The Nation Newspaper

Category: Thursday

  • Osuntokun’s haughtiness

    The more extreme manifestation of this degeneration is in the folly of commentators like Dr. Jide Oluwajuyitan of The Nation newspaper who tragically doubles as a university lecturer. In criminal betrayal and violation of the intellectual avocation, this man went to the extent of manufacturing a quote and put it in my mouth to criticise me! I have since referred the case to the university authorities for possible sanction.” – Akin Osuntokun.

    The above attack on my person by Akin Osuntokun’in his “The Columnist as a Partisan” in ThisDay newspaper of September 12, confirms that a nation that celebrates people like Osuntokun and his group is doomed. He had called to question my right to criticize his father, describing my piece as malicious. I had assured him even while he shouted hysterically on the phone that the quotation which was a documented fact of our history was taken from one of his writings but wrongly credited to him rather than malice. I followed up with a text message explaining that his late father, who was also my father as an Ekiti man, was an important figure of our history whose activities deserved critical analysis in order to see where the rain started beating us.

    But who is Akintola Osuntokun and what is the source of his offensive haughtiness? The answers lie in his definition of himself. Speaking to a reporter not too long ago, he had admitted “There has never been anything I critically need that I don’t get. People have been very good to me – especially, powerful people like (former) Presidents Obasanjo and Babangida”.  Obviously Akin doesn’t need to work hard to earn anything, including integrity. For this reason he finds it relatively easy to impugn the integrity of those who spent a life time building up their own.

    But why wait for that long if a brilliant man, who arrogantly told a reporter, “I thought I was too brilliant to fail my A/Level”, can acquire integrity from commendations from powerful men  like Babangida and Obasanjo – leaders who themselves are in need of commendation? And why should Akin, who we all know from his submissions, cannot win an electoral contest within the larger Osuntokun family, talk less of a local government in Okemesi where he also admitted the people burnt the Osuntokun houses as a result of his father’s controversial role in the 1965 Western Region’s rigged election, wait for that long when he could effortlessly acquire the title of Aare Bashorun of Okemesi Ekiti, and the Aremo Agboyegun of Igede Ekiti during Ayo Fayose’s first term as Ekiti governor?

    We must not also forget he is a proud recipient of one of the nation’s honours, the Member of the Federal Republic (MFR). With such honours so cheaply bestowed, Akin can afford to be contemptuous of even those who have contributed to his dazzling rise from personal assistant to Tunji Oseni to presidential adviser.

    For instance if Akin has now shifted his allegiance to President Goodluck Jonathan insisting his 2015 re-election is unassailable even when Obasanjo, whose commendation he carries around like a trophy, has raised question of morality about the ambition of a president he claimed gave an undertaking to run for only a term, I should take solace if he pretends not to remember I was partly instrumental to his securing a place at The Guardian. Tunji Oseni, one of my mentors who ran my article as Sunday Times editor in the mid-70s, in an effort to rehabilitate his personal assistant, had sent Akin to me for a place at The Guardian. I had advised Akin that a note from Alhaji Jose, our ‘father’ at the Times would carry more weight with Lade Bonuola than my direct intervention. And that was exactly what Akin Osuntokun did to get a place at The Guardian.

    Leveraging on that opportunity, he had moved on to become a General Manager, Corporate Affairs with Dangote Group, Obasanjo/Atiku Campaign Organisation’s Director of Publicity, Political Adviser to President Obasanjo and later Managing Director of NAN. Although as at the time Akin was entering The Guardian to acquire the brief experience that he traded for positions, I have made enough contributions on the pages of The Guardian under the guidance of inimitable Olatunji Dare, to form the substance of “Nigeria Under the Generals” a compilation of articles which my graduate students of Comparative Federalism as well as Politics of Colonial and Post-colonial states have found very handy. I had similarly completed my own modest contribution to intellectual knowledge: “Nigeria: The Crisis of Nationhood and The Newspaper Press 1900-2000”.

    But all these pale in significance compared to the monumental achievements of my superiors like Dr Stanley Macebuh, Dr Olatunji Dare, Sonala Olumhense Lade Bonuola and also Sully Abu, Femi Kusa Ama Ogan, Ted Iwere, among many others who are more deserving of national honour because of their commitment to our nation. If however Osuntokun’s national honour was a reward for his sterling performance as a presidential adviser, Nigerians can then understand why Obasanjo squandered all the goodwill he took to the presidency, destroying at the end, everything he built with his own hands.

    But as Akin is more interested in attacking my person in addition to his threat to sack me from the university where I served selfless as associate lecturer for over 20 years without collecting salary and a university I served without blemish until my retirement in May this year. The only thing Akin Osuntokun has not done is address the issues I raised which late Obafemi Awolowo also raised in his “My March through Prison”.

    And what were the issues?  “Chief Oduola Osuntokun,” quoting Akin, his son “was one of late Chief Awolowo’s golden boys because Awolowo liked him very much”. Awo took him from class room and made him a minister. But Oduola protested when he was moved from Finance to Lands and Labour, blaming Chief Tony Enahoro for what he considered a demotion  Following the crisis in AG, he joined Akintola’s UPP that offered him the position of Minister of Economic Planning which he claimed was superior to Lands and Labour. He subsequently became a prosecution witness against his mentor.

    Awo in his “My March through Prison” said on the basis of Osuntokun’s private discussion with Okoro, another delegate to the AG Jos convention, he believed Osuntokun gave false testimony because Akintola had the support of the Prime Minister and also because he needed to justify his new position of minister for economic planning. My thesis therefore was that since Pa Oduola was cleared of corruption charges, his betrayal of his mentor must have been driven by greed for power. As for Akin his son whose struggle in life by his own confession, is to be like his father, I had argued that as someone of good breeding, his support for those alleged to be deficit in honour and integrity must have equally been driven by greed for power.

    And talking of integrity; let me assure Akin that as a director at The Nation for a brief period, the only demand I ever made on Asiwaju Bola Tinubu was at a public function during which I tucked a hurriedly hand-written two page note into his hand. In the note, I had pleaded he should reconcile with his ‘fathers’ since it is not in our character in Yoruba land to disrobe our fathers publicly even when they are wrong. I have never sought and I have never got any favour from Asiwaju Tinubu. But Akin is no doubt aware of those, who as stalwarts of PDP, abuse Asiwaju Tinubu and his APC publicly, but privately enjoy the favour of his footing their bills when they lodge in Eko Holiday Inn and Towers.

    It was recently reported that Akin is secretary general of a new group christened G.37 committed to crusading against political prostitution, moral decadence, and crass materialism. Leading the new crusade is Orji Uzor Kalu, supported by Senator Gbemi Saraki. Others include Femi Fani-Kayode, Bode George, Musiliu Obanikoro and Nuhu Ribadu who recently decamped to PDP, a party he once described as a sinking ship. Behold the new messiahs. Behold those who lay claim to infallibility. We miss  Saro Wiwa, the humour merchant who has a way to make us laugh when we should be crying.

  • Nigeria: We can sort the future out amicably

    What follows hereunder is about “nations” or “nationalities”. So then, for starters, what is a nation or a nationality? A nation or nationality is a human group defined by a common culture (language, customs, worldview, etc) and a common homeland. The nearly 50 million Yoruba are one nation, and so are the nearly 50 million Igbo, the 15 million Ijaw, the seven million Catalans of north-eastern Spain, and the five million Scots of Scotland in the northern part of Britain.

    Most pundits would say that each nation was created by God and that, obviously, the Creator’s purpose is that each nation should rule itself and manage its own life. We know, however, from human history, that from time to time, human activities unify neighbouring nations together to form one united country under one government. This can happen through conquest, or through friendly agreement, or through marriage between rulers.

    But we also know from human history that such unifying of different nations into one country is hardly ever permanent. All the large empires of ancient times, each combining many nations by conquest, ultimately broke up. In the past 100 years, many countries consisting of different nations have been breaking apart – with each nation becoming a country and ruling itself.

    It is not necessarily because a multi-nation country is poor that its different nations want to separate. In the past 300 years, Britain, consisting of the English, Scots, Irish, and Welsh, has been one of the richest, one of the most powerful, and one of the most beautiful countries in the world. And yet the Irish broke away from Britain about 90 years ago and formed their own separate country; and the Scots and Welsh now want separate countries of their own also. The Soviet Union was wonderfully powerful, but about 20 years ago, all its 14 different nationalities broke apart and formed separate countries of their own – many of them very small and weak countries. Canada is a very rich country, but the French-speaking provinces of Canada want to separate from Canada. Some small non-Chinese nations want to separate from China, and some non-Hindu nations want to separate from India. The eight different nations of Yugoslavia broke into eight separate countries about 20 years ago. Two small nations have recently broken away from Indonesia, and some more want to do so. One of the two small nations of the tiny island country of Sri Lanka wants a separate country of its own, and so does one of the two small nations of the small country of Belgium. In Spain, the Catalan and Basque nations are agitating for separate countries of their own.

    Nearer home in Africa, the same movement is going on. South Sudan recently separated from Sudan. However, South Sudan is not a good example; the separation was not along “national” lines but along “racial” lines (separation of the Black peoples of South Sudan from the Arab peoples of North Sudan). South Sudan is still made up of a number of different nations – and these nations are likely to break apart in the future. There are many better examples. The Eritreans broke away from Ethiopia about 15 years ago, and the people of Somaliland from Somalia about the same time. The Buganda nation wants to separate from Uganda.

    Under certain very painful circumstances, the large Igbo nation tried to break away from Nigeria about 50 years ago and, with the smaller nations to their south, attempted to form a new separate country known as Biafra. Emotional, even romantic, about their newly independent Nigeria, the rest of Nigeria forcibly suppressed the Biafra attempt. But, from what is known of the behaviour of nations in our world, it seems impossible that the verdict of the Biafran war will last forever. For virtually all Igbo, Biafra (as a separate country of the Igbo nation) remains an immortal reality and goal – even if some among the Igbo elite currently seem  hesitant and undecided about that goal. Among the masses of educated Igbo youths, various organizations keep Biafra vibrantly alive.

    As for the large Yoruba nation, a culture-based tendency towards introspection and caution limits effusiveness about separation from Nigeria. But by now, most Yoruba at home and abroad have reluctantly come to the belief that, for the Yoruba nation to come out of poverty and find its true destiny as an enterprising nation in the world, separation from Nigeria has become mandatory. When Nigeria commenced the recent National Conference, significant parts of the Yoruba elite and people were still resolved that the Yoruba nation must continue to contribute to making Nigeria work. But, following the nebulous conclusions of the National Conference, the desire to get out of Nigeria has become observably very strong among the pauperized and suffering masses of educated Yoruba youths.

    I am not saying that large and potentially powerful nations like the Yoruba and Igbo would have forever remained in Nigeria  if Nigeria were better organized and better managed, or if Nigeria were a prosperous country. All I am saying is that the current instability, poverty, and insecurity in Nigeria have tended to optimize the desires of some of our nations  to separate from  Nigeria. Even if Nigeria were orderly and prosperous, it would still be inconceivable that such nations as the Yoruba or Igbo would remain part of Nigeria for much longer.  Look at the facts: Each of the Yoruba and Igbo is larger in land area and population that most of the countries of Europe, and, on its own and in its own country, can become one of the leading countries of the world. The same is true of the Hausa-Fulani nation too. And to, may be, a lesser extent, the same is true too of our smaller nations like the Ijaw, Edo, Tiv, Kanuri, Nupe, etc, each of which is bigger and potentially richer than countries like Belgium, Holland, Switzerland, Austria, Singapore, South Korea, etc.

    In short, as multi-nation countries are becoming an endangered species in the world, it is critically important that we Nigerians should become much more realistic about the immediate future of our Nigeria. If we are realistic, we will be able to ensure that a development that is essentially natural and inevitable does not become the occasion for massive conflict, fighting, chaos, and mass blood-letting.

    Published stories this week that some Nigerians are surreptitiously and illegally shopping for arms abroad – no matter who may be doing it – point to certain fearful probabilities, especially when added to earlier stories of secret arms importations into Nigeria, and to repeated and explicit threats from some quarters that violence and even war will be used for resolving Nigeria’s future. As the Czechs and Slovaks taught the world when they sensibly and  peacefully dissolved their Czechoslovakia not long ago into two new countries of Czech Republic and Slovakia, there is no need for any Nigerian nation to arm itself for war against any other Nigerian nation. We are bound to separate by and by anyway. If we strongly desire to do so right away, then let us do it peacefully and amicably – and remain good neighbours and partners in development afterwards.

  • They will not tell you it’s a trap

    There is no odor as vile as that which arises from despoiled citizenship. It is insidious, human and outright malevolent. And it is all that we represent as Nigerians. Let us not make a mockery of citizenship; we are not the model citizens we profess to be.

    We whose idea of citizenship gravitates from arrant skepticism to dilettantism, gruesome criticism to cynicism and utter insincerity will never court hope even when we see it. And the consequence abounds all around us.

    Yesterday, our grief was of marginalization, unemployment, religious and ethnic bigotry, corruption in high places and enfant terrible godfathers. Today, we bemoan the existence of Boko Haram; we grieve because our youths have turned suicide bombers, our mothers are impoverished and our daughters litter dimly lit brothels and recesses of the sidewalk within and outside the country.

    Today, we talk of going to war and sing to ourselves, blood-spattered choruses of youthful rebellion. We love to sing such ballads that beguile our will and caress our eardrums; that is why we court and fete such leadership as we have now. It is that time of the year when they promise us stable electricity, gallantry in governance, dependable economy and security. It is that time of the year when they recite the same old platitudes to the same old electorate.

    They promise us honor, status, glory, and a prosperous future as usual; and as usual, we fail to hold these promises up against their culture of leadership – that flagrant norm of theirs that blesses us with dead-end jobs of small-town life, religious and financial terrorism, bankruptcy, ethnic bigotry, substandard healthcare, inferior education and unemployment.

    But we believe them anyway. We that are conditioned by poverty and lust for unearned riches perpetually seek all manners of benefits and self-actualization, like greater state autonomy, more state creation and secession. We, who have learnt to enjoy dwellings like hell, are promised nations like Eden, by men like demons.

    The dream of secession is the call of the Sirens, the enticement that has for generations seduced old and young Nigerians struggling to keep inadequate jobs in Chinese and Lebanese owned Nigerian sweatshops, fast food restaurants, construction sites and bus parks, and behind the counters at city malls.

    We desperately crave and embrace the secession alternative because every other cul-de-sac in our lives breaks our spirit and dignity. Pick up advocacy group manifestos or human rights reports of genocide and marginalization. Listen to self-acclaimed youth leaders, weepy politicians and activists, the allure of greater autonomy, self-determination or whatever they choose to call it is touted as our next best alternative.

    They will not tell you it’s a trap, a ploy, an old, dirty game of deceit in which the powerful and informed who will not go to war, promises a mirage to youth who will. We have seen this in the tragedy of Boko Haram’s suicide bombers, political thugs and ethno-religious death squads holding the nation by the jugular.

    We have seen and felt this in our tragic obsequiousness to the ruling class on the political, economic and socio-cultural turfs that condition you and me to serve the privileged class, even as we are perpetually consigned by them to the backwaters of the breadlines.

    Some of us, the somewhat privileged to be precise, get to travel between two universes: one where everybody gets a chance and a second chance to break out of our socio-political and economic jailhouse, where education, connections, money and influence almost guarantee that you would not fail if you strive. In the other universe, no one ever gets to enjoy a first or second chance. In this universe, when the poor fails and falls, no one picks them up even as the rich stumble and trip their way to the top.

    It is not my wish to attack or castigate the rich; they didn’t get to enslave us simply by ordering us to be poor, did they? You and I are willing participants in the impoverishment and eternal enslavement of the Nigerian citizenry.

    We are in such dire state because like ones habitually programmed to self-destruct, we love to identify and propound practical solutions to our tragedies but when puts gets to shove, and we are faced with the chance to change our stars, we begin to speak in discordant voices.

    Thus this year as all others, we have begun to criticize and speak the thoughts of a growing number of natives seeking relief. What is so sad however is that despite our pretentious protestations and insight, we go about perpetuating the same old oddities, self-interests and absurdities.

    Thus this year, President Goodluck Jonathan and our league of extraordinary looters have failed to improve our lot. And while we curse our luck and cry, many of us continue to foster the status quo by abhorrent citizenship and conduct. We who lament corruption in high places wholeheartedly nurture duplicity and corruption in low places.

    Bloody revolution is never the answer. Neither shall secession improve our lot; if eventually, every agitating part of Nigeria gets to secede, every new nation we establish shall parade the same old brutes with the same old lusts and self-interests in high and low places.

    Any story of secession is a story of elites preying on the weak, the gullible, the marginal, and the poor. The pageantry ends the day we pronounce that we secede, particularly for those of us who will occupy the low places. The pageantry will wear off and there will be fewer patriots, and fewer patriots, until there is no single cheer left to hear but tireless shrieks in the street. Whatever contraption we manage to create shall evolve into the monstrosity we have made Nigeria to be.

    People who are singing the secession song are the real traitors – like the average Nigerian who scorned merit and conscience to elect President Goodluck Jonathan and company. Such characters would sell out Nigeria for an offshore account, picturesque mansion, soothing sentimentality and membership of high society.

    To achieve their plot, they would sentimentalize and hoodwink everyone else to buy into their fount of deceptive freedom. To escape such grotesqueness, we need to raise our voices in dissent, and rally in protest in our communities, on the streets and our square gardens. We need to produce the candidates that will fight our fight and take our risks. We need to unseat the men making our fatherland more toxic and hateful to the rest of the world.

    If you don’t think that the policies and actions of the incumbent ruling class is costing us immeasurable damages, then do nothing. But if you can see through the smoke and mirrors, and you realize that you’ll be paying more state and local taxes, while your assets continue to depreciate and the cost of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) and staple food continues to soar out of reach, then you will understand the need to invest in producing and supporting the candidates who will successfully defeat and tame the army of predators and executioners occupying our seats of power. Come 2015, be ready to contribute the most you’ve ever given for a political cause. Be ready to sacrifice.

     

  • Boko Haram and the Stephen Davis Clanger

    Boko Haram and the Stephen Davis Clanger

    The Boko Haram insurgency appears again to be gathering some momentum. The insurgents have seized more towns in Borno State and have declared a Caliphate there. The conflict is widening with press reports about some limited military incursions by the insurgents in Adamawa State. Now, in the midst of all this, Mr. Stephen (or Steven) Davies, the unknown and mysterious Australian mediator in the conflict, has dropped a political clanger about the identity of the sponsors of the insurgency. In a widely reported interview in The Cable, an online newspaper, Mr. Davis claimed that, in his meetings with the leaders of Boko Haram in an undisclosed location, he was told that among the main sponsors of the insurgency were Ali Modu Sheriff, the former governor of Borno State, now a Senator, and Lt. -General Azubuike Ihejirika, the retired army chief of staff. Mr. Davis also claimed he was told that an unnamed senior official of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) had been facilitating the transfer of funds to the insurgents from an unnamed Nigerian based in Cairo, Egypt, with strong ties to Al Qaeda. These claims have sent ripples across the country and beyond. The identity of the sponsors  of the insurgency has become a riddle wrapped in an enigma.

    These are grave allegations bordering on treason on the part of those allegedly involved in sponsoring the insurgency. Both men named by Mr. Davis have vehemently denied the claim, with Ali Modu Sheriff threatening to sue Mr. (or Dr.) Stephen Davis for allegedly defaming him. Lt.-General Ihejirika says he was named because of his tough military strategy in the conflict with the insurgents, adding arrogantly that he had no regrets for taking such a tough military stance against the insurgents. It is difficult to understand why he should be tagged a collaborator simply because of his claim that he adopted a tough military strategy against the insurgents. Could this be a decoy by the insurgents?

    But who really is this Australian mediator, who has variously been described as a political geographer, a political scientist, and even a ‘Cardinal’ in the Australian Anglican Church. Until he broke into the news a few months ago, very little was known about his political antecedents or record in mediating in international or national conflicts. At the time, the media claimed that he had been invited by the federal government to mediate in the insurgency and help rescue the over 200 Chibok girls kidnapped and still being held as captives by Boko Haram. The federal government was certainly aware of press reports linking it with Mr. Davis’s efforts to secure the release of the kidnapped girls. But now, a spokesperson of the Department of State Security (DSS), Mrs. Ogar, has categorically stated that Mr. Davis was neither invited by the federal government to help secure the release of the girls, nor were his mediation efforts in this regard authorised by the FG. In fact, according to Mrs. Ogar, the DSS was neither consulted by Mr. Davis about his mediation efforts nor did he submit any report to the federal government, or any of its security agencies, regarding what transpired in negotiations between him and the insurgents.

     Someone is being economical with the truth about this entirely disgraceful episode. It is rather strange and paradoxical that the federal government, which was fully aware of Mr. Davis’s mediation with the insurgents, should now choose this time to deny any knowledge of what Mr. Davis was doing in Borno State negotiating with the insurgents. On what basis was his entry into Nigeria approved? Who sponsored his trip financially and met his expenses in Nigeria? Was it the insurgents or some other external sponsors? How could the federal government claim to be totally ignorant of the presence of Mr. Davis in Borno State, or deny his mediation efforts, when the media reported periodically about this matter and his efforts in mediating in the abduction of the Chibok girls. If the FG did not authorise or approve his role, why was Mr. Davis allowed to come to Nigeria in the first place? Was the FG naïve in thinking something positive could come from his efforts for which it could then claim some credit?

      I should say that, with my long experience in diplomacy as a retired Nigerian Ambassador, I was very sceptical right from the start that Mr. Davis, whose antecedents were not really known, was the right man for the job of securing the release of the kidnapped girls. I thought it to be highly unlikely that Mr. Davis, a Christian for that matter mediating in a religious conflict with the Islamic jihadists, was in any position to achieve this objective. It was my view that, for any mediation to be really successful, and for the abducted girls to be released, Nigerian mediators, preferably from the North and Muslim, were far better placed to realise this objective. Some of these possible mediators are known to have direct links with the leaders of the insurgency and are more likely to be in a better position to persuade the Boko Haram leaders to release the Chibok girls. In fact, there have been press reports of such mediation efforts by some notable Northern Muslim leaders, which should have been encouraged by the federal government. Now, with the passage of time, it is getting increasingly unlikely that the Chibok girls will ever be rescued with, or without, the use of force which the Armed Forces have ruled out as too risky.

     Now, as to the claims by Mr. Davis of the complicity of Senator Modu Sheriff and Lt.-General Ihejirika in the sponsorship of the insurgency, these should be fully investigated by the security agencies. Sheriff, who has been widely linked by the media to the origins of Boko Haram, is believed to have been invited already for questioning by the DSS over the matter. Though I consider it highly implausible that Lt-Gen. Ihejirika was also involved in sponsoring or supporting the insurgents as claimed by Mr. Davis, he too should be invited for questioning to ascertain the truth, or otherwise, of the claims by Mr. Davis, whose reports on the whole have tended to be broadly speculative. There are disturbing reports that the foreign powers that had offered Nigeria limited military assistance with military intelligence and air strikes in flushing out the dissidents were discouraged when they found out that even the Presidency had been infiltrated by Boko Haram moles.

    Regrettably, there has been some unnecessary blame game on this grave and tragic matter, with both the PDP federal government and the opposition APC blaming each other for the dire security situation confronting the nation. This is not what we need now as it will give comfort to the enemy, now on the rampage in Borno State. The situation is one of national emergency and both the government and the opposition must stand together, shoulder to shoulder, in fighting this threat to our survival as a nation. This is no time for partisan and bitter politics. The federal government must take the security threat from the insurgents more seriously. It is certainly not doing enough now to contain and defeat the insurgency. It appears confused and bewildered by the military audacity of the insurgents.

      We must also recognise that the insurgency is a direct consequence of persistently bad governance in the North, characterised by the long period of grinding poverty, lack of jobs, and rampart social injustice, all of which undermine the political stability and unity of our country. Something must be done collectively by all of Nigeria’s political elite to tackle these long standing political, economic and social problems. It is what the insurgents are feeding on. They are steadily gaining the support locally of those who erroneously believe that the insurgents offer them a better future. The insurgency relies heavily on this increasing local support for their military intelligence and audacity.

      The pathetic situation in the Armed Forces is one that is of considerable concern to the public, with desertions from the Army, of which nearly two battalions were reported as fleeing across the border to the Cameroon. Nigeria once had a competent Army with an admirable local and international record of which the nation was proud. It is now at the mercy of a rag tag insurgency of less than 4,000 fighters. Senior Army officials claim consistently that they are ‘on top of the situation’. But the insurgents seem to have the upper hand militarily. This is embarrassing, not only to the Armed Forces, but to the entire nation. There is no record of any such desertions during our civil war fought with even more savagery than the conflict with the insurgents. But the Armed Forces were well armed and motivated then than now. We hear reports of inadequate funding and equipment inferior to that of the insurgents. To increase the fighting capability of the Armed Forces and end the desertion of the troops the National Assembly must look more closely into the funding of the Army and the supply of the much needed arms and ammunition to it. How the huge defence budget is being spent should also be thoroughly investigated.

  • PDP talebearers Vs Stephens Davis

    Many Nigerians believe President Jonathan is innately a good man that was why they overwhelmingly voted for him in 2011. Almost five years on, many still believe President Jonathan’s problem is his PDP, a party which harbours many that are considered deficit in honour and integrity. The facts stare us in the face. Over 75% of the governors elected on its platform in 2003 were indicted for financial malfeasance. Not too long ago, some 14 PDP governors, supported by one Labour  and one APGA governor, stood before a national television  and proclaimed themselves winner of an election they lost by 16 to 19. Many other party stalwarts lack credibility and are therefore a liability to Jonathan presidency.

    This is why many Nigerians believe the PDP’s resort to blame game is a cover up. A government, many reason, that controls awesome apparatus of power, brusquely exhibited recently in Osun State where 75,000 armed security men including some hooded goons were deployed for the pacification of those contesting against a PDP candidate, cannot possibly pretend not to know those behind Boko Haram.

    PDP men, in any case, have told us different tales. First, late General Owoye Andrew Azazi, as President Jonathan’s National Security Adviser once said, Boko Haram was a product of ‘PDP politics of exclusion’. Before then, it was PDP members that alleged Boko Haram was a creation of PDP leading lights who were outwitted by President Jonathan in the battle for PDP ticket for the 2011 election. Then PDP turned the heat on its political adversaries. First because of his unarguably irresponsible statements after his loss of the bitterly fought 2011 election, Buhari was proclaimed the father of Boko Haram. But as it has turned out, the same Buhari survived an assassination attempt that killed over 300 other people because of an armoured vehicle President Jonathan procured for him a few months before the incident. Then PDP talebearers said Boko Haram that is as old as PDP, was a creation of one-year-old APC.

    But of all the incredible tales told by PDP talebearers, those of Femi Fani-Kayode and Ali Modu Sheriff, until recently members of APC, needed to be given special attention. Both were reacting to Dr Stephen Davies allegations. In view of discordant notes already coming from government officials, we must equally appeal to the government as well as those alleged to be behind the insurgency not to dismiss Davies weighty allegations with a wave of hand. That he is a self-appointed negotiator as now claimed by government that has not denied paying his bills cannot colour his findings.  The Australian has no vested interest beyond helping us to identify those behind the insurgency that has, according to the president, led to the brutal killing of some 12,000 mostly innocent Nigerians, and that as last Sunday, led to the take-over of seven local government areas or one third of Borno State by the insurgents.

    Dr Davis has however continued to insist that former governor of Borno State, Ali Modu Sheriff and former Chief of Army Staff, Gen. Azubuike Ihejirika are Boko Haram sponsors. For him, “Sheriff’s ploy of casting himself as a victim is a poor attempt at disguising his sponsorship as alleged by the Boko Haram commanders.”He also mentioned an unnamed senior official of the Central Bank of Nigeria and an Egypt-based man as those funding the sect.

    Instead of the discordant notes from government and its officials, one would have thought this is an opportunity for PDP, if indeed it has a stake in Nigeria, to show true commitment to locating the real enemies of our nation after squandering all the past opportunities to do so. First this is not the first time Sheriff’s name would come up. His name had been mentioned by some members of the insurgency who alleged he had used them to win the election of 2003 and 2007.It was also said that the source of conflict between the leader of the group Mohammed Yusuf and his mentor, Ja’afar Mahmud Adam which eventually led to the latter being shot dead was the money the former collected from Sheriff. Sheriff has also been alleged to be one of the northern governors that sent young people to lesser hajj and for religious education in Sudan, the process that led to the indoctrination of such young people.  And now, while accusing his former party, APC of mudslinging because of his decampment to PDP, Sheriff says “I consider it most uncharitable for the party to use me as alibi for the obvious culpability of some of its members”. I think this provides the best evidence so far to show that Sheriff probably knows some members of his former party that are linked with the Boko Haram sect.

    Similarly, Fani-Kayode, another decampee has consistently maintained that some members of APC, his former party are sympathisers of Boko Haram. He wanted those pointing fingers at PDP to note that “it was not a member of the PDP or the federal government that said that Boko Haram should not be proscribed as an organisation, it was rather the official spokesman of the APC, Lai Mohammed, who said so”.

    “It was not the PDP or any member of the federal government that told the world only last year that they were against the declaration of a State of Emergency in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa states, it was the leading presidential aspirant and one of the two co-owners of the APC, General Muhammadu Buhari that said so.”

    His logic may be crooked, but I think he like Sheriff should be made to say all he knows.

    Also defending Ihejirika, Fani-Kayode said: “I have never heard of a Christian trying his best to help or assist an organisation to establish an Islamic fundamentalist caliphate which is committed to wiping out the Christian faith and killing every Christian, every secularist and every moderate Muslim in his country. It seems to me that this is an absurd notion and that it really doesn’t make any sense”.

    Yes, Fani-Kayode is right. But that will not be an isolated case. Many strange things are happening in our country that do not make sense to us anymore. For instance our military, tested in Liberia, Sierra Leone and other UN engagements, a military that is well-equipped according to government which allocate about a trillion naira, a quarter of our annual budget have consistently been caught flat-footed by Boko Haram’s rag-tag group. It doesn’t make sense that our soldiers were outgunned by the insurgents and had to seek help from their Cameroonian comrades. It doesn’t make sense to Nigerians that our military barracks are no more safe havens for soldiers and their loved ones. Of course, incredible tales of helicopter dropping food and arms for the insurgents does not make sense to Nigerians. Stories of alleged incidents of soldiers being withdrawn from locations targeted by the insurgents do not make sense. It does not make sense to Nigerians that over 200 girls, still in captivity after four months, were kidnapped from their Chibok dormitories, loaded into a fleet of busses which snaked through bad roads stretching a distance of about 200 kilometres without being accosted by soldiers in a state under state of emergency. It doesn’t make sense to Nigerians that the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has now confirmed that “Boko Haram now controls about one-third of Borno State” or Borno’s Secretary to State Government’s lamentation that “Government presence and administration are minimal or non-existent across many parts of the state, with economic, commercial and social services totally subdued; schools and clinics remain closed”.

    We all feel diminished as Nigerians. It is therefore in the interest of Sheriff and Ihejirika that a proper investigation is carried out to see if there is a fifth columnist at work. After all, many seasons ago, the president himself admitted Boko Haram sympathizers are in his government.

  • Wanted: True leaders

    Dictionaries, even the smallest school dictionaries, always give many meanings to the word “lead”. And in every one of those meanings, to lead is to do something beyond oneself to or for some people – usually to a group. To be a leader is to help a group diagnose or identify a strange or puzzling group problem; or to propose and promote solution to a known group problem; or to guide the group along a path towards the solution of a problem or towards the achievement of a group goal; etc. In every case, a leader brings some value into the group’s life. In some way or other, the leader gives himself to the service of the group, towards the achievement of something.

    Leadership therefore relates to a current problem or situation in a group’s life. For instance, in this column last week, I described how the leaders among a national group, the Catalan people of north-eastern Spain, are providing leadership for their Catalan nation.  The Catalans are an enterprising people, and their little nation of Catalonia is one of the richest provinces of Spain. But they are one of the ethnic minorities in Spain. And succeeding governments of Spain have tended to try to repress the Catalans, and even to try to suppress the Catalan culture and identity. The masses of ordinary Catalans hate all this, but, like ordinary people all over the world, they cannot do much about it; they cannot fight the powerful government of Spain. However, some citizens arise from time to time among them who dare to speak out for their nation – who dare to call on their small nation to stand up together and defend their group dignity. These are the persons who deserve to be called leaders of the Catalan nation.

    Let me remind you of some of the things I said last week about these Catalan leaders. Because they are citizens of Spain, different persons among them belong to different Spanish political parties. That means that they do the things that political parties and politicians do against one another, especially for the purpose of getting votes at elections. But, over and above that, they are loyal to the aspirations of their Catalan nation, and they are united when it comes to defending the interest of their Catalonia. Consequently, they have succeeded very much in obtaining regional autonomy for Catalonia in Spain.

    In fact, they are now in the process of trying to achieve independence – the status of a separate sovereign country – for their Catalonia. And they are virtually all united in the quest – even though they belong to different political parties. Because the government of Spain is threatening to prevent them from holding their “independence referendum” this next November, the Catalan political leaders, of all political parties, have become much more united than ever before over the issue of independence. Indeed, some of the opposition political parties have seriously warned the Catalan regional president not to yield to the threats by the government of Spain. And the regional president, Artur Mas, has become enormously more confident in the struggle. He consults regularly with the other party leaders, and frequently joins with them to tell the masses of Catalans that the plan to vote for independence next November is unchanged and unchangeable, and to urge them to get ready to fight “democratically and peacefully” to make it happen. I hope you remember these statements of his: “If we fight we can win and we can lose; but if we do not fight, we have already lost”. “Our goal is to rule ourselves freely”. “If we lose because we won’t fight, then we do not only lose the struggle, we also lose our dignity – and that is the worst thing we can do to ourselves”.

    Now, we must remember that Spain is a rich and powerful country. These Catalan leaders can plausibly claim, if they so choose, that because of their fear of the Spanish government, they dare not speak up boldly for their own small nation. Many of them can also easily make deals with the Spanish government, get positions or money for themselves, and do nothing for Catalonia. Any of them can easily claim that because of the “interest of Spain” they have to make compromises and therefore junk Catalonia’s interest. And any of them can choose to focus only on the ambitions and agenda of their political parties and behave as if they are not aware of the situation and desires of their Catalan nation. These Catalans are not doing any of these. United, loyal, dutiful and resolute in the interest of their Catalan nation, though also participating in the politics of Spain, they are leading their nation in the fight that their nation has chosen – towards the goal that their nation seeks.

    It is very painful to most Yoruba people  that the leading men and women among the Yoruba nation do not act like these Catalan leaders – do not act at all as true leaders of their Yoruba nation. There is very deep disillusionment and hopelessness among us Yoruba people today, and the cause of it is not so much because we have serious problems (problems created by Nigeria’s brutalization and even destruction of our achievements and assets), but because we do not have leaders trying creditably to confront the problems, telling us what direction the road ahead  should be, and dutifully offering themselves as guides forward towards a goal –daring boldly to defy Nigeria’s opposition to our progress, and trying boldly to rally us in support of a Yoruba national programme.

    Our system of education (our flagstaff achievement in the past 100 years) lies in ruins, resulting in disgraceful performances by our children in public examinations (such as WAEC), and resulting in the shame that our youths are learning virtually nothing in our schools and colleges. Disgracefully, we do not have a programme for turning our educated youths into skilled workers, entrepreneurs, businessmen at home and abroad, inventors, patent owners, modern farmers, etc. Examples of how to do this are many in our world today (I recently wrote in this column about the example of Singapore), but we make no effort to learn or emulate. As a result, we squirm and sorrow in unbefitting poverty, and depend on imports and refugees from other parts of Nigeria for much of our economic life. Now, we tremble as an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist army, manufactured in another part of Nigeria, threatens to overrun all of Nigeria, including our homeland.

    But, worst of all, no Yoruba leader stands forth to challenge any one of these problems.  In practical terms, most of what we ever get from our leading citizens are efforts to conform to the putrid norms and standards of Nigeria, to share in Nigeria’s corrupt wealth, and to obtain positions in Nigeria’s chaotic and unproductive power system.

    The time for change has come. We cannot let Nigeria kill and bury all that is good in our nation’s life. Let the true Yoruba leaders, whether young or old, begin to emerge. We will welcome and support them – as we welcomed and supported Awolowo and his colleagues in their time.

  • Political prostitutes

    Crossing carpet from one political party in normal democracies is very rare. The last time this happened in the United Kingdom was sometimes in the 1970s when some members of the British Labour Party left to form, along members of the old Liberal Party, the Social Democratic Party. They did not cross over to the Conservative party. In the USA the so-called Dixiecrats who were members of the Democratic Party and who were mostly racists holding on to the old slave-holding and racist past in those states south of the Mason – Dixon line, left to join the Republican Party, the party of Abraham Lincoln which in modern times has ironically become a racist party against the tradition of its founders. In these democracies nowadays one would rather stand as Independents or quit politics entirely than cross carpet for the purpose of getting elected to any electoral positions.

    But in our clime and in our recent past, it was unusual to witness the current trend in Nigeria where politicians go up and down like a yoyo sleeping one night in one party and waking up the following night in a totally different party. In our recent past, especially during the First Republic, people formed different parties if they disagreed with their old parties. This was the case with Chief S.L Akintola’s party, United Peoples Party when he left the Action Group and KO Mbadiwe’s Democratic Party when in he left the NCNC. Sleep-walking from political party to another as it is the case today started in the Second Republic when the likes of Busari Adelakun, Akin  Omoboriowo and Chief Sunday  Afolabi crossed over from the  UPN unashamedly to the NPN. Of course in my lifetime I have seen strange things happen in Nigerian politics such as Dr. Michael Okpara and Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu joining the NPN and even the stalwarts of the old Action Group the trio of G. S. Ikokwu , Anthony Enahoro and J.S Tarka who were opposed to reconciliation in the old Action Group deserting Obafemi Awolowo to join his enemies in the NPN.

    But we have never witnessed the kind of political prostitution going on now in current Nigerian politics where a former presidential flag bearer of one party would unashamedly cross over to attempt to get elected in to office of governor on the platform of a party he ran against flippantly saying that there is not much difference between the two parties! What dishonesty!. If politicians expect to be taken seriously, they must stay the course and show that they are not in politics for their bellies alone. There must be a higher calling than just making money and living well without work as most of our politicians tend to do.

    Recently Tom Ikimi  and  Ali Modu Sheriff the former governor of Borno crossed over to the PDP apparently to enjoy stomach infrastructure while pretending they left because of lofty reasons. For the former governor of Borno  to have been accepted into the PDP speaks volumes about what kind of party it is especially because of the current tragedy that has befallen Borno and the entire North-eastern part of Nigeria where some of us including myself invested part of our youth in helping to build. As for Ikimi, I was surprised when he said he is proud to have been a former foreign minister of Nigeria in a regime that was expelled from the Commonwealth when a national of our country was its Secretary-general, and a regime that defrauded the country of close to $10 billion spirited out of the country and lodged in private accounts some of which will never be found. Instead of boasting of being the regime’s foreign minister, Ikimi should cover his face in shame because he served in a regime that will go down in infamy.  In the history of contemporary Africa, never has so few destroyed the lives of so many in so short a time.

    Perhaps in the interest of our country, our leaders ought to take more seriously the mission of leadership in this benighted country. We cannot afford politics without principles and commitment. Political parties need to be known for where they stand on any issue. We cannot run our country on parties that change principles like taffeta and chameleon. If we are not careful in this country politicians will be totally disconnected from the people that there will be no need for political parties and we may therefore be forced to embrace the Egyptian or Indonesian model of guided democracy in which the military will play a dominant part which will be unfortunate and not in the long term interest of our country. Without their knowing it, politicians are gradually becoming the grave-diggers of democracy.

  • Davis, Chibok girls and Boko Haram

    A few months ago, an Australian, Dr Stephen Davis, emerged from nowhere, claiming to be  negotiating on behalf of the government with Boko Haram on the release of the abducted 219 Chibok schoolgirls. His claim was widely reported by the media. Among others, he claimed that the Boko Haram insurgents were ready to release the girls, who are spending their 150th day in captivity today, if government met certain conditions. He did not state the conditions.

    Most importantly, he said, the group was literally tired of holding the girls because it has run out of supplies. By this, Davis meant that Boko Haram does not have food, drugs and other essentials that could make living in the bush a bit easy. And with 219 girls in tow, the sect has added more to its burden with its own hand. Again, some of the girls were ill and needed medication, which Boko Haram could not readily provide

    In such a situation, the wise thing to do is to release the girls, which it seemed the group was willing to do,  everything being equal. Nigerians were looking forward to the government taking the matter up from there, but mum was the word from Abuja. What we heard next was that the government would not negotiate with Boko Haram because, in its own thinking, to do so, would amount to giving in to terrorism. Indeed, I am for standing up to terrorists, but time and circumstance should determine whatever position we take when confronted with two evils.

    In the circumstance that we are in, is it not better to negotiate with Boko Haram and get the girls out before any other consideration?  We have seen such happen in the United States (US). As powerful  as America  is, it did not allow its ego to stand in its way of negotiating with the Taliban for the release of an American soldier, who was captured in Afghanistan. For that lone American soldier, the US released five Taliban militias. There is a lesson in that for us, but our leaders chose to listen to those who said they should not negotiate with Boko Haram. If the US could through Qatar negotiate with the Taliban, what stops Nigeria from reaching out to Boko Haram in order to free our girls?

    Davis is again in the news. A few weeks ago, he released a bombshell. He claimed that he was told by the Boko Haram leadership that its sponsors are, among others, former Chief of Army Staff Lt Gen Azubuike Ihejirika and former Borno State Governor Alli Modu Sheriff. Many mouths are still agape over the allegation. Can it be true? This is the question many are asking because as army chief Ihejirika waged relentless war against Boko Haram. If he fought the sect while in office, when then did he become its sponsor considering that he left office not long ago?

    Davis’ claim beggars belief but it cannot be brushed aside with a wave of the hand. He must have been told something by the Boko Haram elements who he has met on a number of occasions to discuss one or two things. It  looks absurd that it took his allegation against Ihejirika for the government to disown him. When Davis spoke about his efforts to rescue the Chibok  girls after  meeting with Boko Haram, government did not tell us then that he was not acting on its behalf. It kept quiet, and silence, they say, means consent.

    If the government did not disown Davis then, why is it doing so now? Is it because he claimed to have been told that Ihejirika is a Boko Haram sponsor? What Davis said is mere allegation. What is more; it is hearsay. What this means is that he has to produce the person who told him that Ihejirika is a Boko Haram sympathiser for his statement to be worried. So, why is the government fidgety over his claim? Rather than being troubled by the allegation, it should try to get to the root of the matter, if it is  serious about stopping the Boko Haram insurgency.

    How do you stop Boko Haram if you are not ready to follow a lead that would help you in your investigation? It is disheartening that the State Security Service (SSS) could come out boldly the way it did without investigation to dismiss Davis’ claim against Ihejirika,  and yet in the same breathe, it upheld the allegation against Sheriff. Sheriff, the SSS said, would be invited for yet another interrogation. What did the SSS find in its previous interrogations of the former governor? If SSS did not find anything against him then, is it now that it will get cogent evidence of his romance with Boko Haram, just because of what Davis said?

    At times, our security agencies act hastily without looking at the merit of a case before drawing their conclusion. And this is just one of such occasions. There is no serious security agency in the world that will dismiss such grave allegations without prior investigation. For instance, a court will never dismiss a claim as frivolous and vexatious without first hearing the parties. Who and who did the SSS quiz before dismissing  Davis’ allegation against Ihejirika? If SSS  cleared him because as ”army chief he waged battle against Boko Haram”, why can’t it extend the same gesture to Sheriff, who the agency  investigated in the past without finding anything incriminating against him?

    The battle to unmask those behind Boko Haram is not one to be fought on sentiments. Our security agencies should bear in mind that they owe Nigerians a duty to end the Boko Haram insurgency and bring all those behind it to book, no matter how influential they may be. Nobody should be seen as too big or untouchable in this Herculean task of ridding our nation of this evil. No sane person will be happy with what Boko Haram is doing in the Northeast today.

    The insurgents  have been capturing towns and villages in Borno and Adamawa states, leaving death and destruction in their trail. We must collectively put a stop to this and the only way we can do that is to be truthful to ourselves. What is the essence of disowning Davis when we know that there is no way he could have found himself in Boko Haram’s enclave without the knowledge of those in power? And of course, that of the Australian High Commission, which represents his home government here. If Davis was not hired as government negotiator, what then was he doing in Boko Haram’s  den knowing the inherent danger in such adventure? Training the insurgents on the use of arms and how to make bombs?

    The government should spare us  that kind of talk. We are wiser than that. What we want urgently now is for our girls to be rescued and the lost towns in Borno and Adamawa states recovered from Boko Haram.

  • My truth is truer than yours (2)

    Tyranny is brought to ultimate refinement in the news columns; this brings to mind that memorable jest by Norman Mailer that “Once a newspaper touches a story, the facts are lost forever, even to the protagonists.” Journalists are often the butt of the most demeaning jokes and premeditated put-downs in the social arena. Nobody thinks much of a journalist; in the eyes of big business and the ruling class, the journalist whatever his designation or job title, is the manipulable pawn and necessary evil that has to be courted and tolerated.

    The descent and humiliation of the journalist however, begins in the hands of his employer; very few media today are paying fairly. Many are not paying at all and among the few establishments that pay, salaries are very poor.

    Just three media houses endeavour to pay fairly and while three may claim exceptionality in this respect, the reality is known to the government, big business, advertisers and general public that the Nigerian journalist is an endangered species, haunted by his employer and tormented by the public he serves. These sad realities lead to daily exodus of skilled and promising hands from journalism and a daily influx of quacks and brigands into the profession.

    This resonates badly for the Nigerian mob; the nation’s critical mob to be precise. Mob culture requires that he who would adorn the cloak of defender of the masses’ rights should be upright and flawless in character, professional and personal ethics. Such admirable traits are rarely attributable to the Nigerian journalist manager and the press in general.

    The Nigerian mob, like every other rabble, seeks fulfillment of tyrant fantasies; such fantasies often vary between the destruction of an unpopular government, despot or worn-out civilization. Reality however, affirms the impotence of the Nigerian mob. The latter is continually tamed and kept on a leash by a ruling class that capitalizes on its obvious handicaps: its impulsiveness, insensibility to reason and judgment, poverty of soul and intellect, its irritability and overt sentimentality – which are undeniably characteristic of beings belonging to inferior forms of evolution, like savages and carnivores.

    Despites it handicaps, the Nigerian mob conveniently picks on a scapegoat for its infinite timidity and cluelessness: the press. The journalist is expected to serve as the conscience and moral compass of the society, challenging the government and checking the excesses of the ruling class, uncompromisingly and selflessly.

    As utopian fantasies go, these are noble expectations of the journalist but the Nigerian mob ignores the cultural shift of the society from conventional morality to unbridled hedonism. It assumes, hypocritically, that the press will continually give it honest and developmental news even as every segment of the society strive to unmoor the journalist from his role as a crucial appendage of the nation’s critical mob.

    The public, comprising big business, the government, and civil societies among other mob segments, vilify any journalist or news medium that seeks to educate and engage rather than entertain and perpetuate their biased definitions of reality.

    Contemporary Nigeria embraces the emotional pageant that has turned news into paid publicity and mindless entertainment and the journalist in response kowtows to lusts and vanities of modern society. Beneath the mindless glamour and cultural decline however, an insidious reality festers in the death of hope and incandescence of tragedy.

    Prevalent socioeconomic tragedies necessitate the emergence and elevation among the citizenry of the bungling and sadistic, and the beginning of a differentiation cum tyranny of social grades.

    At the centre of the turmoil is the journalist whose fate is so critically bound with the country’s but he obviously does not know that hence the cluelessness, treachery and brazen recklessness that characterizes his work. Consequently, the Nigerian journalist manifests as an accident to society. He perpetually loses his grasp of the issues at stake; fundamentally hollow and benumbed to valor, he shamelessly resigns to the powers that be, blaming the tyranny of the ruling class and the proverbial ‘system’ for his inability to fulfill his professional and moral obligations to the society.

    Rather than pose a challenge to the system that domesticates and enslaves him, he chooses the easiest way out and plays junkyard dog to tyrant cabals and the predatory bunch constituting the nation’s ruling class. He assumes the role of a poseur and pretends to fight for the interest of the public. This sad charade is continually perpetuated across esteemed leader-writers’ polemics in foremost newspapers’ columns.

    The Nigerian journalist today, nurtures an abiding wariness for shattering his ego and dignified notion of the press; consequently, he shuns the inclinations to function ethically and measure up to lofty perceptions he tirelessly projects of himself and the press. But really, he prefers not to face the fact that the truth as he has learnt to say it is acutely relative.

    The contemporary journalist trades in all manners of truths, deploying sophistry and shades of impressive fallacies in the interest of whatever social divide fulfills his lust for relevance and survival. I am a journalist and I shamefully acknowledge that my clan and I hardly epitomize hope to our world. Not yet. Rarely does our work signify hope, self-sacrifice or a promise of future honesty and gallantry in the interest of all. We can blame the society and advance all forms of isms and ostentatious arguments to justify our descent the steep slope of amorality and socioeconomic expediency; it wouldn’t excuse our treachery to our calling and the Nigerian citizenry.

    If Nigeria chooses to exist as a land of savages, it’s our responsibility to nudge her back on to the path of humanity and progress – for only in such clime can we positively evolve and prosper. Our failure as journalists indicates severance from a progressive and moral culture while we institutionalize bigotry, lies, depravity, base sentimentality and pitiful fantasies.

    The traditional, conscientious journalist is going extinct today along with true, dependable news culture because Nigeria obsesses and migrates to the pseudo-reality of the internet and reality shows. It is no doubt ironical and unabashedly hypocritical that the masses would turn around to blame the press for not fulfilling its roles to the society.

    The only profiteers from the status quo are those skilled in the art of manipulation: the government, politicians and corporate establishment – but this despicable band can rarely function without the support of the journalist hence the urgent need for the Nigerian press to retrace his steps.

    Journalism will thrive and Nigeria will prosper if we neglect the culture of the news spectacle to focus on progressive pursuits, like development and socially responsible journalism. It is about time we stopped narrowing the debates and spotlight to the shenanigans and petty differences of the ruling class and instead aspire to serve as a true voice to the voiceless.

    There is no magical antidote to our decline and death as a crucial part of the nation’s critical mob. Real progress will manifest in the country when we start demanding that the ruling class march in virtual lockstep with promises they make. Whatever the tone and dialect of intellectualisation that characterizes our news culture, posterity will judge us by how truthfully we fulfill our roles as conscience and watchdog of the society.

  • 2015 and the Jonathan crowd

    2015 and the Jonathan crowd

    PRESIDENT Goodluck Jonathan’s campaign has finally taken off – against all odds.

    I salute His Excellency’s courage. Faced with the obvious blackmail by his numerous opponents, not to talk of the army of busybodies and unrepentant slanderers, who have been too mischievous to see his gigantic achievements, many a leader would have shied away from it all. Not so Dr Jonathan. His campaigners have flooded the land with rallies to celebrate their man. Television advertorials portraying him as a great man, just like many other giants whose opponents believe he shouldn’t be ranked with, are relayed all the time.

    Can you blame those excited young men and women who have launched a huge road show to drum up support for Jonathan’s re-election? Now, the whole country is on pins and needles for what Dr Jonathan will say about the numerous calls for him to run in 2015. An ever compassionate man, who has refused to be overwhelmed by Nigeria’s daunting problems – corruption, insecurity, poverty, violent crimes and others – Jonathan, I am sure, will not let them down. He will surely throw his hat in the ring.

    The campaigners, eminent citizens all, have been called all manner of names by those idle fellows who hide under the nomenclature “social commentator” to hurl abuses at others. Fraudsters. Tricksters. Pranksters. Crooks and cranks. They have been so called.

    Unknown to the critics, these are visionary men who saw through it all. They knew that the various irritants and distractions that we all see as problems are what they are – an amateurish attempt to discourage Jonathan from exercising his right to run next year.

    Consider the Boko Haram nonsense. The Presidency knew early enough that it was a mere political contrivance by the opponents of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) who vowed that what they could not make they must break. The President once said that members of the dreaded sect had infiltrated his administration. Why don’t you flush them out? Some cheeky fellows, who obviously are ignorant of the workings of a modern administration, asked His Excellency. Then, there were some bombings here and there, but not enough to loosen the grip of a government that is bent on damning all the odds to pursue religiously its widely maligned but highly successful transformation agenda, the fruits of which are all over the place now.

    Apparently not satisfied with the little attention it got after bombing the UN office in Abuja and the police headquarters, Boko Haram stepped up the game. It went in the dead of the night to abduct over 200 schoolgirls from their hostel in Chibok, Borno State, drawing global attention to what has been described as one of the biggest mass abductions ever.

    At first, the government dismissed it all as another political stunt. It was unmoved. It sent a team to validate the claim, challenging the “faceless” parents of the girls to show up or keep quiet. So serious and urgent was the matter that the First Lady joined in finding a solution. She summoned the school’s principal, the WAEC chief and others. Her conclusion, even though not surprising, was highly revealing: some mischievous fellows, most likely politicians who obviously lack the fear of God and do not want to see anything good about the President, had forged the abduction to malign him. She admonished them to fear God, crying: “Dere is God ooo”.

    There seems to be no evidence that those fellows have changed, despite Mrs Jonathan ’s admonitory tears. When the President wrote to the National Assembly, seeking permission to borrow $1billion to purchase equipment to fight Boko Haram, he was pilloried like a coach whose team had just lost a game it had under its firm control. Some said the cash was to fund his campaign for 2015, the same campaign that some patriotic Nigerians are now funding with ease. Others said he should first account for all the cash that had been voted for defence since he mounted the saddle. Yet, others simply said the money was too much. Are we talking about cutlasses and axes for political thugs? Bows and arrows for village vigilantes? Haba!.

    Now, Boko Haram has seized some key towns. It has declared a caliphate. A few days ago, some leaders of the North issued an ultimatum, saying Jonathan must get the Chibok girls out before October or forget about 2015.

    Where have these northern leaders been? Hasn’t the government said several times that it knows where the girls are and will get them out at the appropriate time?

    As if all that was not enough, an American – Liberian, Patrick Sawyer, an Ebola patient, flew into Lagos, fell ill and was admitted at a hospital. His desperate attempt to flee the hospital was physically resisted by a remarkable woman of a remarkable character who contracted the disease and died even as she opened our eyes to the big danger Sawyer posed.

    A source told me last night that he learnt from a politician whose uncle is close to a fellow who knows a man whose friend used to work at the Presidency that a team of local scientists with deep knowledge of human behavioural patterns analyses have been commissioned to crank out studies into the various distractions the President has been facing. One of the preliminary results of this massive academic exertion is the discovery that an opposition party may have hired the late Sawyer to unleash Ebola on Nigeria.

    Trust the President’s men. They have refused to be deterred. The campaigners have stepped up their rallies. Transformation  Ambassadors of Nigeria (TAN), Protectors of Nigeria’s Prosperity and many others are in the new game in town. Surveying the podium the other day, a colleague wondered how people could be chucking their money about, promoting a controversial cause. Now we know why the subsidy fraud probe never really got off the ground, he said, noting that some of those accused of creaming off billions in the fuel subsidy bazaar are the leaders of the campaigns.

    They have been talking about President Jonathan’s transformation of the railway, roads, ports and sports. In their excitement, they seem to have forgotten the wonders wrought by the transformation agenda in many other areas. How about the Almajeri schools that are now turning out potential professors, the glittering airports with top range equipment and schools that are set to be designated “centres of excellence” after just about a year of closure and those killer-roads that are now as smooth as airport runways, and the first class hospitals. The rice revolution and the cassava bread that has sent wheat farmers gasping for breath and the roaring textile mills. The steady electricity supply that has sent diesel and generator merchants screaming for help. As they say, the list is endless.

    As we pondered these “giant strides” of the administration, Chika Okpala, the one called Chief Zebrudaya Okoroigwe Nwogbo, alias 4.30, just popped up on the screen, white moustache  and all, saying: “Does anybody need mirror to look at what I have at hand? Nooo!  These are the ingredient of life. Automobile industry, Goodluck.. Petrol yanfu yanfu …Goodluck. Goodluck can do. Goodluck are going to do and Goodluck will be done. Are you seeing what I’m saw?”

    My colleague shook his head, gave a harsh, derisive laugh and concluded: “Now I know the whole thing is nothing but a joke.” Is he right?