. For the private schools, no sports facilities beyond the lawns used for assembly on important days.

    The boarding house which served as catalyst for students to compete in sports became classrooms. It didn’t matter if sports could help to improve students’ health. Evenings became class hours. Sports died across the country under this setting. With the sports ground built up, games masters and mistresses turned to either farming or working for politicians. Schools now hire stadia and playgrounds for their annual inter-house sports. What a shame.

    Is anyone shocked the schools’ competitions, such as Hussey Shield, Lady Manuwa Cup, Grier Powel Cup, Morocco Clarke Cup e.t.c are extinct? Is it not a shame that the Principals Cup which produced many student footballers is moribund? Does it matter to anyone that the inter-school relay races, which climaxed schools’ inter house sports, are dead? Yet we expected our 4×400 metres relay girls to win a medal at the World Athletics Championships held recently in London?

    Victory is the reward for hard work and precise preparations for competitions. But I dare say that it is not always the case in our clime. Can we really say that our victories in global competitions are the result of hard work and good preparation- from administration to on field delivery by our sportsmen? Your answer is as good as mine!

    However, it is important that we pause for a moment to assess the women basketballers’ level of preparation for the competition. Was the Basketball Federation there for the team, preparatory to the tournament? What was the nature of support the federation gave the ‘African heroines’ before and during the competition? What sort of training did the team receive before going to conquer Africa? Were their allowances paid as at when due?

    The team would have returned home unannounced and disunited, if they had failed. Victory is indeed sweet! In celebrating this victory, the federation needs to examine what it has and what it intends to do so as not to make this a pyrrhic victory.

    This is why it is pertinent to ask what the federation is doing to ensure that the victory is replicated in subsequent competitions. It should also use the momentum to groom younger players that who rise to the occasion when the need arises. Victory is very sweet, indeed, but we should not be carried away as we often do. That is the bitter truth.

  • Sustainability, structure and leadership

    I attended  the 90th  birthday   ceremonies  of a quiet  but great Nigerian at Ile  Ife  and  Lagos and what I learnt at a unique birthday event  is what I want  to share  with the public  at large today and that is what has dictated  the topic  in this column. The  celebrant is Chief Iyiola Omisore, a  structural  engineer and doyen of  engineering in Nigeria and I went to Ife in the company of his relation, the debonair and calmly dignified business  mogul  and   barrister  at law,  Chief  Alex  Duduyemi, the Aro  and Asiwaju of Ife.

    Let  me state  clearly  here that at  Ife  I saw how a community  shows  appreciation and gratitude for services rendered  selflessly, to one of its own in the  large   turn out    of    people  at both the  church service  and the reception to  mark this birthday. At   the  Church  service  there  were  about  30  Obas  wearing  their  crowns  and they  were  led by  the Oni  of  Ife himself  Oba Enitan Ogunwusi. The  Oni,   whose royal stool is the pride of Yoruba race was in the church  service  as well  as the reception  where in a rare   but very   royal    mixture  of youth and age,  he,   in silent  dignity   sat   by the side  of the 90 year  old celebrant.  I  confess  to being carried  away by the spectacle  which  I still  recall  with great pleasure and crave indulgence   and   understanding   of   any trait  or accusation  of exaggeration  or   hyperbole. This is because in a society where the traditional  society and modern polity  are always at each  others  neck, and at a weekend where in Ibadan 20  Obas  were being installed  and the Olubadan stayed away , one can  be excused at being  so fascinated  by the beautiful sight of the foremost  Yoruba Oba, the Oni leading  a huge show of communal   gratitude to an  illustrious  son of  the land  Chief  Iyiola Omisore  at his 90th  Birthday reception.

    However,   it was the birthday   symposium at  the prestigious  Yoruba Tennis Club in Onikan  Lagos  that  I got  the meat  or ammunition for  today’s  topic. The  title of the symposium was  ‘Sustainability    in  a built  –  environment, the Nigerian  perspective’,  and it was a very educative and intellectually rewarding event,   not  in terms of the usual academic rhetoric but in terms of practical  suggestions  to move the Nigerian society forward   on  infrastructure  and improved  quality of life  which is the kernel  of the concept  of  sustainability in the first instance. Obviously  the choice  of sustainability  in the built  environment  came from the fact that the celebrant is a structural  engineer  who  felt  that education matters in developing the Nigerian  environment  as demonstrated  by his own life.  He  had  grade  one for his school  certificate  and he won  a prize  of five guineas for being the best student  at his school  abroad  in   England and was given  the  prize by  the city’s Mayor  at a civic reception.

    The  Chairman  of the occasion was the law guru Alhaji  Femi  Okunnu, also  Chairman of the Board  of Trustees of the YTC, whose  current Chairman  Professor Tokunbo  Fabanwo ,was the host. The  discussants were Professor  Ibidapo  Obe, former Unilag  VC, Professor Peter Okebukola   former  Executive  Secretary NUC, and Ayodele  Aderinwale, Deputy Coordinator  of the Obasanjo Presidential  Library.  Setting the ball  rolling was Professor Fabanwo who asked  the non  professor  amongst  the discussants  Aderinwale to  seek  a professorship in a humorous but pedantic manner to a huge applause. I  will  proceed now  to  what  the discussants said in brief and comment  on these.

    Professor  Ibidapo  Obe spoke  on the theme – Rome  was  not built in a day –  and that really  captured the  essence of the topic  as he illustrated  with the way  the ancient  Romans built facilities that endured and were tailored to enable Rome  to attack it enemies  while providing security  for   its   citizens. He  also   analysed  the  topic  in terms of the hope of continuous improvement with regard  to set  tasks  till  the set goals and objectives  are achieved  and  stressed that education  matters in  all  human endeavors. Professor  Okebukola  insisted that all  that needs to be done to make education improve the lot of the Nigerian  society have  been made  available in different resolutions and papers on education such that he has refused to take on proposals for such projects again. He  cited surveys that showed  that the standard of education  has fallen   generally  in  Nigeria. He called  up his former school mate at Remo  Secondary  School, Otunba  Ladi  Solanke  who he said was the best student in Arts during their HSC and  noted  that if he had represented the NUC  as  the lawyer    as he did  during his time there  would be no  ASUU  strike  like  the on going one that has paralysed  the Nigerian university  system. The  third  discussant   Aderinwale  identified leadership as the bane of the quest  to achieve sustainability in the built environment  in the Nigerian  context. He  lamented  the poor state and dilapidation of our cities as well  as the shame  and insecurity  of  the  numerous slums and shanties  all over Nigeria.

    In  rounding up, the Chairman of the occasion and  former  Federal  Works  Minister  Alhaji  Okunnu  also identified  ethnicity  as a major  obstacle  to  the achievement  of sustainability in a built  environment. He  lamented the absence  of a Nigerian leader  and gave the historical example of former President Nnamdi  Azikiwe  an  Igbo, born in Zungeru  and who  was elected  as the First  Lagos  member for Lagos, a Yoruba city  as the prime example   of a non ethnic  and Nigerian leadership  that has since eluded  our political  system  now  convulsed  by tribalism  and ethnicity  making sustainability  in a built environment difficult. Really  as a former Federal  Works  Minister  and as a  foremost  lawyer Alhaji  Okunnu is well placed to know where the shoe  pinches on sustainability  and stated that  education under our constitution is  a state  matter  and has been usurped by the federal  government even with regard to his alma mater, his beloved Kings  College. I  know that if he had time Alhaji  Okunnu  would  have dwelt on land matters  and castigated the   take  over of some sea shore  land in Lagos  state by the federal  government   as well   as  the high  emoluments of our law makers,   and he would have linked both as  obstacles  to the attainment   of   sustainability in a built  environment and he would be right.

    With  regard  to the non  professor’s submissions on lack  of leadership  I found his presentation quite professorial  and educative. But  since  he hailed  professionally  from the Obasanjo  Leadership  Forum  and  is now  Deputy  Coordinator  at  the Obasanjo  Presidential  Library, he  should be  reminded of the saying that – we  have seen  the enemy  and the enemy  is us. Which means that on leadership, charity  should begin at  home at the heart of Abeokuta where the beautiful Obasanjo  Presidential  Library  is located. Again  on the issue of the absence  of a Nigerian leader,    as claimed  by Alhaji  Okunnu, I beg  to disagree as I think  former President Olusegun  Obasanjo  would fit that  bill  or vacancy easily. That  was  what   his  pal    former General    Theophilus    Danjuma  was saying when,   before the 1999  presidential campaign he vowed that if  Obasanjo  lost  the presidential   election,   he   –   Danjuma -would leave  Nigeria because  Obasanjo  was  so  Nigerian, his people  the Yorubas  hated him ,  which also  was cruelly  but debatably true. Once  again, happy  birthday to Pa  Omisore at 90  and long live the Federal  Republic  of Nigeria.

  • AGF and coalition of northern youths

    Abubakar Malami, the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), clearly had an unpleasant job last Tuesday to defend the federal government’s refusal to arrest leaders of the coalition of northern youths who gave the Igbo in the North a quit notice on June 6. The notice was thought to be unprecedented, hateful and a dangerous incitement to anarchy. In his response when he addressed a number of issues concerning his ministry’s operations, Mr. Malami averred that it was not expedient to arrest the youths despite their objectionable reaction to the agitations in the Southeast. According to him, “Government considered the security implications on the issue. Let me state that government is alive to its responsibility and whoever is found wanting will be prosecuted. This administration is determined to provide good governance and promote justice, peace and fairness.” By not arresting the youth leaders who issued the June Kaduna Declaration, Mr. Malami was suggesting that doing so had negative security implications, or that as a matter of fact the youths had not yet been found wanting. However, it was clear last Tuesday when the AGF addressed the press in Abuja that he was neither able to convince even himself nor his audience.

    A few days before then, on August 25, the AGF issued a press statement indicating that his office had approached the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking for the revocation of the April 25 bail granted the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader, Nnamdi Kanu. The statement clearly suggested that Mr. Kanu had violated the terms of his bail in the following ways: “That the offence for which he is standing trial does not entitle him to bail; that among other conditions for the bail of the 1st defendant is that he should not be seen in a crowd exceeding 10 people; that he should not grant any interviews, hold or attend any rallies; that he should file in court medical updates of his health status every month; that rather than observing all of the conditions listed above, the 1st defendant in flagrant disobedience to the court order flouted all conditions of the bail.” It is indisputable that Mr. Kanu violated his bail terms.

    But a day before the AGF applied to the courts for the revocation of Mr. Kanu’s bail, the same northern youths whom Mr. Malami egregiously defended against arrest imperiously issued seven pre-conditions for the rescindment of the June 6 quit notice. Among the seven conditions, all of which appeared to counter or dilute President Muhammadu Buhari’s affirmation of the right of every Nigerian to live in any part of Nigeria unmolested, was the one that predicated their magnanimous rescindment on the arrest and detention of Mr. Kanu for violating his bail terms and for his continuing incendiary remarks. Few people would fail to notice that the northern youths and Mr. Malami seemed in fact to be on the same page. Their actions followed the earlier statement by the Internal Affairs minister, Abdulrahman Dambazzau, that the courts might revoke Mr. Kanu’s bail to curb his excesses.

    Worse, President Buhari’s terse and threatening broadcast of August 21, which probably partly inspired the rescindment of the northern youths’ quit notice, also appeared to be in sync with the general feelings in the North that Mr. Kanu should be locked up after the revocation of his bail. The unanimity of opinion across many parts of the North, however, complicates the IPOB-northern quit notice brouhaha. Mr. Kanu doubtless violated his bail terms, having organised or attended rallies, continued to make inflammatory statements, and neglected to file his medical updates before the court that granted him bail. But whether re-arresting him will help resolve the dangerous and inflammable matter at hand is a different thing altogether, especially in view of Mr. Malami’s argument that security implications were considered in the federal government’s reluctance to arrest leaders of the northern youths.

    Unfortunately for the government, the argument has shifted away from the appropriateness or otherwise of Mr. Kanu’s defiance of his bail terms to the reluctance, if not criminal connivance, of the government to arrest or censure the northern youths. In the process, a lot of issues have become so complicated that the government is unable to draw a line between moral and political rectitude on the one hand and deliberate and provocative malfeasance on the other hand. The northern youths claimed their actions, hate speech and the unacknowledged hate song that went viral a few weeks ago were a product of the provocation and actions of Mr. Kanu’s IPOB. But neither the pro-Biafra provocation, which has met with vicious government response, including the president’s fierce anger, nor the northern youths’ reaction, which has so far met with deliberate and orchestrated pussyfooting, was lawful. Both should have attracted equal law enforcement and governmental sternness on the grounds that while the provocation was unlawful and malfeasant, the reaction also amounted to unlawful self-help. Instead, the federal government and the security agencies gave the impression that lawlessness had colour and mitigations.

    It is puzzling that Mr. Malami dared to suggest that the federal government’s refusal to arrest the northern youths followed a sensible and cautious consideration of the security implications. What is even worse is that the AGF did not feel any obligation to explain in detail what those security concerns were, nor to defend them as factors militating against the government’s stern action. But by going ahead to assert cynically that the government was alive to its responsibility, when that responsibility seemed to be targeted in one direction, Mr. Malami did not convince anyone, let alone himself, that the government had any such ‘life’, nor even dispassion, nor yet impartiality. With the exception of the Kaduna State governor, Nasir el-Rufai, who at first ordered the arrest of the northern youths but soon inexplicably kept his peace, and the police who also at first gave the impression that they sought out the youths to arrest them, little was heard from anyone else. Indeed, all that was heard were condemnations targeted at both IPOB and the northern youths. Even the Department of State Service (DSS), according to reports, invited the youths once, spoke with them and let them go.

    Why it is difficult for the federal government to recognise Mr. Kanu’s obstreperous and trenchant advocacy of the Biafra cause and the equally tendentious and acrimonious northern youths’ reaction as evidence of the dire condition of the country’s unity, is hard to say. These actions and reactions, much of it almost neatly divided along North-South lines, are a testament to the decay afflicting the polity and an indication that little or nothing is being done to salvage the problem. The country is fraying at the edges, and this fraying is compounded by incompetent and prejudiced public officials who lack the knowledge and dispassion to weld a country together out of its many seething and fractious parts.

    From the presidency to the relevant ministries, and on to the various law enforcement and security agencies, nothing expert or rational by way of public policies is being done to repair the country’s broken hedges. Contrary to what the presidency says about the country’s unity being settled or non-negotiable, the IPOB crisis and the northern youths’ quit notice, and various other forms of hate speech and hate songs on social media and traditional media, suggest quite clearly that fresh thinking is required to manage the dangerous decline to anarchy. Strong-arm tactics, as appealing as they may look, especially in the short run, do nothing but obfuscate the contentious issues tearing the country apart. The country is not only clearly not united, and nothing extraordinary and informed is being done about it, until the right mix of policies are designed and public officials from the North and South can eschew ethnic and religious prejudices, the situation may worsen considerably until it explodes.

    Mr. Malami had no rational and acceptable explanation for the inexcusable reason given by the government not to arrest the northern youths who issued the Igbo a quit notice in June. He compounds that oversight by applying to the courts for the revocation of Mr. Kanu’s bail. Had he and the government he serves been fair-minded enough to deal firmly and expeditiously with the purveyors of quit notice, the move against the IPOB leader would have been explicable and defensible. More, it would have shown everyone that the government understands the need to keep an open mind in dealing with cantankerous groups threatening the peace and unity of the country. And if by chance the government were to also correctly situate those threats where they belonged, and go further to appreciate the factors that undergird and propel those threats, Nigerians would have assumed that sooner or later a political formula and existential fulcrum would be found upon which the unity and stability of Nigeria could rest without being imperilled.

  • Oshiomhole’s home truths

    Oshiomhole’s home truths

    Those who insist like President   Muhammadu Buhari did in his address to   the nation on his return from his 103-day medical vacation in the United Kingdom that Nigeria’s unity is settled and nonnegotiable are as intolerant, given to hubris and misguided as those who contend that there is no alternative to their own variants of scores of suggested strands proffered for restructuring the country. Of course, one understands where Buhari is coming from. He not only witnessed but fought in the civil war.

    He witnessed the wastage of over two million lives in an ultimately senseless civil war. As elected President of the Federal Republic Nigeria in the 2015 general elections, this column has always insisted that Buhari was not given a mandate to dismember Nigeria. Rather, he swore to an oath to preserve the territorial integrity of Nigeria as the Head of Sate and Chief of its armed forces.

    It is sheer unrealistic idealism to argue that the Federal Government must go into negotiation with every group claiming the right to agitate for secession on behalf of their people. If that were the case, the government would have little or no time to govern in the interest of progress, prosperity and development. Of course, the threat of forcible separatism has become a veritable source of primitive accumulation of wealth for some brave and clever youths in this political dispensation. Many of those whose pastime was to destroy oil assets and extractive facilities in the Niger Delta at the height of that region’s militant insurgency against the Nigerian state’s perceived marginalization have today become quiet billionaires.

    This has been courtesy of the late President Umaru Yar’Adua’s Amnesty Programme and former President Goodluck Jonathan’s strategy of buying out the insurgents through the most scandalous and outlandish contract awards and cash handouts to the militants. Yet, the creation of a minuscule of exceedingly rich ex-militants by the Jonathan administration did very little to dent, even minimally, the deplorable depth of poverty in the Niger Delta not to talk of even beginning to repair and restore the long suffering region’s broken infrastructure and blighted environment. Given increased agitations from diverse quarters in recent times for the restructuring of the country, the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) must be commended for organizing a one-day colloquium with the theme “The Labour movement and the future of united Nigeria: What role for restructuring”.

    It is symptomatic of the erosion of our capacity for restrained discourse; our ability to legitimately disagree without being disagreeable that a former NLC President and two-term governor of Edo State, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, was reportedly heckled by some members of the audience and prevented from marshalling his points for about five minutes before order was restored. Oshiomhole’s crime was his insistence that most of those clamouring for restructuring were doing so because they found themselves on the losing side in the 2015 election. Oshomhole may perhaps have been guilty of some measure of indiscretion on the occasion. It would probably have been more politically correct for him to say what he perceived the audience would want to hear and cheer.

    But it is difficult to fault his submission that separatist agitations, some masquerading as advocacy for restructuring, intensified and assumed more dangerous dimensions, in strongholds of the hitherto ruling party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) that had lost out to the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the 2015 elections. The South-South and the South-East certainly had never had it better especially in terms of influential and juicy positions during the 16 years that the PDP was in power.

    Yet, in spite of the critical positions they held during the period, some of the quite brilliant minds of the South-South and South-East had negligible impact on the development of the regions. Who then is really marginalizing who? Ever since the assumption of office of the Buhari administration, we have daily been assailed by stunning revelations of the industrial scale theft of public property by public officers of the immediate past administration. Even where cases have crawled on sluggishly in courts across the land because of the inbuilt deficiencies of our justice administration system, we have learnt of hundreds of billions of Naira in cash and physical assets that have either been voluntarily returned to the coffers of government through the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) or forcibly forfeited by thieving public officers on orders of courts. As alluded to by Comrade Oshiomhole, the amounts of funds and property traced to a powerful female Minister of Petroleum in the Jonathan administration and much of it already confiscated on court orders is simply mind boggling.

    You can just imagine what the money allegedly stolen so brazenly could have done towards raising the bar of development in the Niger Delta. According to the comrade governor: “Look at yesterday’s pictures; Over the last few days, they have been mind boggling. If those ethnic champions, when they steal the money, they do not invest the money in their states. How did she get the money that built how many storey buildings in Banana Island? And just before I entered a lady was interrogating me about women. When they say whatever a man can do, women can do better. We have seen both the good and the bad. Never in our history have we had a minister, who has taken as much as a woman minister took from NNPC. So we must speak to character”.

    Those who are today the most vocal voices in the Separation or nothing orchestra were thunderously silent even as the nation was being mindlessly bled to death by Jonathan’s corrupt cabal. Even as Ministers Dr Ngozi Okonjo Iwealla and Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Anyim Pius Anyim, brazenly and blatantly picked their kinsmen to head virtually all agencies under them, the rest of the country could go to hell for all they cared. Most of those who, today stung by the displacement of the PDP-controlled Federal Government call for either secession or a restructuring that remains ill-defined, did not call for a boycott of the 2015 election.

    Many of them even participated in the election believing confidently that their party and candidate would win as usual no matter how desultory their governmental performance. In doing so, they have legitimated Buhari’s election and cannot cursorily truncate an elected government midway because of an outcome they are dissatisfied with. The PDP won massively in the South-South and South-East but were comprehensively outvoted in other parts of the country. For the minority to seek, directly or indirectly, to bring down a government or thwart its continued existence because it cannot live with the decision of the majority is the very essence of treason.

    That was probably what President Abraham Lincoln meant when in his first inaugural address, he vowed to resist the secession of states that wished to preserve the institution of slavery and emphasized the essence of majority rule. In his words, “Plainly the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy. A majority held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations, and always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people.  Whoever rejects it does of necessity fly to anarchy or despotism.

    Unanimity is impossible. The rule of a minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or despotism is all that is left”. None of this, of course, is to excuse the cavalier and utterly unserious manner with which the ruling APC has approached the whole issue of restructuring, which incidentally was a cardinal principle of its campaign. It is embarrassing that even a matter as simple as reviewing the revenue allocation formula every five years has, just like the PDP did for 16 years, has been left unaddressed for the over two years that the APC has been in power at the centre.

    The same thing applies to moving items better pursued by the states and local governments from the exclusive to the concurrent and residual lists thus relieving the Federal Government of the burden and enhancing the prospects of better service delivery to the people through the lower levels of government that are closer to the grassroots.  However, greater devolution of powers, responsibilities and resources to the lower levels of government thereby weakening the current suffocating stranglehold of the centre on the polity may be necessary but is certainly not a sufficient condition for accelerated national development.

    Devolution to achieve its desired objectives must also be accompanied by greater de-concentration of powers at the states and local government levels to allow for greater democracy, legislative autonomy, transparency, accountability and productivity at those critical levels of governance. The President’s speech writers must also strive to be nuanced, gracious and solicitous in their use of language so that they don’t portray their boss as an uncompromising garrison commander issuing orders to his troops and utterly lacking in compassion or an impatient boss talking down and gruffly brushing aside what may be misguided but genuine grievances of whole regions or ethnic groups.  It is not impossible for Nigerians to be held together by force but the cost, if too many parts of the country are pushed to the wall, may become unbearable and unsustainable.

    There are so many simple things that can be done to win back the confidence of disaffected sections of the country. For instance, nothing stops the President from reconsidering his key appointments to critical offices to allow for greater inclusivity. There is absolutely no reason why he cannot take as hard line a stance as he has taken against Biafra agitators, Niger Delta militants and Boko Haram insurgents, for instance, against marauding Fulani cattle herdsmen. Buhari’s integrity and austere worldview remain his greatest assets and he no doubt still enjoys significant goodwill. The responsibility that such goodwill is not needlessly squandered rests entirely on his shoulders.