Category: Sunday

  • Camelot, fifty years on

    Camelot, fifty years on

    (On the myths of nations)

    Some moments past mid-day (Central Time) on November 22, virtually the whole of the United States stood still for one minute. It was in honour and commemoration of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the thirty fifth American president, who was slain exactly 50 years earlier. In downtown Dallas where the great reckoning around a small plaza took place, the mayor waxed lyrical describing it as the moment when hope collided with hatred. Fifty years later, the myth of Camelot survives in the heart and imagination of most Americans. And so does the Kennedy mystique.

    Camelot was not original, to be sure. It belongs to the legend of King Arthur and the fabled knights of the round table. But it was the magical motif that John Kennedy chose for the moment. It was meant to invest his administration with the aura of nobility of purpose. Yet there are those who insist that it was not a profoundly imaginative or a particularly brilliant choice of myths. King Arthur, they point out, was a political failure and a cuckolded husband who lost both his kingdom and his queen.

    However that may be and whatever the fatal foibles of their king, it is the glorious legacy of the knights in shining armour and of their gallantry and chivalry that has been handed down from generation to generation. When and where it mattered most, Jack Kennedy always had his heart and political instincts in the right place.

    It will be foolish and futile to continue to debate whether nations need myths or not. All human societies and nations in particular thrive on imaginary delusions. This is the only way to nudge humanity towards a higher telos. When it is not a particular myth of creation, it is a potent legend of re-creation. Certain existential dilemmas and intolerable contradictions such as death and the finitude of existence are resolved at the level of the imaginary.

    So it is that in some traditional societies, death and dying which ought to be the ultimate nemesis of the ruling class in its firm, final and irrefutable logic, is magically transformed into a natural ally of the dominant caucus. The king does not die, he merely ascends to the ceiling. Thus the natural pecking order subsists in life hereafter. There is no point in killing the king. You are merely consigning him to the inconvenience of early dinner somewhere else, and in the same royal splendour.

    But some nations and societies are better and more collectively talented at self re-creation and ceaseless self-invention. The myth of Camelot was particularly good for America and the Kennedy clan at that point in time. America had been founded amidst such impassioned rhetoric and grandiloquent grandstanding as a new haven of freedom and equality for humanity. But the actual reality was less than flattering. Slavery, pogrom and genocide of the local populace were the order of the day. When Abraham Lincoln proclaimed democracy as the government of the people by the people and for the people, universal adult suffragette was a myth and the true political emancipation of the Black people was still centuries and momentous protests away.

    Fifty three years after, the election that brought Jack Kennedy to the American presidency looks like a done deal. But it was in reality a hard slog and obstacle course indeed, owing as much to Kennedy’s personal charm and magnetism and equally to the potency of the ruthless political machine the older Kennedy had put in place.

    The very idea of a Catholic president was considered an affront and an aspiration of incredible temerity to the delicate political palate and sensibility of the real American power brokers. A generation earlier, the Irish populace was regarded with the hostile political curiosity reserved for scumbags. The Boston Brahmins viewed the Irish as belonging to an inferior caste and Joseph Kennedy in particular as a dangerous bounder. It was not until old Joe stole the thunder from them by marrying into the local nobility and bootlegging his way to stupendous riches that they began to reckon with him.

    The election of Kennedy was a watershed in American history, just like the triumph of Barack Obama several decades later. The baby boomers had come of electoral age, altering the demographic and electoral complexion of America forever in favour of youth and idealism. Before then, America was run like a corporate guild presided over by old, doddering authoritarian no-nonsense figures whose feet were firmly planted on earth and who had no time for fancy stuff. They were old American conservative patriots who viewed untested youth as a stuff that must be endured and only barely tolerated.

    Kennedy’s predecessor in office, Dwight Eisenhower, a veteran of two World Wars and indisputable hero of the second, was so vexed by his film star glamour and highfalutin rhetoric that he dismissed the youthful senator from Massachusetts as a whippersnapper. A whippersnapper is a young fellow whose pretensions to knowledge and political nous can be quite irritating to older folks.

    But not to worry. The young man from Hyannis Port seized the American imagination with his stirring and sterling rhetoric. He was not going to be stopped in his track by some fuzzy-woozy old men who were past their political sell-by date. Particularly resonant with the American people was his admonition that one should ask what one can do for his country and not what the country can do for one. It was a motif from the Arthurian legend. The American torch had indeed passed to a new generation.

    After the somnolent and somnambulist years of Harry Truman, the former haberdasher from Missouri, and Eisenhower during which the USSR managed to send the first man into space, America was stirring anew. Here was the new knight in shining armour and a new American prince to boot. The superman had finally arrived at the supermarket. There was an infectious optimism in the air. For good or bad, America would never be the same again.

    And John Kennedy looked every inch the part. He was rich, young, handsome and delectably telegenic. He was courtly, courteous and charismatic in the extreme. He went to Harvard, had written books and was a war hero to boot. He had the aura of a film star. There was something about him which made women swoon. Half of them wanted to be his mother and the other half his wife.

    Meanwhile, his real wife, the former Jacqueline Bouvier, of French extraction, brought a French élan and chic sophistication to the White House. This was life imitating a great movie. The normally sedate residence of American presidents bristled like a great Parisian café with aficionados of the arts and the illuminati of the haute couture. It was too good to be true. Something was bound to give. This kind of charismatic authority is always brittle and unstable, and so disruptive of normal life.

    Predictably, the enthralling movie ended in a real nightmare in downtown Dallas 50 years ago with Kennedy’s brains and blood sprayed and splashed into his wife’s dress. It was said that earlier on while the Kennedys were on a state visit to France, Charles de Gaulle had taken a wistful look at the wife and then noted to associates that he could see her in another 12 years on the yatch of a rich Greek shipping tycoon. Whether this was due to exemplary political clairvoyance or to the fact that the great French wizard was privy to some classified intelligence which showed Aristotle Onassis, the fabled Greek Casanova, already making hay behind JFK’s back will never be known.

    Like everything Kennedy, it was very difficult to separate myth from reality and fact from fiction and fantasy. Kennedy himself was very much a creation of myth and ruthless modern marketing. When the fact got in the way of the legend, it was the fact that gave way. Contrary to the myth of superhero, Kennedy had been sick and sickly for a long time and relied heavily on massive doses of pain killers to get by.

    Jack was also a serial philanderer who turned the White House to a sexual Bedlam. Even his war record was largely pumped up fiction. His older brother, the late Joe, was the real thing. Joe had volunteered for a dangerous aerial mission and was never to be seen again. As for being a book writing intellectual, a close scholarly associate noted wryly that the late American president only managed to finish one serious book he knew about.

    But this grand occlusion of reality and illusionist fantasia worked magic with the American people and the world at large. The bouffant Kennedy hair-do became a global brand. JFK seized the American and global imagination in a way that no leader had done before. Whenever and wherever he visited, the crowd went into a frenzied adulation. It was charisma in the original sense of the ancient Greek word.

    Yet where and when political sorcery ends, reality sets in. Somebody had to pick the tab of magic. It was the American people—and the world at large. Kennedy’s inflammable rhetoric of American exceptionalism and the gung-ho mindset of the “best and brightest” team he had assembled set America irrevocably on a war path which was to end in tears and tragedy. You cannot procure laughter with the coins of pains.

    The Cuban missile crisis and the Bay of Pigs fiasco are just two sides of a bad coin. America was trapped in its imaginary delusions. The lesson had to be taught that America was not founded as a martial nation. The doughty and hardy Vietnamese who had earlier given the French a bloody nose were lurking in the wings to give the Americans their own comeuppance. A dark chapter had unfolded in American history. It is also to be noted that even the great Civil Rights reforms initiated by Kennedy were eventually consummated by his successor, the earthy, joyously profane and gleefully oafish Lyndon B Johnson.

    Fifty years ago, the magic ended in downtown Dallas. But John Kennedy lives on in the imagination of many who saw him as a symbol of hope and national capacity for self renewal. A nation perishes without visionaries. It has been argued that Kennedy was neither a great president nor a particularly good one. Death spared him a horrible fate. But when allowances have been made for human lapses and frailties, it is the magic that endures and not the grim mathematics of political failure. Therein lies the secret of the enduring myth and the continuing global fascination with an authentic American icon.

  • ASUU, Wike and shifting ultimatum

    Convinced that the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) was being needlessly intransigent and combative in its strike, President Goodluck Jonathan and the supervising minister in the Ministry of Education, Nyesom Wike, have become even more openly bellicose. Would to God they had been bellicose against Stella Oduah’s malfeasances. The latest stalemate began when the leaders of ASUU sought written assurances that the federal government would keep its own side of the bargain. First to meet the university teachers with discourteous outburst was Mr Wike himself, Dr Jonathan’s redoubtable man Friday. There would be no written assurances whatsoever, he shut back in anger, nor any assurances for that matter. The president’s word was good enough, he claimed. Thereupon he launched into the most obscene and fawning rhapsodies of Dr Jonathan’s attributes and the incontestability of presidential powers.

    Dr Jonathan himself, inflamed by his aides’ rhapsodies and sweeping and uncouth denigration of his opponents, summarily and unprecedentedly declared that ASUU had become subversive and a tool in the hands of the opposition. If the presidential hysteria was not embarrassing enough, Mr Wike, still breathing imprecate against the government’s phantom enemies, reviewed the December 4 ultimatum he gave the striking teachers to resume or be sacked. They should now resume work on December 9 or get the boot, he thundered as one completely ignorant of the way universities are run.

    It is sad that a matter about to be resolved has become complicated by the insensitivity of the Jonathan presidency. Could university teachers, as enlightened and diverse as they are, offer themselves to be used by a political party? Is the decay in universities not apparent enough? And had teachers not gone on strike over the years, who could guess how much worse the rot would have been? Clearly the country is in need of being saved from the hands of Dr Jonathan and his fawning aides. If Dr Jonathan is still capable of listening, would former presidents please gently remonstrate with him to stop embarrassing the country he has misled for the past five years or so?

  • Now, the lion sleeps tonight……

    And whilst we are still on the subject of great men and exceptional nations, it is meet to report that arguably the greatest human soul of the last hundred years and one of the noblest human beings of all time passed on late on Thursday. Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, a.k.a Madiba, has joined his great ancestors. It was the most publicly enacted passing of a world-historic personage since recorded history began.

    From all corners of the human globe, the outpouring of grief has been unprecedented. The world woke up a much poorer place on Friday, but humanity has been greatly enriched by the glorious and profoundly symbolic example of one exceptional individual. Mandela was the warrior who chose not to fight; and the conqueror that chose not to exact vengeance and retribution. When shall we see the like of this man again?

    There was always something regal about Nelson Mandela. Even in dire captivity, he looked and acted like a king in waiting. Born into minor royalty, Mandela ruled South Africa like a major royalty. A lion does not need to proclaim its leonine nature. Even in languid repose, mere looking at the lion is enough disincentive. The truly powerful do not need to throw their power around. This is the preserve of brutes and thugs who force their way into reckoning.

    While we are still celebrating the passage of Mandela to immortality, Snooper has one request to make of the South African authorities. They should make Mariam Makeba’s great song, the lion sleeps tonight… the theme and motif of Mandela’s funeral. Oh, the great African lion sleeps tonight…..God bless you, and goodnight Nelson.

  • Excerpts from An Afternoon with the crocodile

    You are a foolish man. The second name of history is horror. Everybody has been enslaving everyone else since the dawn of history. The Romans did it, there was no problem. Then the British, and then the Americans and even the Zulus here. It was when it was our turn that the idiots started talking about human rights. How I hate the Yankees and the perfidious Albions !”, the old man lamented.

    “You should still have gone to the Truth and Reconciliation Tribunal”, Snooper noted.

    “I am not a bloody hypocrite. The truth is there was nothing to reconcile. And to tell you the real truth I can’t bear the smell of those hotties,” the crocodile snarled.

    “You should have been guided by the noble example of Mandela who suffered so grievously but was willing to forget and forgive” Snooper observed.

    “I am not Nelson Mandela. Mandela was trained to be a king. I was brought up to do a job. Actually, I like Nelson a lot. The Blackman has a great capacity to forgive. My theory of history is this. Let the ruthless Whiteman build the infrastructure and let the Blackman come and rule with his compassion, his justice and sense of fairness. That is the miracle you are witnessing”, the old man noted as his harsh features softened.

    “Mr Botha, how can the rest of Africa catch up with South Africa?”, Snooper inquired.

    “You are a bloody moegoe ( Afrikaans for idiot). I have just told you. Try Bot”, the crocodile answered with a fiendish giggle.

    “Bot? Mr Botha? Oh no, not you again!!” Snooper screamed.

    “Idiot, I mean B.O.T, which is build, operate and transfer after 500 years!!”

  • Corruption: One more reason Jonathan must not be re-elected

    Corruption: One more reason Jonathan must not be re-elected

    Mr. President has gone on a self-congratulatory tour, regarding how negligible corruption is in Nigeria

    I am completely disillusioned being the citizen of a country permanently in the league of failed countries like Afghanistan, Syria and Somalia, whenever the topic of discussion is corruption. It pains to the marrows to wake up each morning remembering you are a member of a country where the entire leadership of the ruling party celebrates each time an election has been successfully rigged as in the shambolic Anambra elections. These facts must have accounted for a presidential ultra loyalist like Asari Dokubo to , this past week, flagellate the president, claiming that he surrounds himself with incompetent and corrupt persons. Speaking further he was quoted as saying: ‘“We mainly speak out on issues that are very critical to the survival of the people of the South-South and the South-East. Jonathan is surrounded by very greedy people who are only in the Presidency to enrich themselves ’.And quoting voraciously from Ijaw proverbs, Dokubo could not hold back from pointedly saying: ‘“Everyday people die on the East-West Road. If Orubebe is incompetent as he has shown himself to be, he should be removed. Nobody voted for Orubebe’. Orubebe, the Niger-Delta minister is a man only a mere breath away from the President Jonathan.

    Dokubo most probably spoke without an inkling of Transparency International’s latest report on Nigeria which is ranked 124th most corrupt country among the less than 170 studied. In my article: ‘Mr President When Is Corruption In Nigeria Enough?’ which appeared on this page on 26, May 2013, I wrote as follows: ‘You will not but pity Nigeria, and ordinary Nigerians when you read that the country ranks with the likes of Nepal, Azerbaijan, and Pakistan on the global corruption perception index. That was as at the Transparency International’s last report in December, 2012 which could actually be far worse now when you factor in the humongous oil subsidy and pension rackets. For moving up a measly 4 places on the T.I’s list, scoring 27 out of a possible 100, presidency officials are out on a binge gloating; attributing that miracle to President Jonathan’s muscular anti- corruption efforts even when the world knows much better. The entire world now daily reads us like a book. In spite of the fact that there is no more hiding place, Mr President has gone on a self-congratulatory tour, regarding how negligible corruption is in Nigeria. He has even told the U.S to mind her many problems and stop getting unnecessarily exuberant about corruption in Nigeria.

    If Mr President cannot be persuaded to see Alamiesiagha, a fellow Ijaw’s state pardon, as a corruption of the process, then let us quickly remind him of other acts of putrefaction which have no other name besides corruption. Indeed, it needs be mentioned that Alamiesiagha’s pardon was so badly received by the outside world that the U.S could not hold back from issuing a statement to the following effect: ‘The US views this development as a setback for the fight against corruption, and also for our ability to play the strong role we’ve played in supporting rule of law and legal institution-building in Nigeria, which is very important for the future of the country’. Earlier in this presidential blitzkrieg he had said that “corruption is not the cause of our problems, claiming that Nigeria has more institutions that fight corruption. ‘Most of the issues we talk about, said the President, are not corruption. If we do things properly, if we change our attitude of doing things, most of the things we think are caused by corruption are not’. This is precisely what Nigerians are saying, Mr President. Change your compromising attitude to corruption, banish impunity, follow the due process and allow the anti-corruption agencies, the police and the courts do their work without interference’.

    Now, a mere seven months on, things are far worse as eloquently attested to by the Transparency International’s latest report.

    For elucidation, I shall skip the putrefying allegations against Stella Oduah, his Minister of Aviation, who is already back in business, inspecting airports and promising a billion jobs. I will choose, instead, to quote, mutatis mutandis, from Mohammed Haruna’s, article in The Nation of Wednesday, December 4, 2013. Deprecating the arrest of two sons of Governor Lamido of Jigawa by the EFCC for money laundering but which the author attributes more to political witch hunt, he cited the following examples of how President Jonathan protects, and encourages corruption in Nigeria.

    Wrote Haruna: ‘Easily the most glaring of such cases is that of Malabu Oil and Gas, reportedly controlled by a Chief Dan Etete, a former Oil minister under General Abacha who was previously convicted in France. According to newspapers like The Economist (June 15) of London, two years ago, a consortium of Shell and Eni/Elf which had controversial stakes in the oil well, OPL 245, paid nearly $1.1 billion to Malabu, reportedly on orders of the president, as settlement of the ownership dispute of the lucrative oil well. According to Premium Times (September 30), an investigative online newspaper, the former minister, in turn shared the money paid to his company into several dubious accounts, some of them owned by close political associates of the president’s.

    Clearly this payment (of N184 Billion, under the direction of a government which cannot adequately fund tertiary education), and which the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, Mohammed Bello Adoke, tried to rationalise away during a public hearing of a House committee investigating the deal, as voluntary with government acting only as a “facilitator”, reeked to high heavens of the worst form of cronyism’, another name for corruption.

    ‘Second, he continued, was an earlier case of the president versus Spynet Magazine which in its maiden edition in August 2007, accused him of perjury in declaring his assets and liabilities during his tenure as deputy governor and governor of Bayelsa, and eventually as vice-president under Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, as demanded by the Constitution. Days after the publication its premises were ransacked by the State Security Services and its editors detained. To date nothing more has been heard of the case. Not even after the president angrily told Nigerians he doesn’t “give a damn” about whatever Nigerians thought of his refusal to publicly declare his assets as President’.

    Finally, concluded Haruna, ‘ is the paradox of a worsening insecurity in the land, especially from Boko Haram insurgency, despite the huge budgetary allocations to our security forces since 2009. One glaring illustration of this, wrote Haruna, is the fact that the Army Chief, Lt-General Azubuike Ihejirika, has lately been complaining of an under armed and under equipped military confronting a rag tag Boko Haram’.

    Nigerians are now fully satiated with stories of oil subsidy, pension, budget crude price benchmark bribes, and the lot, that they no longer mean a thing except that the Jonathan government continues to negatively serve the country as EFCC no longer diligently follow up on these crimes and where it does, at all, it comes up with nothing more than a slap on the wrist. In any decent country, increasing corruption should naturally send the government packing. Come the next elections Nigerians must do likewise.

    LAST WORD

    The above article was written long before I got to read about the following senseless and totally irrational statements allegedly made by two men who were integral to the ruination of Nigeria: Alhaji Lawal Kaita, quoted as saying:”a northerner must emerge President in 2015 or we will divide” and, the ever repulsive Dr Junaid Mohammed who was reported as saying: “there will be bloodshed if Jonathan runs in 2015”.

    Who exactly do these people think they are; Nigerian overlords? Rotational presidency may be equitable. But this level of arrogance?

  • Unitary police system: beyond first-line charge

    Unitary police system: beyond first-line charge

    Putting the Nigeria Police Force on a first-line charge may in fact lead to creation of another fiefdom for those in charge

    Nigeria is one country where money or guaranteed access to funds is believed to be the be all and end all of all problems. Since the oil boom in the country, rulers of the country have been throwing money at problems without necessarily obtaining value for the money expended. We threw money at states and local governments from the federation account fuelled by petro-dollars, yet most states and local governments have to lose their citizens to Lagos, even thirty years after they were created. The belief that money can solve all problems in Nigeria is being propagated at the national assembly, which is currently about to amend the constitution to allow a first-line charge for security agencies including the Nigeria Police Force. The failure to secure the state, particularly by the Nigeria Police is caused, not as much by the source and timing of its funding as it is by the over centralisation of policing in what ideally and realistically should be a federal system.

    The National Security Adviser’s assertion that the nation’s security challenges would be better met if security personnel are enabled to do their job more effectively is, without doubtful, insightful. What can enable security personnel to do their job more effectively is much more than whether the funding of security agencies is from first-line charge or not. For example, that the president’s fleet was almost grounded in France three months ago until three million euros was paid to the French authorities says more about a national culture that condones inefficiency than the type of budget allocation. After all, the presidency is more or less on first-line charge. How come nobody in the presidency was able to anticipate the embarrassing problem that came up in France? What is significant is to get a constitution that is de-militarised and that recognises the need to move the architecture of the nation’s security away from the legacy left behind by decades of military autocracy. There is no security agency that manifests the problem of bad structure that leads to bad performance more than the Nigeria Police Force.

    It should not be surprising that efforts to police Nigeria, a federal country as if it is a unitary system has for decades led to under-securing the nation. Putting the Nigeria Police Force on a first-line charge may in fact lead to creation of another fiefdom for those in charge. It is the concentration of law enforcement powers in the hands of those who control the central government that has created all sorts of aberration being experienced on the nation’s security landscape. Legislators and governors in states who are empowered by the 1999 Constitution to make and sign laws are, ironically, prevented by the same constitution from enforcing such laws. In effect, such legislators and governors are also prevented from protecting themselves; they are left to the whims of managers of executive power at the centre.

    Leaving the protection of governors and their citizens in the hands of forces that are answerable only to the central government in a federal state-nation makes it possible for police officers to withdraw security aides of governors and state legislators as and when such officers are instructed to do so or feel duty-bound to do so. Any surprise that seven governors meeting in Abuja, the capital for all citizens of the country, found out that governors duly elected by their citizens could be stopped from meeting, all in the name of national security and unity? Any system that separates the respect for its part from the respect for its whole cannot but have problems performing effectively. Citizens of states whose governors and legislators are dispersed or prevented from meeting as and when they choose cannot but feel alienated from security agencies whose loyalty is only to the central executive in a federal system.

    There is no country in the world that is secured solely by its security personnel. All properly secured countries are secured jointly by security personnel and loyal or patriotic citizens. But loyalty or patriotism in a federal system derives from respect from the centre representing the whole for all the parts that constitute the whole. In any federal system that derives its legitimacy from shared sovereignty, governance at all levels, including security is also shared. Where this does not exist, as it has been in Nigeria since 1966, citizens are encouraged to feel alienated and isolated, and unprotected.

    More than the speed with which funds reach security agencies, it is the architecture of security in a federal system that needs to be re-examined by members of the national assembly. The current system of securing the country, particularly its law enforcement system is too distant from citizens for effective security. For example, central police officers are culturally distant from the citizens they protect. Although the official language of the Nigeria Police Force is English,the de facto language of the Nigeria Police Force is pidgin, a language that is not spoken by majority of the country’s citizens. This is at a time that most federal countries provide special sensitivity training for law enforcement officers to respond in a culturally correct manner to citizens. Even in communities with sizable immigrant communities, such as the United States or Canada, police officers are selected from pools of citizens who are familiar with the language in which such communities carry their cultures. This is despite the fact that the United States is largely a territorial, rather than an ethnic, federal system. Respect for cultural peculiarities exist in other territorial federal systems, such as the United Arab Emirates.

    In ethnic federal systems, such as Switzerland, Belgium, and South Africa, security officers are mandated to demonstrate adequate cultural understanding of the citizens and communities they are hired to protect. Decentralising the security system, especially the police system deserves more immediate attention than looking for first-line charge source of funding. Once the structure is deficient, no amount of funds can provide proper and effective security. Even now when some governors have to provide additional funding for the central police, such governors cannot be sure that their security is guaranteed by the police they partly fund on behalf of the all-powerful centre. In a federal system, a benevolent structure is always better than a benevolent leader that may or not appear for decades, depending on the value systems under which citizens who later aspire to be leaders are raised.

  • The widow’s millions!

    How on earth can one justify a two million naira apology? 

    It used to be called the widow’s mite; now, we can talk of the widow’s millions! Yes, dear reader, mother luck actually smiled and placed a rose into the sooty hands of a poor widow in Edo State, Nigeria, in a way that one can describe as ‘Only in Nigeria!’ For being insouciant towards the law, I say, this poor widow went home with a handsome sum of two million naira, a job, and the memory of tea with the governor! Tell me, what do you call this kind of luck? Rascally, that’s what!

    Now, let’s get this story straight because I am so indignant my thoughts are liable, nay threatening, to run ahead of me right into next year. As I understand it, the governor of Edo State, Mr. Adams Oshiomole, had been trying his very best to transform the entire state, particularly the horrible roads, into something closely resembling paradise here on earth. And I said, ‘Good man; bless you for trying’. Indeed, I not too long ago passed through Benin and was astounded by the many canyons on the roads that threatened to swallow my vehicle. As I heard it, many people before him did not deign to lift a finger in the direction of the roads. Oh, they lifted their fingers all right, but I will not say where for fear of offending the dainty ears of my readers. Anyway, from reports reaching us in this corner of the country, the man Oshiomole was doing quite well until a certain widow, Mrs. Joy Ifije, entered into the picture.

    Any interaction with members of a disadvantaged group is always fraught with danger, a little like walking on eggshells and even more like holding dynamites in one hand while holding a lit cigar in the other. You are bound to come away with egg on your face. That’s right, the word is angry sensitivity; for such people are forever trying to foist their failures on others. For example, have you ever held a conversation with a working woman on why she appears to have suddenly gained weight? If you are not wary, dear sir, you will be treated to a treatise on how members of her fair sex have been hewers of wood and beasts of sooooo much burden for centuries until your ears ache. Talk indeed, of the unfair sex. Now, how was Governor Oshiomole to know all this when the poor man did not study group behaviour or even English?

          Anyway, to cut a long story short, the poor man fell right into the hands (no, not arms, silly) of this widow, Mrs. Ifije, who had displayed her wares right on the kerb of the main road in defiance of the law and in anger at her fate. Two things strike one here. The first is that this behaviour is so typical of Nigerians that I still wonder that we have any roads to walk in this country. Actually, I have come to the conclusion that there is no group in this country with a greater disregard for the law than the low-income group made up of petty traders, artisans, etc. Collectively, they all appear to have adopted the philosophy that where poverty prompts an action, the law must yield its arms. So, the hapless driver or pedestrian must battle to put feet gingerly between wares that have taken over roads. Once, a vulcanizer graciously permitted me to park my car in front of his shed ‘for a few minutes only’. I looked up and down, just to assure myself that I was really parking my car along the town’s only main road provided by the government. Satisfied, I apologised and told him that I did not know he owned the road. Obviously, there is the law, and there is… Now, where is Sunny Okosuns to tell us who exactly owns the road?

          The second thing is the ambivalent attitude of the law itself towards the low-income group. Nigeria is considered one of the most lawless countries in the world because the people as a group seem to have adopted this attitude of indifference towards rules and regulations. For the most part, the law condemns the attitude but does nothing to punish the offenders. This is why there is no fear in the land. So, traders take over streets and policemen walk by or walk home with freebees. No one talks. No one, that is, until Gov. Fashola in Lagos who managed to keep his mouth shut while talking, and now Gov. Oshiomole, who could not keep his mouth shut for very indignation. Up to that point, I had been with him.

    Gov. Oshiomole lost me, however, not because he could not keep his mouth shut (no, I certainly do not support the ‘Go and die’ tirade) but because his apologies were too effusive. I do not understand how on earth one can justify a TWO MILLION NAIRA APOLOGY without having gone through a law court. Actually, I have several objections to that very expensive apology. First, where does that gift of two million Naira come from? I am sure the good people of Edo State are very well disposed towards their governor. I would be too if I lived there. I am also sure that the governor is a genuine leader at heart. However, I do not think that gives him the licence to apologise to people with the state’s funds. It is not an argument to say that all the money belongs to the people after all; that is only an apologia that implicates helplessness. It is the people’s money but it is for building the state not for funding apologies.

    My other objection concerns Gov. Oshiomole’s logic. After giving the widow a monetary offer, he went further by giving her employment to go and ‘fight’ (other widows?) against trading on the streets. I wasn’t sure what to make of that. Here was a woman who had nothing in the world save her children, and suddenly, because of what someone has tagged the ‘Go and Die Encounter’, she found herself a millionaire and you are now asking her to go out and fight what made her rich. I would not. I mean, how can anyone expect me to attack even in the mildest form that very thing designed to take me out of poverty? That is one madness to which people will not listen.

    That’s another thing: who exactly is expected to listen to her – other widows hoping for their own ‘Go and Die’ encounter? If I were any one of such widows, I would not take kindly to an encounter with Mrs Ifije. I would look her up and down in a typical fish-woman fashion, beg her to please leave me alone and not stand in the way of my own ‘Go and Die’ encounter. Who knows the next person to pass by, insult me in indignation and turn round to apologise handsomely? I would therefore turn my back on Mrs. Ifije.

    Then, how is the poor widow to now begin to cope with the hordes of relatives who will now besiege her hitherto poor home in a renewal of avowed long-stemmed relationship? It’s the kind that starts with ‘don’t you remember, I am your long lost, great-great-great-grand-father’s long lost cousin seven times removed.’ Now, how can anyone forget something as simple as that?

    However, it is possible to get it right. In the course of providing governance, toes will be stepped on, but care should be taken that wrong signals are not sent out. Governors can sympathise, empathise, have fellow-feelings with and towards us the citizens, but let a reprimand be a reprimand. Otherwise, we just may find that gestures such as Gov. Oshiomole’s can easily be counter-productive. For instance, what lesson is Mrs. Ifije to learn but that crime pays in millions?

  • Writing, as if life itself depended on it (2)

    Writing, as if life itself depended on it (2)

    [For Festus Iyayi: radical humanist; writer; neorealist artificer]

    What is the decisive shift that occurred in Iyayi’s writings in the 1990s? Can one even talk of a “shift” in a corpus that is comparatively “slim”, comprising, as it does, only four published works of fiction? My response to these two questions is, of course, affirmative: yes, there is a very discernible shift in Iyayi’s writings; and yes, one can validly talk of shifts even within two, not to say four, works of an author – as long as such shifts are so apparent, so decisive as not to even remotely seem to be the factitious projection of the critic’s own fantasies or delusions.

    The most apparent, the most undeniable shift in Iyayi’s writings is the one between, on the one hand, the first three published works of the late 70s and 80s, Violence (1979), The Contract (1982) and Heroes (1986) and, on the other hand, Awaiting Court Martial (1996). The most discernible change is formal or generic: the first three titles are works of full-blown novelistic fiction while Awaiting Court Martial is a collection of fifteen short stories only one of which, “Jegede’s Madness”, has the length and the narrative scope to qualify as a novella. It is of course possible that the ten years between the publication of Heroes and Awaiting Court Martial might not really amount to a genuine temporal hiatus since some of the stories collected in the latter could very well have been written either before the publication of the former or contemporaneously with it. But there are clear indications that with the move from the novel to the short story something very decisive, very fundamental has taken place in Iyayi’s writings. Indeed, it is on account of this very fact that I gave this essay its title: writing, as if life itself depended on it. For this title is far more appropriate, far more germane to the kind of writing that we confront in Awaiting Court Martial than what we see of literary art in the preceding three works of fiction, even though there are intimations of this kind of writing here and there in the previous works.

    This observation has a rather intriguing aspect that we ought to highlight here: if Iyayi is unquestionably so much at his very best as a writer in the collection of short stories, what is even more enigmatic is the fact that in Awaiting Court Martial we encounter a form of radical writing that is not easy to categorize, a mode of storytelling that inscribes literary radicalism far more complexly than anything we find in the three novels. Let me expatiate on this crucial claim by starting, first, with some incontrovertible differences in themes, style and narrative technique between these two phases of Iyayi’s writings before moving to more substantive points of theoretical and ideological import that I shall subsume under the rubrics of social realism and neorealism.

    The plots, the characters and the themes of the first three novels characteristically revolve around the struggles of protagonists against an oppressive, neocolonial social order that is unspeakable in its barbarity, ferocity and mediocrity. In Violence, this takes the form of an unrelenting struggle of Idemudia, the protagonist, to get a better sense of the corrosive effects of this barbaric social order on both his dire social circumstances and on his inner life, especially as this is excruciatingly played out in tortured and uneasy relations with his wife, Adisa, and with his co-workers. In The Contract, this oppressive social order seems infinitely more entrenched, more impregnable, so much so that the protagonist, Ogie Obala, decides that the best thing to do is to find out how best to compromise with it on his own terms so as not to be eaten up and destroyed by it. And in Heroes, with graphic, terrifying accounts of atrocities on both sides of the Nigerian civil war as its searing backdrop, the protagonist, Osime Iyere, is in a world even more horrific in its dehumanizing and brutalizing acts and effects than what we had encountered in the two previous novels. For this reason, Osime Iyere finds that he must do something that neither of the protagonists of the two previous novels have had to do and that is completely and existentially unlearn virtually everything he had always thought and taken for granted – about his country, his neighbors, the combatant forces in the civil war and their conflicting claims and, above all else, himself.

    In all three novels, Iyayi writes so powerfully and so truthfully about the Nigerian neocolonial version of what Hannah Arendt has famously called the banality of evil that it is no exaggeration to state that the sheer vigor and eloquence of the testamentary quality of his writing in these three novels is almost without equal in postcolonial Nigerian literature. In all, I have read these three novels several times and each single act of reading finds me in the profoundly disquieting stance of being compelled to actually like the novelistic depiction of an order of existence in our country about which there are almost no redeeming things to write about. In such moments when I have been either reading or rereading Violence, The Contract and Heroes, I have had to remind myself that I also liked Dante’s literary depiction of purgatory in Inferno; the difference of course is that the “inferno” so memorably rendered in Iyayi’s three novels is one that we are living in, the one that continues to haunt us at the present moment when this essay is being written.

    The strength, the quality of the writing in these three novels thus rests a lot on evocations of place, context and environment that are external to the inner lives, the inner struggles of the protagonists. But not exclusively so, for at the same time that he invests so much narrative space and skill to the depiction of external forces impacting on his protagonists, Iyayi manages to get deep under the emotional and psychic skin of these characters. In graphic terms, the characters literally and figuratively have their backs against the wall of material and psychological survival, whether in the jungle of the commoditized public sphere of endlessly crooked business deals or the emotional wildernesses of marital or erotic private spaces in which spouses and lovers find that the “enemy” is as much within as it is outside in corrupt public officials and their repressive political misrule. Indeed, with the possible exception of Soyinka, no radical Nigerian writer has explored so powerfully this interior psychic and moral space of the “enemy within” in his protagonists.

    I must of course not fail to note here that occasionally this exploration by Iyayi of psychic and moral self-division within his characters is handled rather awkwardly in a formulaic manner in which “voices” representing either “good” or “evil”, rectitude or cynicism battle for the soul of the protagonists. But side by side with these instances of predictable and “convenient” narrative crutches, there are innumerable instances in which, through either dialogue or extended ruminative authorial description, Iyayi stands tall and ramrod straight as a writer as he confidently and masterfully deploys fresh, probing and often mesmerizing prose to do the work of laying bare the inner moral and psychological torments or, as the case may be, victories of his characters. And to his great credit, Iyayi confers this particular narrative “privilege” as much on the “heroes” as on the “villains”, as much on the workers and the oppressed as on the exploiters and their cronies and hirelings, especially in the first two of the three novels, Violence and The Contract.

    So much then for what we encounter by way of characters, plot and narrative style in Iyayi’s three novels of the Seventies and Eighties, all pointing to a radical, committed writer who very deliberately if also often memorably bends the art and craft of fiction to openly avowed ideological and political purposes. The term “social realism” has been applied to these three novels; some critics have even been more specific and have mentioned the more ideologically loaded label of “socialist realism”. There is no denying the appropriateness of these terms to Iyayi’s writing in these novels. But then, there are socialist realists and there are socialist realists. The label, the badge does not automatically confer significance on the writer; significance has to be earned and Iyayi consistently gives proof in his novels that he has earned it. He is definitely one of the most successful socialist realists in contemporary Nigerian writing and one of the important exemplars of the “school” in postcolonial African writing. But more on this point later in this tribute.

    With regard to the book of short fiction, Awaiting Court Martial, we are in an entirely different literary, artistic universe than the worlds of the three novels. Perhaps the most compelling proof of this is that no critic or scholar can “accuse” Iyayi of either “social realism” or “socialist realism” in this collection of short stories. There are some very obvious, very easily perceived indications of this shift, but so are there much more subtle factors that require critical vigilance and “readerly” sensitivity to nuances of language and style to discern them. Let us take the more obvious factors first, on the condition that we will then subject their “obviousness” to radical, deconstructive critique.

    In Awaiting Court Martial, there are absolutely no characters like Idemudia and Adisa (Violence), Ogie Obala, Rose Idebale and Eunice Agbon (The Contract) and Osime Iyere (Heroes), characters who struggle mightily to come to grips with the crushing weight of the oppression, exploitation and corruption in the land and in their lives. Of the fifteen stories in the collection, only four – the title story, “Awaiting Court Martial”, “Saira”, “Extracts from the Testimony”, and “When They Came for Akika Lamidi” – have characters or themes that entail the depiction of struggles against oppression in its myriad forms and expressions. But in none of these stories are we close to what we encounter in the three novels and the clearest sign of this is the telling fact that in each of these four stories in Awaiting Court Martial, the struggle is utterly defeated. Moreover – and this point is crucial – in the eleven other stories in the collection, the struggles, the conflicts have far less to do with socio-economic or socio-political issues than with confrontations that could more appropriately be described as existential, woven as they are around the dilemma or the anguish of how to live or die well in a world in which deceit, bad faith, cynicism and rampant indifference to human suffering are the reigning values that determine and shape all relationships. Indeed, in comparison with Iyayi’s three novels, it is nothing short of astonishing that the working class in particular and, more generally, subaltern groups and those who struggle on their behalf are, so to speak, greatly “underrepresented’ in Awaiting Court Martial. Conversely, characters with a middle class professional background clearly predominate in the stories in the volume.

    These are the more apparent, the more obvious shifts in character, “plot” and themes that we find in the movement from the earlier three novels to the collection of shorter stories in the book that I, along with a few other critics, deem the best work to date of Iyayi as a writer. But what are the not so apparent, more subtle shifts in Awaiting Court Martial the perception of which should lead us, as I wish to suggest, to an interpretation of this work that might lead us to a fruitful, radical and progressive analysis of a collection of stories in which, for the most part, we encounter only catastrophes and defeats? This will be our starting point in next week’s concluding essay in the series.

    To be continued.

    Biodun Jeyifo

    bjeyifo@fas.harvard.edu

  • Men like Mandela

    Men like Mandela

    How does one pay tribute to a man for all seasons like former President Nelson Mandela who died last Thursday at 95?

    He was indeed not only the greatest son of South Africa, like President Jacob Zuma put it while announcing the passing away of Madiba, he was one of the greatest men that has lived in our times.

    That not only South Africa is mourning his death is a confirmation of his being a global icon of what a true leader should be.

    I have been reading the tributes to Mandela and can only pray that in our mourning moments the virtues that stood him out are not lost on us.

    The world and Africa particularly need more men like Mandela and I am reminded of the famous poem of Josiah Gilbert Holland titled GOD, give us men!

    A time like this demands

    Strong minds, great hearts, true faith and ready hands;

    Men whom the lust of office does not kill;

    Men whom the spoils of office cannot buy;

    Men who possess opinions and a will;

    Men who have honour; men who will not lie;

    Men who can stand before a demagogue

    And damn his treacherous flatteries without winking!

    Tall men, sun-crowned, who live above the fog

    In public duty, and in private thinking;

    For while the rabble, with their thumb-worn creeds,

    Their large professions and their little deeds,

    Mingle in selfish strife, lo! Freedom weeps,

    Wrong rules the land and waiting Justice sleeps.

    In Mandela God answered Holland’s prayers and He can still do.

    Mandela and some other African National Congress leaders refused to be cowed by the apartheid regime and confronted the demagogue of oppression when many would have given up.

    For 27 years, he was jailed but he never wavered on his commitment to the struggle to free his people from white-dominated rule and was ready to pay the supreme sacrifice to free his people.

    “During my lifetime, I have dedicated my life to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons will live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal for which I hope to live for and to see realised. But, My Lord, if it needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die,” Mandela stated in1964 from the dock of the Pretoria courtroom after being in jail two years already.

    I remember visiting the very isolated Roben Island prison years ago and can imagine the extent the apartheid leaders went to break Mandela’s and other freedom fighters’ spirit.

    Mandela was ready to pay the supreme sacrifice, but thankfully he didn’t and lived to emerge as the first black South African president.

    Unlike many other African leaders who would have seen his election as president as an opportunity to entrench himself in office and serve as many terms as possible and even get the Constitution amended, Mandela served only a term and gave his country a firm democratic foundation.

    Mandela’s death calls for celebration of a life lived for others. What counts in life, as Mandela noted, is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others.

    Bye Bye Mandela. Rest in peace.

  • No Junaid Mohammed, no

    No Junaid Mohammed, no

    Jonathan can run again; what we should insist  on is free and fair election

    Even many people who do not like the Goodluck Jonathan administration will not agree with Dr Junaid Mohammed’s threat that blood will flow on the streets of Nigeria should President Jonathan insist on running for president in 2015. Although I share Dr Mohammed’s views about the Jonathan presidency, I would have been satisfied if he had stopped at his statement that “… if there is going to be a free and credible election, I don’t mind if Jonathan runs, because I know he would be roundly rejected by Nigerians”. But to say blood will flow on account of the president running again is to me superfluous.

    The truth, though, is that Nigerian leaders have a way of speaking in tongues when the issue is staying put in office. President Jonathan’s godfather said he was waiting on God for direction when asked if he was going for second term or not. This was a man who was born again only in the upper part of the body! The essential area is however still steeped in iniquity. Now, according to Dr. Mohammed, President Jonathan has said he is under pressure to run; and that that, so far, is the only clue we have as to whether the President wants to run again or not.

    Like Governor Rotimi Amaechi, Dr Mohammed may not be a good body language reader, so, at least for now, we should rely on his claim that the president is ‘under pressure’ to run again; a thing that does not go down well with the medical doctor: “Quote me, if Jonathan insists on running, there will be bloodshed and those who feel short-changed may take the warpath and the country may not be the same again. His running will amount to taking about 85 million northerners for a ride and that is half of the country’s total population”. I have issues with some of these claims, but that is not important today.

    The 1999 Constitution stipulates conditions for people who aspire to our presidency. President Jonathan has more than the minimum requirements. If he hadn’t, he would not have been president in the first place. For me, therefore, the next question to ask is whether the president has done well to merit reelection. Permit me to refer to Mohammed’s criteria:

    “…On the three criteria globally used to measure preference for a leader, this man (Jonathan) has got none of them. They are competence, integrity and acceptability. On competence, you journalists know this better. President Jonathan is incompetent. He has got no integrity … On acceptability, apart from his few ethnic and tribal advisers, who are urging him to contest, Jonathan today (please note my emphasis on TODAY) is not acceptable to the generality of Nigerians. So on all these three counts he is nowhere, so on what basis is he going to run again?”

    This is a pertinent question. But on what basis has the president’s party been winning some of the elections it claimed to have won in the past? I agree with Dr Mohammed that the Jonathan administration is an administrative fiasco. I may not know of the president personally, but I agree too that his government is corrupt. These being the case, the answer to the third question (that of acceptability by voters), is already settled. So, if it is indeed true that some people are putting pressure on President Jonathan to run again, this must be the handiwork of ethnic advisers as Dr Mohammed said. And, if I may add, those other people whose bread is being buttered for every minute that President Jonathan is in office.

    But this should not surprise anyone because it has always been like that; Nigeria has never been in short supply of such characters. These sycophants are sans borders, it has nothing to do with the part of the country the leader comes from. They were there in the Second Republic and they did not leave the Shehu Shagari government until the president had the knock of soldiers on the door, telling him the game was up. They were also there in the Gen. Sani Abacha years when they told the general (who was disliked at home and distrusted abroad) that Nigeria would collapse if Abacha did not transmute to civilian president. They eventually saw Abacha to his grave.

    These are the people who are now preventing President Jonathan from knowing that things have changed since the 2011 elections and that if free and fair elections are held today, the president will perhaps lose his deposit. This reminds me of a question I asked President Jonathan’s Senior Special Assistant on Public Affairs, Dr Doyin Okupe, when he visited this newspaper sometime ago: “since when did the Jonathan administration begin to be loathed by Nigerians? Was it not the same Nigerians that gave the president an overwhelming support during the 2011 presidential election”? Okupe replied that it was probably since the fuel subsidy withdrawal issue. That could jolly well be true; but what effort has the Jonathan presidency made to reverse the trend? The government has only gone progressively worse on all indices of good governance.

    I am not sure any other government since the Babangida era caressed corruption the way the Jonathan administration is doing. And what this does is to reinforce the impression by not a few persons that the president does not give a damn about his legacy but only sees his time as the turn of the Niger Delta region to rule Nigeria. People from other geo-political zones have done it before and they had second term. So, it is immaterial if he too does it well or not; the Niger Delta is entitled to two terms and other Nigerians must understand and accept this notorious fact, and return him (Jonathan) possibly unopposed.

    Perhaps another reason that many people have been silent on concerning their frustration with the Jonathan government is that this is the first time Nigeria is having graduates not just as Number One citizen but also as Number Two. All the while we have been lamenting that while the country is blessed with numerous erudite scholars, it had not been privileged to have a graduate as president. Now that both the president and his deputy are graduates, with the president having a PhD, there is still no difference. Isn’t this enough reason to be aggrieved, when great expectations turn to great frustrations?

    By 2015, President Jonathan would have been in power for five years (his four years plus one year he inherited from the late President Umaru Yar’Adua); this is only two years short of the seven-year tenure he has championed for president and governors. What value is the president going to add to governance that he could not have added in five years? If morning shows the day, we can see clearly there is none.

    All said, what we should be fighting for now is not that President Jonathan should not run again, because he has the backing of the constitution to run. Rather, we should be preparing ourselves for free and fair elections. That should be the sing-song of the opposition parties to their supporters. Now, perhaps more than ever before, it is becoming clearer that the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has completely outlived its usefulness. The party has ruled for over 14 years and, going by its fantasy, it wants to rule for 60. When an ant sends its apologies about its inability to attend a social function, saying it has been having diarrhea in the last three days to that function, the natural question to ask is: whether there would be any trace of such an ant after three days of continual running of the stomach? What is the size of the ant even while enjoying good health?

    If the sorry pass that our country has become today is what the PDP could post after 14 out of their projected 60 years in power, then Nigeria would become history if that party stays in power longer than necessary.