The Nation Newspaper

Category: Thursday

  • Jonathan, Amaechi and culture of self-help

    Jonathan, Amaechi and culture of self-help

    To properly grasp the far reaching implications of the mayhem that took place in the Rivers House of Assembly last week, we will have to situate it within the larger context of a ‘self-help culture’, a euphemism for anarchy which has come to define the fourth republic since its advent in 1999. When I suggested diarchy on this page last week as one possible way of curing those who have institutionalized a’ culture of self-help’ of their madness, many thought I was dragging the nation backwards.

    General Obasanjo, as the chief guardian of the military decreed 1999 constitution, undermined the legislature and the judiciary. Accused governors were impeached by a handful of state legislators who themselves must have compromised their positions from a hotel room hundred of miles from the scene of their crime.

    The culture of self-help became institutionalised. Serving governors rigged elections through the help of the police and directed their victims to go to court while brigands held on to their priced loot- the governor’s seat. NNPC and Nigerian Ports were unabashedly and openly used as sources of patronage. Legislators, without qualms awarded themselves scandalously indefensible salaries and allowances.

    The current crisis in Rivers is about 2015. The president and his men want 2015 without opposition and without the electorate, if resorting to self-help would achieve the same goal. Timipre Sylvia of Balyesa became the first victim. Amaechi of Rivers seems to be the next.

    But beleaguered Amaechi, who became governor in spite of PDP, is proving to be a good product of self-help culture. Trying to exploit the sentiments of his people over Rivers/Bayelsa oil well issue he had openly cried out: “They have taken our oil wells from Etche; they have taken our oil wells from Kalabari; they have taken our oil wells from Andoni and they are battling to take over those in Ogba/Egbema/Ndoni. We are losing our oil wells everyday; If I speak, they will say that I am stubborn, but we have to defend our rights; Part of the problems were facing now is that we are fighting to protect our oil wells.”

    Ignoring the president body language, he seduced the opposition by sharing their sentiments on Sovereign Wealth Fund, Excess Crude Account, fuel subsidy, East-West road, Adamawa PDP case amongst others to win a Nigeria Governors Forum election by 19 to 16 votes. Humbled in its own game, the presidency scandalously embraced Jonah Jang the loser in the election. The Rivers State House of Assembly suspended the chairman of Obio/Akpor Local Government Area allegedly for corruption. Amaechi hid under the doctrine of separation of power to ignore the presidency pressure to reverse the decision. Again, beaten in its own game, Abuja resorted to self help. Obio-Akpor LGA was taken over by the Rivers State Police Command who chased out the council officials without any legal authority and without information or consent of the state governor. Dakuku Peterside, a federal legislator from the area described the action as ‘the height of lawlessness which each day moves us closer to anarchy’.

    Amaechi lost out in Rivers PDP intra-party feuds. But he secured a moral victory because the judgment in favour of Obuah who did not participate in the Rivers PDP congress nine months earlier was thought to have been influenced by powers that be in Abuja. The Abuja FTC court judgment by Justice Ishaq Bello, was described by Professor Itse Sagay as having ‘the capacity of derailing our democracy.’

    Joseph Mbu, the Rivers State Commissioner of Police claimed he has the mandate of the National Security Adviser (NSA) in far away Abuja to chair the Rivers Internal Security Council while Amaechi, as the chief security officer of his state wanted it rotated. Mbu, publicly called the governor names, supervised a demonstration led by militants but insisted the governor would need a permit to lead his own protest against Mbu and his Abuja backers. Amaechi once again got sympathy from far away Niger State whose governor Babangida Aliyu, said, “Mbu, allegedly, with the backing of federal government, has virtually taken over the security functions of democratically elected governor”.

    In June, in a show of power, the First Lady shut down the Rivers State capital ostensibly to attend the wedding of Evans Bipialaka. In July the same man at the head of five legislators procured a fake maze and proceeded before the arrival of 23 other members, purportedly impeached the speaker and declared self the new speaker. Even while the perversity was still going on, the Obuah led faction of Rivers PDP, loyal to the presidency, congratulated Bipialaka . “The lawmakers who elected Bipialaka as their Speaker had once again demonstrated the unity and sense of purpose that characterized the hallowed chamber before the crisis”; the party’s spokesman, Monday Oyenzeowu asserted in a statement. Gulak assertion that ‘Jonathan, a man of peace’ is not behind Rivers crisis only make critical minds chuckle.

    Betrayed by Mbu and abandoned by Abuja, Governor Amaechi also resorted to self-help. He rallied round a few loyal security men ostensibly to rescue his 23 loyal lawmakers and dislodged the’ five law makers’ loyal to the president. In the ensuing melee, Okey Chindah, a member of the President’s army of self-help enforcers was battered with the fake maze he and his daring four law makers had procured. He has since been flown abroad by the federal government for treatment, on tax papers account following his injuries.

    Now, the presidency, the god father of a ‘culture of self-help’ is blaming Amaechi for resorting to self help to chase out rascals and hoodlums that took over the state House of Assembly. His political adviser, said, “I am not aware of any plan to impeach the governor …what I know is that the House of Assembly intended to change their leadership, rightly or wrongly, they have a constitutional right to do it if they have the majority.’ Ahmed Gulak conveniently forgot to say, the presidency’s five foot-soldiers tried to impeach a speaker backed by 23 lawmakers.

    The Inspector General of Police M.D. Abubakar and the Police Service Commission chairman, Mike Okiro are more interested in the professional misconduct of the governor’s security aides. But many Nigerians, because of their own antecedents, unfortunately see their emergence as arising from a ‘culture of self-help’. Okiro, critics claimed was a card carrying member of PDP and an alleged government contractor before his appointment. Very few similarly forgot his role in the humiliation of Ribadu who as chairman of EFCC was demoted before being chased out of office and the country because he stepped on the toes of corrupt PDP leaders notably the British-jailed James Ibori and other ‘South-south’ indicted governors. Abubakar, the IG on his part, was alleged to have been indicted by the Justice Niki Tobi Commission of Inquiry examining the 2001 Jos crisis as Commissioner of Police in Plateau State, for allegedly taking sides in the sectarian violence which led to the death hundreds. In other words the outcome of the probe would be taken with a pinch of the salt by cynical public.

    But perhaps as the2015 battle becomes more vicious with both Abuja and Port Harcourt relying on ‘self-help’ to outwit each other, both sides may need to weigh the observation of  Dr. Junaid Muhammad that the culture of self-help as demonstrated by the ‘current developments in the PDP and especially in Rivers State bear an uncanny resemblance to the old Western Region, which led to the collapse of the First Republic, with very serious and bloody consequences. Then and now, the popularly elected leaders of those parts of the country were prevented from exercising political power and control, and the operations of the police, the army and the rump of security services were interfered with in a brazen political manner.’

    Perhaps we should add by reminding ourselves that when decent men such as Awo, Rotimi Williams, Enahoro, Adegbenro, Soroye opted to tackle the brigands and their federal backers in court, the judicial process was manipulated. And when they appealed to the British Privy Council, the federal government overnight changed the laws. One would have thought the travails of our nation since 1966 would have been instructive to those in Abuja who think they are invincible. But do people ever learn from history?

  • Nigeria’s growing economic relations with China

    Nigeria’s growing economic relations with China

    President Jonathan has just concluded a five-day official visit to China. The highlight of his visit was the signing of a Chinese loan of $1.5 billion for the development of infrastructure in Nigeria, including the expansion of four airports at Lagos, Kano, Abuja, and Port Harcourt. The official visit was reportedly marked by a lot of conviviality and cordiality on both sides with the large Nigerian official delegation been treated to the fabled Chinese hospitality and excellent cuisine.

    Sino-Nigerian relations have developed rather slowly over the years. It is now gathering some momentum. It was General Gowon who, as military head of state, first paid an official visit to China in 1972 shortly after the Nigerian civil war. When his brutal military regime faced international criticism and isolation General Abacha also decided to go to China for support. This was in the wake of the crackdown in Tiananmen Square in Beijing that led to China’s international isolation as well. In 1997, the Chinese premier, Li Peng, visited Nigeria too to boost China’s renewed interest in Africa, aimed at reversing the decline in China’s trade with Africa. Nigeria’s trade with China actually fell from $57 million in 1980 to only $7 million in 1985, recovering somewhat to $35 million in 1989. Thereafter, Nigeria-China trade grew from $35 million to $97 million in 1993, and reached $327 million by 1997. It is currently estimated at $13 billion.

    President Jonathan’s visit to China is significant as it underlines Nigeria’s growing economic relations with China. From the Nigerian perspective, closer economic ties with China have become imperative. The new Chinese loan of $1.5billion brings to a total of nearly $15 billion China’s investments and loans to Nigeria in recent years, including the $2.5billion investment in the newly refurbished Lagos-Kano rail line. Nigeria’s share of Chinese investment in Africa has increased to over 30 per cent. In 2012, total Chinese investment in Nigeria was $13.3 billion. In contrast total US FDI in Nigeria was $8 billion. To counter the growing economic relations between China and Africa, President Obama announced during his recent hurried visit to Africa an offer of $7 billion infrastructure loan to Africa. Some cynics will consider this offer as too late and too little. Financial commitments by the World Bank and the IMF are far less than Chinese loans to Nigeria. African countries are turning increasingly to China as an alternative source for infrastructure loans badly needed.

    Both countries now realise the importance of economic cooperation between them. China, the most populous country in the world, with the fastest global economic growth in the last three decades, averaging 10 percent annually, has emerged a leading player in the global economy. Its national economy is now bigger than that of Japan, or the EU countries combined. Within a few decades, China has lifted some 300 million of its people from abject poverty, a feat without any precedent in the annals of economic development. Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa, with vast reserves of oil and gas, needs China’s financial and technical assistance in the development of its decaying infrastructure. China too needs Nigeria’s oil and gas to fuel its growing industry. In addition, Nigeria is, potentially, the largest market for China’s industrial products in Africa. Nigeria’s imports from China account for over a third of its total trade with West Africa.

    As President Jonathan was reported as saying in Beijing, the increasing exploitation of shale gas and other energy alternatives by the US and other Western states has made the need for the diversification of the Nigerian economy away from oil more urgent. Increasing Chinese oil imports will make up for the slack in oil exports to the US. In 2005, China accounted for 40 per cent of the global demand for oil. Over 30 per cent of China’s oil supply is imported, with the country becoming the world’s second largest consumer of oil after the US. So, closer economic co-operation is in the mutual interest of both countries. But there is a pitfall here which Nigeria has to watch very closely. There is a chronic and growing trade imbalance between the two countries in favour of China. Nigeria should seek to reduce this vast trade imbalance by increasing its non-oil exports to China. China’s exports to Nigeria are currently estimated at $3 billion, while Nigeria’s exports are estimated at only $1 billion, a trade gap of $2 billion. This trade deficit, a concern to Nigerian leaders and its private sector, is being discussed by the Nigeria-China Joint Planning Commission. Nigeria should be wary of being used by China as a dumping ground for cheap Chinese exports, particularly textiles, as this will increase the existing trade imbalance between the two countries in favour of China and lead to more job losses for Nigeria. For instance, in 2006, South Africa imposed two-year import restrictions on some Chinese textiles. In this regard, the Nigerian authorities are beginning to take some limited action against cheap and fake Chinese exports. In 2006, NAFDAC banned pharmaceutical imports from some Chinese and Indian companies.

    China has the largest foreign exchange reserves in the world some of which is being invested in Africa where growth prospects are becoming increasingly attractive. Nigeria is eager to diversify its trade relations by reducing its trade dependence on the Western industrial countries. China, with its horde of foreign reserves, is one of the few countries in the world today that can assist Nigeria with its huge financing gap, particularly for infrastructure development, in such critical sectors as roads, the railways, bridges, airports, and public transportation in which Nigeria is hugely deficient. Nigeria will not achieve its huge economic potential unless it modernises its infrastructure. China can offer Nigeria such assistance with loans and investments in the critical sectors of the Nigerian economy. In April 2006, President Obasanjo observed, while addressing the visiting Chinese President, Hu Jintao, in Lagos, that “This 21st century is the century for China to lead the world. And when you are leading the world, we (meaning Nigeria) want to be close behind you.” It was the most effusive compliment to China by a Nigerian leader and demonstrated Nigeria’s eagerness to expand its economic relations with China.

    Until recently, relations between the two countries were tepid and took some time to develop. At its independence in 1960, Nigerian leaders knew very little about Communist China, a remote country, with its turbulent political history and frequent upheavals. Western influence in Nigeria was very strong and the Western media gave Communist China a bad press all over Africa, decrying its lack of respect for human rights and its authoritarian -style of government. Culturally, the Communist style of government had little or no appeal for African leaders. In fact, like many other states in Africa, Nigeria refused to even recognise the existence of China and did not enter into diplomatic relations with her until after the Nigerian civil war in 1970. At the UN Nigeria voted routinely along with the Western powers to deny China admission to the UN. Instead, Taiwan, which the Chinese regard as a ‘renegade’ province of China, was given China’s seat at the UN. China was badly isolated globally. During the years of the Cultural Revolution China turned its back on the rest of the world, including Africa. Before then, during the cold war era, it had tried unsuccessfully to get a foothold in Africa but it encountered strong opposition from the West as well as the Soviet Union with which it had fallen out. Its interests then in Africa were basically strategic and consisted mainly of challenging both Soviet and Western dominance in Africa during the cold war.

    To counter Western influence China encouraged wars of liberation in Africa and was supporting armed anti-colonial struggles in some 24 African countries, including South Africa. China’s main aim was to reduce Africa’s economic dependence on the West by offering long-term low interest loans to Africa and promoting the so-called ‘benevolent trade’ such as by buying up large coffee and tobacco surpluses from Tanzania. By 1976, China was already giving Africa more aid than the Soviet Union. It achieved a major breakthrough in Africa by financing and constructing the Tanzam railway that gave it access and some limited political influence in central Africa. Beijing’s involvement in the African liberation wars paid off when many African governments, including Nigeria, provided critical support on the UN General Assembly resolution admitting China as a member in October, 1971, and replacing Taiwan. Relations between Nigeria and China also began to improve dramatically. China had supported the secessionists during the Nigerian civil war and is believed to have sent Biafra some limited arms through Tanzania. The secessionist leader, Ojukwu, actually wrote Chairman Mao, seeking Chinese assistance ‘in our struggle against Anglo-American imperialism and Soviet revisionism to achieve a socialist revolution in Biafra’ and Africa. But China secured Nigeria’s recognition in October 1971, after which the two states began building modest bilateral ties based on terms of co-operation agreed between them in 1972 during Gowon’s official visit to Beijing.

    Predictably, the growing economic relations between China and Africa have caused some concerns in the Western countries, particularly in the US. In 2005, during a Congressional hearing in Washington, the chairman of the Africa sub-committee warned that ‘China is playing an increasingly influential role in Africa, and that the Chinese intend to aid and abet African dictators, gain a stranglehold on precious African natural resources, and undo much of the progress that has been made on democracy and governance in the last 15 years’. There were complaints from the US as well when a satellite launch deal was signed in 2005 by Nigeria and the China Great Wall Industry Corporation. But Africa needs to develop rapidly and, if necessary, will engage other powers to achieve its economic and technological goals. Africa cannot remain the economic preserve of the Western powers alone. It must diversify its economic relations in line with the process of economic globalisation. It is not China that is responsible for dictatorships in Africa, but the Western powers that, for long, supported African dictators, and refused to support liberation wars in Africa. There is no real danger of the Chinese exporting Communism to Africa. The Soviets did not succeed in doing so. If they tried, it is less likely that the Chinese would succeed where the Soviets failed.

    The Chinese have no interest in exporting their Communist ideology to Africa. Like Africa, China was, for centuries, the victim of invasion and colonialism by the Western countries. It has no colonial past or imperialist ambitions in Africa that can stand in the way of increasing economic co-operation between the two. China has no military bases in Africa or anywhere else outside its own territory. It is unlikely to use force to advance its economic interests in Africa What China wants, like any other foreign power, is access to Africa’s huge natural resources, particularly its oil, and new markets for its industrial products. Africa is more mature now and should ignore unjustified foreign concerns about its new economic relations with China. In its economic engagement with China, it should, collectively, be able to protect its own economic interests.

  • Our gods are not to blame

    Think continuously of those who are truly great, men and women who by their deeds fight for fairness and the good of all; think of those who wear on their hearts’ sleeve and domicile in the inner recesses of their souls, irrepressible zeal to make our lives better and worthy of our dreams …there are no such men and women alive, are there? For if there are, Nigeria would be 21st century version of Eden or Al Jannah; and men and women on whose watch our country so evolves and appreciate would be everything and even gods.

    Our people are quite insane, they wouldn’t know how to create a heaven or sustain the like of it but they create gods by the dozen. I do not speak of divinity that manifests only in far-fetched miracles and dreams; I speak of individuals that we quite desperately and misguidedly deify as our vanities dictate.

    Being rich is the closest you get to being god in Nigeria. Add an impressive root and very intimidating academic record to the mix and you have yourself a 21st century hero or god. Of what calibre are our idols? Who really, is the Nigerian god? Who is an example of a quintessential idol? Allison-Maduekwe? President Goodluck Jonathan? Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, Reuben Abati, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala or the rampaging law makers of Rivers State? Do their deeds make them worthy of hero-worship or blind deification?

    To what would these individuals owe our reverence of them? Some would say it is their brilliance and extraordinary achievements in their chosen callings. Anyone could be brilliant from time to time but intelligence is what we have to affect all of the time. How intelligent are our ruling class? How intelligent is President Goodluck Jonathan, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi? How intelligent are other members of the Nigerian ruling class?

    By their citizenship, do they provide the pathways to empowering the Nigerian youth…the disillusioned school drop outs of Umukegwu, Akokwa, Urualla, Apongbon, Idumota, Agege, Agbor, Sankwala, to mention a few? Do they teach the youth particularly, to evolve beyond the greed, selfishness and idiosyncrasies of their generation? Do they teach us to accept truths we cannot change, like the fact that we collectively make our world as gory and burdensome as it is by turning a blind eye to their tedious politics? Do they teach us to make peace with our guilt and conquer our riotous demons? Do they teach us that at the end, we get to choose what to make of our own lives and our own world?

    The answer lies as much in their utterances as their deeds. Alas! Transcendent moments and heroic acts are rather deeds of an exalted intelligence, something which Nigeria’s incumbent ruling class pitifully lacks. But despite its protests and dissatisfaction with the status quo, the Nigerian citizenry equally lacks that towering immensity of intellect and strength of character that remains prime requirements in the constitution of a progressive race.

    Our lust for heroes and gods illustrates a fable; it is not of latent strength but disintegration rather it reveals the weakness and shallowness of the Nigerian adult’s awfully preadolescent mind. Such mind is inherently incapable of creating leaders worthy of being called gods of unconditional love and compassion. All we are capable of are gods of impoverishment and gods of war.

    The Nigerian hero is a human sound bite. He is essentially a half-formed mammal, animal to be precise. Take for instance gods and goddesses we have created as our ruling class; they are no longer exclusively Nigerian or humane. Rather they have been turned upside-down and inside-out; they have been scrambled, corrupted and fertilized by ghastly manifestations of self love, tribalism, wantonness, perverted education and sense of worth.

    “All gods are homemade, and it is we who pull their strings, and so, give them the power to pull ours,” says Aldous Huxley, English writer. However, the manner in which the Nigerian electorate worships its ruling class and celebrates its bestiality makes it impossible for the latter to affect the necessary humaneness, tact and humility that are prime requirements of occupants of exalted public office. Having made super humans of them, they begin to delude that they are untouchable and unquestionable. They begin to parade themselves as gods and see the electorate on whose strength they ascended to their exalted positions as lesser creatures.

    They seek the exaggerated safety and coziness of fortresses they build around themselves to protect their ill-gotten wealth and ostentatious lifestyles. Suddenly it becomes taboo for them to hobnob with the working class. It becomes abominable for their wives, daughters and cooks to visit the same grocer or shop in the same market as the masses.

    Shamelessly, they clear our public coffers of our collective fund without any inhibition and in response; we celebrate them and grovel at their feet for crumbs of what is rightfully ours. Whenever they intrude our world, they leave behind pungent memories and pains. Whenever they come to town, we must be kept in traffic for them to move freely; whenever they are ‘guests of honour’ at our functions, we are treated with little or no honour. Apology to Kayode Oteniya.

    The chief quality of a true leader is the apparent sincerity in his manners. The speeches he makes are never mere platitudinous enterprise and his developmental programmes are never extraordinary elephant projects; his politics and humanity are not only heard but concretely seen and felt.

    Really there is prime merit in everything about him, and his life generally, radiates truth. His life is what we may call a great sober sincerity. A sort of temperate authenticity that is not only blunt but uncompromising. His fervor is undomesticated, bordering on the wild and forever wrestling naked with the elements that be for the love of the good and the truth of things. In that sense, there is something of the savage yet humane in him like all great men.

    He is one in whom one still finds human substance. He relishes no opportunity to tell any colourful story of himself anywhere; usually, he stands bare and grapples like a giant, face to face, heart to heart, with the naked truth of things. ‘That, after all,” according to Thomas Carlyle “is the sort of man for one.”

    And such is the type of man we should value above all others. He is the man who as Norman Mailer, an American writer, puts it, would argue with Gods and awaken devils to contest his vision. When he dies, his death would be felt nationwide as something more than a historic calamity; women would weep and men would fight back tears as if they had heard of the death of a very dear friend or Saint.

    The creation of such honorable man and god would be our noblest work. But we seem incapable yet of such honorable task. We could start by stripping ourselves of the greater vanities and portentous contradictions. Unhappy the land that has no heroes, says Andrea; No, unhappy the land that needs heroes, responds Galileo in Bertolt Brecht, late German playwright and poet’s “The Life of Galileo.” Regrettably, the meaning is lost on all.

  • Time to govern; not electioneering

    We have about two years to go before the next elections in Nigeria, except in a few states where elections are due next year. The federal elections are not due until May 2015. Although I know that people generally say the campaign for the next election begins during swearing-in, but in our case in Nigeria, I think we are carrying things to an extreme. There is too much politics in this country and little time for governance and development. Our leaders seem to spend too much time on planning to stay in office than on helping the country to develop. Hardly does anybody pick the newspapers or listen to the news without politics dominating everything. I think we are getting to a point of saturation where people would just switch off from politics.

    Unfortunately, there is no other way of ruling a people than through politics and it is in nobody’s interest to go back to the old days of military dictatorship. But our politicians have to be very careful that they don’t by their behaviour invite the unthinkable. We have only reached the midway in this present dispensation and there is nothing to show for it. The country is earning billions upon billions of dollars in the sale of hydro-carbons without the people benefitting from it. There is still no power in most places in this country. In fact more power is generated by individual Nigerians than by the state. Statistics show that only about 20 percent of Nigerians benefit from electricity supply. I have a feeling that this is probably true as far as supply of portable water is concerned.

    It may seem a middle class obsession, but there is need to say once again that our roads have collapsed and they constitute a danger to every road user and these are in the majority because we have no trains on which to ride and flying is out of the reach of the average individual not to talk about the risk of flying in Nigeria where aviation infrastructure is pedestrian. There is so much to do in terms of governance and everyday should count. As they say, a day is a long period in politics; it should also be that a day is a long period in governance. Imagine what can be done if all the efforts being concentrated on politics were to be devoted to finding solutions to our problems in Nigeria. The reason for this overconcentration on politics is because strictly speaking, there are no political parties in Nigeria, what exists are ad hoc coalitions to win elections. The party organs are not developed and there are no party structures and most of the parties have no ideologies. Those of us who grew up in the days of the Action Group in the Western region know that apart from government, there was a parallel party organisation with distinguished party functionaries who kept politics going on while those in government faced squarely the problems confronting society. This is not so nowadays except perhaps in Lagos, where there seems to be a well-organized and parallel political party structure completely distinct from government. Some people have argued that that is why Babatunde Fashola is able to devote most of his time to governance rather than to politics. This dichotomy does not seem to happen anywhere else most especially at the federal level.

    What is going on right now is not healthy for democracy. Because at the end of the day, democracy is about people and if people feel that their lives are not being changed by the democratic process, they are likely to develop a nonchalant and negative attitude to the political process. Even in countries where the impact of government is being felt, people are increasingly disillusioned about political leaders. The ongoing protests in Turkey and Brazil should be an eye-opener for our leaders. I know that Nigerians generally would say “this cannot happen here”; this assumes that we are a different kind of humanity, but I think we are wrong. In a globalized world, anything that happens in one part of the world has reverberation all-over the world. The internet, is not limited by national frontiers and communication these days, have universal audience. This is why we have to be careful that we don’t get carried away by our leaders’ penchant for looting the treasury through their love for primitive accumulation of resources that should belong to the commonwealth of our people.

    I shudder to imagine what can happen to this country if our leaders do not learn lessons from other lands. I remember vividly what happened during the demonstration against removal of so-called fuel subsidy, a year or so ago. To many, it was an occasion to ventilate their feelings against government and there is nothing wrong in doing that, but to others, it was an occasion for unbridled criminality. There were stories of looting, rapes in such places as Ibadan and the outline areas of Lagos by criminals on the lunatic fringe who took the opportunity of the demonstration to rave and rant against society and to commit crimes. I barely escaped being killed near Ibadan when I was travelling from Ife to Ibadan very early on the day of the demonstrations. I say this because in the nature of revolutions, blind fury can take over well planned and well articulated plans of protests and manifestation against government action or inaction and when revolutions begin, nobody can predict its end, because revolution tend to consume its own children. Therefore, those who wish for revolutions and those who by their lack of vision and non-performance invite the wrath of society on their heads and the heads of all of us, need to be warned of the possibility of eventual chaos or doom that await us as a collectivity of people if we don’t do the right thing.

    It was J. F. Kennedy who said “those who make reforms impossible make revolution inevitable.” My old Professor of Political Science at the University of Ibadan, Reverend Father James O’Connell, wrote a paper in the sixties titled “The inevitability of instability in Nigeria”, which at the time was dismissed as the wild imagination of somebody from the ivory tower. We now know how prophetic, O’Connell has been proved. Instead of facing serious problems of governance, both the legislative and the executive branches of government in Nigeria are usually seized with the non-existent problems of creating new states and re-writing the constitution, and wasting resources in this regard. They create unnecessary debate over a six-year term for the president and governors and creation of innumerable number of states to satisfy the ambitious politicians who want to be governors of their little ethnic kingdoms, without thinking of the viability or not of their little areas or the relevance of whatever years a president or a governor spends to the development of the country.

    A cynic has described the Nigerian democracy as “government of the politicians, for the politicians and by the politicians.” The people hardly count in the reckoning by our leaders. This cannot go on forever without repercussion especially in the face of massive unemployment of young people, particularly, young graduates; substandard education at all levels because of lack of facilities; and financial inputs by the relevant bodies and also massive insecurity and general underdevelopment. It is always a shame when one goes to countries that are oil-producing like our own and compares our physical development with theirs; and these where countries that became independent around the same time as our country. The difference between them and us is leadership. We have been cursed by the problem of the right kind of leadership in our country. In a developing or underdeveloped country, leadership by example is everything. If we had a leader today who is not corrupt, who is forward thinking, who is development oriented and selfless, he can take this country within a generation to the highest point possible. Singapore and Lee Kuan Yew are examples, so also are Mahathir Mohammad and Malaysia.

  • To kill or not to kill?

    It is a debate as old as time itself. It is a sensitive issue because it involves life. Wherever the issue is being discussed, emotions run high because the discussants find it difficult to reach a consensus. It all has to do with capital punishment. Should condemned men be executed? Many will not blink an eye before saying yes they should be killed. Yet, there are others who frown on the death penalty.

    Those against death penalty believe that it is inhuman to take a life, no matter what the person might have done. These people are also quick to cite the Bible to strengthen their position. ‘’Thou shall not kill’’, they say, quoting the Bible. But the scripture is clear on the issue of killing. Even the Quran is also explicit on the matter.

    The two holy books draw a distinction between intentional and unintentional killings. They mince no words in their condemnation of intentional killing, which today may be likened to extra – judicial killing. Whoever kills another intentionally, the holy books say, should also be killed.

    Today, there is a raging debate in the land over the propriety or otherwise of capital punishment. The debate ensued over the execution of some condemned men a few weeks ago by the Edo State Government. The executed men had been found guilty of various offences by the court. Their execution followed a presidential directive that governors should no longer shy away from signing the death warrants of condemned men.

    Those against capital punishment say that despite its implementation, we still have cases of armed robbery, murder and related offences. So, they argue, why retain capital punishment when it has not deterred people from committing capital offences. We have been executing robbers as far back as the 1970s yet robbery has not ceased, they further argue. They may have a point, but the failure of a law to deter crime should not be an excuse for throwing away the baby and the bath water.

    If despite the so – called harsh punishment things are like this what will happen if the law is not in place. If the law is not there, things may be worst than they are now despite the human rights community’s misgiving about its effectiveness. Can we blame the laws ‘ineffectiveness’ on the upsurge of capital offences? What the human rights community seems to forget is that those with criminal tendencies will exhibit those traits no matter the ineffectiveness of the law in place. Human beings are very complex. Some express fear for the law, while others are ready to march on the face of the law. In that wise, should such people be allowed to go scot – free? What will become of the society if we allow such impunity?

    Nobody is happy seeing people tied to the stake and shot or put under the gallows, but for a safe, secure and saner society, these things must be done. When such happens, it is for the wise to draw a lesson from such episodes and refrain from things that could make them collide with the law. Execution as a form of punishment is to instil the fear of God in would – be criminals and also protect society. As the Americans would say, ‘’if you don’t want to do the time, don’t do the crime’’. Those who kill or rob know the consequences of their action and that is death. Even the Bible tells us that the wages of sin is death. What greater sin can there be than to rob or kill?

    Armed robbery and murder, lest I forget, are not offences against the victims alone; they are also offences against the state. This is why the state and not the individual prosecutes for murder and armed robbery. It is because of the sensitive nature of these offences that the state takes up the matter itself in order to avoid a scene in court if the victim’s family decides to prosecute. If the victim’s family is allowed to prosecute, chances are that another murder may be committed in court. Those who kill deserve to be killed. Nobody should take human life and be allowed to live thereafter. What is he living for? If a murderer feels somebody is not worthy of life, he too should be denied the benefit of living.

    Society is the worse for it when people take the lives of others for no just reason. Must we look the other way when such barbaric acts are perpetrated? If we decide to do nothing on such occasions, we will be digging our own grave without knowing it because soon we will have a society of killers. Things have not become worse than they are now because of the law which provides capital punishment for such offences. As I have observed, nobody is happy seeing criminals executed, not even judges, but then, they have a job to do, no matter how unpalatable it may be.

    Perhaps, this was why Justice

    Chukwudifu Oputa, then of

    the Supreme Court, noted in a 1985 murder appeal involving Josiah versus the state: “Justice is not a one – way traffic. It is not justice for the appeallant only. Justice is not even only a two-way traffic. It is really a three – way traffic – justice for the appellant accused of a heinous crime of murder; justice for the victim, the murdered man, the deceased ‘whose blood is crying to heaven for vengeance and finally, justice for the society at large, the society whose social norms and values had been desecrated and broken by the criminal act complained of’’. If justice must serve all these purposes outlined by Justice Oputa, it means that those condemned for murder or armed robbery must pay the ultimate price for their dastardly act or else society risks being at the mercy of criminals. We cannot afford that. With due respect to rights activists, the right of a convicted killer to life ends at the point he is found guilty of the crime. For criminals to maintain their right to life, they must do away with acts that can deprive them of this God given right. If they know how to kill, they should be ready to know how to die when they are caught.

    Killed in their prime

    It was the last thing the public expected to hear in the wake of the emergency declared in the Northeastern states of Adamawa, Borno and Yobe because of the Boko Haram insurgency. Since emergency was declared in those states on May 14, there appears to have been a lull in the sect’s activities until last Saturday when people believed to be its members hit a secondary school, killing 20 pupils and a teacher. These innocent kids were asleep when the killers struck around 5.30 am. No matter what anybody says, this was a premeditated act carried out with the intention of having the maximum effect. Those kids did not deserve to die that way. These were children sent to school so that tomorrow they can stand on their own and contribute to the socio – economic development of our country. Their dreams have been killed and our parents’ plans for them shattered. It is a callous and barbaric act which no sane person could have engaged in no matter the provocation. The killers carried out the act fully aware of what they were doing. It was a planned and deliberate act to provoke the country at large. Boko Haram carried out this attack because in recent times, it has been losing the terrorism war. Since soldiers arrived in those states, they have succeeded in pushing the Boko Haram insurgents out. Many of its members have fled to neighbouring countries, while those still around no longer move about freely. Since they have been caged, as it were, they needed to make a statement that they were still a force to reckon with. So, they resorted to killing these innocent souls just to make a point. What a mindless act. For too long, Boko Haram has been killing people and getting away with it. This time around, they should not be allowed to get away with the murder of these children. We must pursue this group to the end of the earth if need be in order to make it pay for this killing. Anything short of this will further embolden these killers. Can those campaigning against capital punishment now see why the penalty should be retained for grave offences such as this. I invoke the spirits of these children not to rest until their killers are brought to justice.

  • Rivers: Where are the elders?

    Rivers: Where are the elders?

    WHAT is going on in Rivers State?

    The scene is familiar. A group of lawmakers – usually infinitesimal in number -find their way into the House of Assembly chamber, grab the mace, proclaim one of them speaker and, apparently in a befuddled state of a newfangled legal muscle, proceed to make fundamental decisions. By the time the world learns about such actions, it is too late for sanity to prevail, too late to withdraw a bitter joke.

    That was the scenario on Tuesday at the Rivers State House of Assembly. Five lawmakers – they are often described as loyalists of Minister of State for Education Nyesom Wike; have they lost their identities? – seized the chamber to proclaim a new leadership that lasted just a few minutes. Governor Rotimi Chibuike Amaechi moved in to pull the brakes on the theatrics. The nonsense stopped after a few heads had been smashed.

    A source has just told me that the root of the Rivers crisis is money. Cash. As a corollary of this is 2015. The crisis in the local Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has been contrived to achieve a purpose, which surely is not to project the people’s interest, but to pursue personal designs for personal gains. I hope the actors do not think they can take the people for granted forever. When they realise the truth and rise, the consequences may be too grievous for us all to handle.

    A brief recall of some of the events. A court in Abuja handed over the leadership of the party to Felix Obuah as chairman. Obuah is believed to be loyal to Wike. Godspower Ake, who the Abuja court removed, is of Amaechi’s faction. He insists he was validly elected in an election Obuah never participated in. The House of Assembly suspended a local government chairman and his executives from office for alleged fraud. The party asked Amaechi to restore the council chiefs. He did not. He couldn’t have. The principle of the separation of powers will never allow that. The party suspended Amaechi and asked him to apologise for him to return to the party.

    Ever since, the Rivers crisis has been part of the trouble with the national PDP. Amaechi’s plan to retain his chairmanship of the Governors’ Forum became a fratricidal strife from which the forum is yet to recover. Governors became the subject of beer parlour jokes after Plateau State’s Jonah Jang maintained that he won the election with his 16 votes. Amaechi scored 19. Academic giants were seized by a strange frenzy in a bid to unravel the new theory of how 16 became bigger than 19 – the Nigerian politician’s latest contribution to scholarship. Till date, they are yet to resolve the mystery. Unable to conceal his questionable neutrality any longer, President Goodluck Jonathan embraced Jang, hosting him at the Villa.

    Amaechi was subjected to all manner of indignities. A recent visit of the First Lady shut down the Rivers capital city, Port Harcourt. He had to shelve some official engagements for as long as the Dame Patience Jonathan road show lasted. Many verbal grenades were hurled at him. The official aircraft that flew him to the Akure Airport was grounded in questionable circumstances. Before then, Rivers had lost some oil wells to its neighbour, Bayelsa, in what has been seen in many informed circles as an attempt to cripple the state financially.

    Amaechi and Commissioner of Police Mbu Joseph Mbu are not the best of friends. They are not working together. In fact, the governor says since Mbu’s arrival in the state, the crime rate has surged, adding that kidnappers are back in business and robbers have ended their holiday to seize the state by the throat. Mbu denies it all. He insists that he remains an impartial enforcer of the law and not an executioner of a political design drawn up from the very top as part of a line-up of activities to enfeeble Amaechi.

    The governor has remained pertinacious, saying the interest of the people is paramount. Nobody, it should be noted, has dismissed Amaechi’s achievements in many areas of development – health, education, infrastructure and all that. Why then is he having problems? Politics? Envy? Ambition?

    A school of thought says it is because Wike, a former associate and Chief of Staff to Amaechi, wants to succeed him, but that the governor has dismissed this as a mere dream because he and the minister are from Ikwerre. Others, he says, should be given a chance. Wike kicked. He launched into a war of attrition against Amaechi.

    Like a mere scratch of the skin, the Rivers crisis has grown into a sore that needs attention because of its potential to balloon into an infectious disease that will spread to other places and become difficult to heal. There are speculations that the main target of the madness in the House on Tuesday was Amaechi. If the five legislators had had their way, they would have initiated impeachment proceedings against the governor. Sounds strange? Yes. But, recall, dear reader, that recently, 16 was said to be bigger than 19. Besides, memories of such incidents are fresh. Dariye. Alamieyeseigha. Fayose. Impeachment is a long process, but our politicians sure know how to shorten any process. After all, doesn’t the end justify the means?

    The role of the police in this drama has been everything but noble. From just watching hoodlums harass the lawmakers on Tuesday, the police yesterday stepped up the game. They reportedly fired teargas into the Government House as they pursued people who had come to show solidarity with the embattled governor.

    Where is the Constitution in all this? Where is the rule of law on which the Jonathan presidency has built its shaky public image? With businesses shut down yesterday as policemen chased protesters around the city, there is a clear invitation to anarchy. Presidential aide Dr Doyin Okupe has said his boss is not involved in the crisis, adding that Amaechi is too small for Dr Jonathan to fight. Hold it doc; that is wrong. The issue is not Amaechi. Why should the President watch as a part of the country is being wracked by anarchists who don the garb of politicians. Shouldn’t he show he is not part of this morbid game – many believe he is –?

    Those former militants who made a living by fighting the law are back in business. They are leading the assault on the state’s constituted authority – obviously with official backing. Isn’t this a costly way of keeping ex-militants busy?

    Nigerians, ever inventive, have started cracking jokes with the Rivers situation. A friend sent me this: “Dad & Son.”

    Son: Dad, why are you training in martial arts?

    Dad: It has been entrenched in our constitution as part of the criteria to contest elective office.

    Son: Are you sure, dad, that we now have such in our constitution; since when?

    Dad: Oh my son, yesterday the Rivers State House of Assembly was suddenly turned into a boxing ring. I need to acquire skills to defend myself when I become a honourable member.

    But the Rivers crisis is no laughing matter. It is the type that makes decent people fulminate. Where are the elders? Should the nonsense in Rivers be allowed to go on? The other day at the Villa, a group of Rivers indigenes, among them some notable individuals, visited the President. They poured invectives on Amaechi, casting him in the mould of an implacable brat. That is not the way of elders who are expected to be custodians of public morality and wisdom. It is politics taken too far.

    It is good that the National Assembly has stepped into the matter. The nonsense in Rivers must be arrested. It should not be allowed to spread. With a state of emergency in three states, the fiendish bloodletting in Plateau and the communal clashes all over the place, Nigeria seems to be overdrawing its account in the bank of peace. It may hit the red.

    Rivers indigenes have a big role to play in the resolution of this crisis, which is part of the long-predicted implosion of the ruling PDP. They should demand peace and decency. But, again, where are the elders?

  • 2015:  A revisit to the diarchy option

    The omen of 2015 is unsettling. As the desperation, scheming, and intrigue unfold, the fate of our nation after 2015 looks uncertain. As if it is a family title, the South-south exuberant youth and octogenarian militants are saying, it is Jonathan or there will be no Nigeria. It is difficult to know where the South-east stands. The North like the ostrich, with its head buried in the sound, while blaming her adversity on unfair sharing of oil revenue, is insisting power must return to its traditional place-the north. The South-west is wary of casting its lot with President Jonathan it helped into

    power for marginalizing and uprooting its people from the commanding heights the economy. The rest of the Middle-Belt for fear Islamisation of their area, preach ‘an eye for an eye’ like their Islamic fundamentalist counterparts.

    Yet the beneficiaries of the current anarchy have ignored a call to discuss many of our self-induced crises. In the midst of massive corruption and culture of arbitrariness, the guardian of the democratic process has become intolerant of dissent. They insist they must rule for 60 years. Last month, leading lights of the party publicly swore that members would rather die than let go of power. Many of those behind the creation of a mega party to confront the PDP evil have no ideological orientation. As if these are not enough threat to 2015 elections, we are fighting elusive religious fundamentalists that amidst state of emergency, and deployment of soldiers, strolled into secondary school boarding houses and university student living quarters, murder our children and our future in their dozens.

    That the political class has failed is perhaps an understatement. Perhaps it is time to revisit the diarchy option which apart from allowing soldiers direct participation in government also make them watchdog over the conduct of politics and public life. This call is not new.

    At the beginning of the fourth republic, in September 1998, the Northern Elders Forum (NEF), after a meeting in Kaduna  in a communiqué signed by its  Secretary, Senator A. M. Gani and  chairman, Alhaji Aliko Mohammed said “more realistic civilian/military relationship should be considered in order to ensure a stable polity”. Much earlier, precisely in October 1972, Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe came under virulent attack when he first mooted the idea.

    The argument of anti-diarchy group has been that the military is ill-equipped, ill-educated  and ill-tempered to manage society and that they  are in fact the cause of the decay we have in our society today. But those reasons are in fact why the military in my view should be given responsibility to contribute towards finding solution to the mess they have made of our society since they came as custodians and liberators in 1966 ostensibly to deal with those who had undermined the electoral process during the first republic.

    It was true the inheritors of power in 1959, instead of deepening democratic principles, destroyed opposition and followed up with the rigging of the 1964 election. History repeated itself in 1983. The election was massively rigged, and the sea and land slide victory of NPN brought the military in 1984. After eight years of Babangida’s ‘transition without end’, Babangida imposed Ernest Sonekan as a stop-gap for Abacha the maximum ruler. Following Abacha’s death, Abdulsalami Abubakar, the caretaker along with retired military well-heeled officers imposed Obasanjo. Beside those who operated behind the scene, the stars of Obasanjo administration include Aliyu Gusau, Theophilus Danjuma, Bode George, Ahmadu Alli, Olagunsoye Oyinlola, David Mark, Jonah Jang, Abubakar Atiku and Tony Anenih among many others.

      Obasanjo at the end of his second term imposed Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, the younger brother to the late General Shehu Musa Yar’Adua who was the equivalent of a prime minister under him as military Head of State in the in 1979. He publicly admitted imposing President Jonathan when the search for his (Jonathan) replacement took him to Jigawa State recently.

    The truth is that the Nigerian military has since 1966 surreptitiously wielded power and influence, controlled the commanding heights of the economy either directly or by proxy. They do all this without being accountable to Nigerians. ‘It has been power without responsibility’. Diarchy will make the military accountable.

    We must also not lose sight of the enduring legacies of the military when tamed and managed by visionaries and those trained to manage society such as Obafemi Awolowo, Tony Enahoro, Aminu Kano, Ahmed Joda, Phillip Asiodu and others. We fought a 33 months civil war without borrowing money. We had a viable working federation of 12 states that had been impossible to create due to the selfishness of three dominant ethnic groups; Hausa/Fulani, Igbo and Yoruba before the

    collapse of the first republic. They bequeathed on Nigeria pillars of unity such as NYSC, Federal Government Colleges, enduring monuments like Murtala Mohammed International Airport, Third Mainland Bridge, the now collapsed Lagos/ Ibadan, Sagamu/Benin express ways and their equivalents elsewhere in the nation. They presided over a nation with a solid economic base.

    If our bureaucracy, the best in Africa , if our university system, highly regarded in the world, if our teaching hospitals that ranked very high among the Commonwealth countries collapsed, blame reckless military adventurers like Murtala Mohammed and Obasanjo who destroyed these institutions out of share ignorance. If our ‘economy started heading for the rocks’ in the early eighties, blame Obasanjo who in 1979 said the best Nigerian manager of man and resources did not necessarily have to emerge as Nigerian president. If the economy finally collapsed, and if corruption became institutionalized, blame Babangida with his ‘army of anything is possible”, who embraced IMF-inspired privatization through which they shared our national patrimony among themselves and their cronies.

    I am also aware of the argument of anti-diarchy to the effect that the cure for imperfections of democracy is more democracy. But while it is true that democracy has become the new god worshipped by all nations including those ruled by dictators, we must also define our own variant of democracy. Do we want to pattern hours after the French’s ‘Liberty, equality and fraternity, that has left France economy prostrate, or after those of communist China and Russia that have helped them to move their nations from one that could not feed its citizens a few years back to become the second biggest economy in the world and from one that was a few years back a candidate for aid but now inching back to its former position as a world power? What we have in the last 14 years is not democracy but anarchy.  If diarchy with restricted freedom guarantees “responsiveness of government to the people, justice, and civil liberties of thought, speech writing, and worship”, we will still not be too far away from the initial concept of democracy by the Greeks.

    And if the true test of democracy is election, who else but soldiers can cure those who insist Nigeria is doomed if their tribal representative loses  election, that their party must rule for 60 years or that they are ready to die rather than lose power, of their madness? Without a balance of terror, those who have consistently undermined the electoral system since 1964, and have now elevated election to ‘a do or die affair’; those responsible for widespread poverty, illiteracy, injustice, social discontent, all of  which reduce the electorate to easy tools for manipulation; those who under fund and undermined  the institutions needed for safeguarding democracy, like the police, the electoral body, judiciary, and the mass media will continued to be let loose on our nation.

  • Niggers with attitude (4)

    (Portrait of the Nigerian as a ‘black’ ant) 

    We live to a devastating stereotype. Like fattened ducks, we waddle against the walls of institutionalized pigeonholes as the ram thrashes in its soul at the descent of the butcher’s jackknife. But we are no ducks neither are we cattle of any kind. We are humans, learning to live as livestock, because we think it’s shrewd and fashionable to do so.

    Freedom has a thousand charms to show, that slaves, however contented, never know, writes Cowper and quite truthfully too. The tragedy is in the details. And the details are all around us, in our past glories and defeat, infinite quirks and measured sobriety. It is in our fabled heritage and defunct humanity, colourful history and grand inadequacies. It’s what separates our foibles from what we term fate. And what symbolizes our mental inferiorities and political expediencies.

    But necessity, like William Pitt the Younger, would say, is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants and the creed of slaves. Slaves like the Nigerian nigger.

    A 27-minute video among other things, distinguishes a select few of Nigeria’s pioneer statesmen from the gangs of glorified eejits – if I may insult poor eejits by comparing them to the country’s ruling class – that currently occupy the country’s corridors of power. The video is of the July 1961 visit of Nigeria’s first Prime Minister, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, to the United States of America (USA).

    Great thanks to Farooq Kperogi, a Nigerian scholar resident in the USA; after he stumbled on the video on the website of the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, he promptly shared it with friends on Facebook. The video is intense with charm and instructive with lessons in manhood, desirable pride, poise and refinement epitomized by the league of extraordinary statesmen that served Nigeria at independence.

    Between July 25 and 28, Kperogi, enthused and I confirmed in the video, the late Abubakar Tafawa Balewa and a modest entourage of about 10 key government officials visited the United States on the invitation of the late President John F. Kennedy during which Tafawa Balewa visited major historical landmarks in representative parts of the United States and addressed a special joint session of the United States Congress that was convened in his honor.

    Only a select few, as Kperogi noted, “are accorded the honour of addressing a joint session of the United States Congress. Certainly no Nigerian head of state has been accorded this honour since Tafawa Balewa.” According to the website of the Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, since 1874 when the King of Hawaii first addressed a joint meeting of the U.S. Congress, there have been only 112 such privileges granted to foreign leaders and dignitaries.

    Watching the video was as enchanting as it was delightful; Balewa’s address to the joint session was persistently “punctuated” by thunderous, standing ovation. In all the cities he and his entourage visited, Americans came out to wave at them hospitably, and U.S. government officials bowed very respectfully when they shook hands with the Nigerian Prime Minister. Thus was the depth of respect the pioneer Nigerian leader and nationalist inspired in 1960s America.

    Men like Balewa and his contemporaries at the period in the persons of the late Obafemi Awolowo, Nnamdi Azikiwe to mention a few, personified the infectious grandeur, unimpeachable character, progressiveness, patriotism, depth and self-assurance that remains the prime requirements of statesmanship that Nigeria and the African continent deserves. These men, despite their shortcomings, were no Nigerian niggers. The same can hardly be said of incumbent Nigerian leadership and citizenry.

    The Nigerian leadership today could be likened to men gifted with the mentality of the hyena and the sensibility of the guinea fowl. The same may be said of the Nigerian citizenry. Our lust for unearned riches, acclaim and the west’s approval illustrates the shallowness and weakness of the Nigerian adult’s ignorance and awfully preadolescent mind. It reiterates a very shrill cry for help that’s at once self-seeking, infantile and retrograde. It is what makes Nigerian leaders pilfer and deplete the nation’s treasury to embark on idiotic trips abroad to learn western-european governance styles to be ineffectually applied back home. It is what makes Nigerian leaders throw their doors open to every visiting foreign cub reporter even as they deny seasoned journalists back home, similar opportunities. During such interviews, such characters persistently expose themselves to ridicule, presenting themselves as inveterate idiots by their comportment and utterances which are tailored to glorify the disturbing plots and agenda of the foreign newshounds.

    The citizenry is guilty of the same inanity as indicated by the widely broadcast documentaries on Niger Delta militancy, the insidiously “professional” and manipulative “This is Lagos” and “Law and Disorder in Lagos” documentaries on Lagos which glorifies the city’s shanty and street urchin (area boys) culture and malaise. Such media fare reveals contemptible plots to fulfill derogatory news agendas to the delight and pitiful acquiescence of the news subjects.

    I am yet to see a Nigerian journalist travel to the United Kingdom or the US for instance, to enjoy similar courtesies and stupidity from the countries’ leadership and citizenry. It’s even more worrisome to note that the incumbent Nigerian leadership has never enjoyed and will never enjoy the kind of respect accorded the late Tafawa Balewa, Obafemi Awolowo and their ilk at independence. It is impossible for the average Nigerian to enjoy such courtesies and honor given the inexplicable greed, complacence, degeneracy, shallowness of thought and character characteristic of majority of the Nigerian people.

    The kind of inferiority complex projected by the ruling class and passed down to generations of Nigerian youth affirms the western belief that we are not as mentally proficient as they are. Consequently, they see us as irredeemably ignorant, inept, corrupt and susceptible to inexplicable violence and inferiority complex. Unfortunately, the average Nigerian’s sociability and prodigal nature manifests to further serve as evidence of a collective idiocy and inferiority complex of a crude race that recognizes and accepts its intolerable limitations.

    That we are very accommodating and hospitable like Akin Akindele rightly noted shouldn’t make us “bend over backwards to impress any white or yellow man more than we would any other ordinary person.” But the import of such admonition is lost on us; mediocre and highly incompetent foreigners come to Nigeria and are immediately regarded as ‘expatriates.’ Yet many brainy and exceedingly talented Nigerians are treated with contempt and suspicion at home and abroad. Abroad, they are despised for being Nigerians based on bigoted generalizations about the average Nigerian’s fraudulence and deadliness. At home they are despised for being different and capable of evolving the process that would lead to that progressive and prosperous socio-economic system that we seek.

    If we are to be judged by indigenous mores of morality or what Greek philosopher, Pythagoras, deems the human measure of all things, we shan’t fare excellently well, not by a smidgen. We have fared diffidently for too long; that is why local and international idiots as fragile as clay toys have evolved into outsized heroes and gods, on our watch. To the rest of the world, we are just a bunch of contemptible niggers; still.

    • To be continued…

  • Diplomatic row over proposed UK visa bond

    Diplomatic row over proposed UK visa bond

    The usually cordial and long standing bilateral relations between Nigeria and the UK are being sorely tested by recent press reports that the British Conservative government is planning to introduce a UK visa bond of £3,000 for first time Nigerian visitors to the UK. Nigeria is one of the six countries being targeted by the proposed visa bond. The other countries include Ghana, Bangladesh, India, Kenya, and Pakistan, all Commonwealth countries. It is believed that this new visa policy could be introduced as early as in November. The countries being targeted by this new measure were caught by surprise as they were not consulted about the visa changes contemplated by the British government.

    Nigeria’s official response to the proposal was predictably swift with the Foreign Minister, Ambassador Gbenga Ashiru summoning the British High Commissioner to the Foreign Affairs Ministry in Abuja to strongly convey to the UK government Nigeria’s displeasure and concerns about the visa measures proposed. He urged Britain to reconsider the new visa changes and left the British envoy in no doubt that the visa measures were wholly unacceptable as they were plainly discriminatory.

    At their meeting, the British High Commissioner was reported as saying that only first time visa applicants would be affected by the proposal, still being worked out, and that the number of such applicants is really insignificant. He added that of 180,000 visa applications from Nigeria last year, some 125,000 were approved. But he did not disclose how many of this number of approved applicants were first time applicants, or how many of them had infringed British immigration laws. The number of Nigerian visitors who break British immigration laws cannot be so large and significant as to justify the new British visa policy. Most Nigerians who go to the UK are law abiding. It is morally wrong for the UK to seek to paint all would be first time Nigerian visitors to the UK with the same brush because of the sins of a few. Many of these applicants are students who, for historical and linguistic reasons find Britain more attractive than other foreign countries. The UK should clarify the situation by disclosing figures of Nigerian visitors that have broken British immigration laws.

    The British authorities are seeking to justify the visa review on both economic and security grounds. But the motivation is largely political as the proposed visa measures have strong electoral appeal in Britain. In 1966, when Enoch Powell, a right wing Conservative Party leader, warned that unless immigration from black Commonwealth countries was curbed, there would be ‘rivers of blood’ in the UK he was roundly condemned by the leaders of the two major political parties for his racist bigotry. Today, Britain is less racially tolerant. All three major political parties, including Labour, will support the proposed measures for electoral reasons. The British economy is under strain. It has been slowing down for years. But this trend can hardly be blamed on foreign emigration to Britain. There is no evidence to support this view. France and Italy, both of which traditionally have also had a larger number of immigrants, have stronger economies than Britain. Neither is contemplating the visa measures being considered by Britain. The down turn in the British economy cannot be justifiably blamed on foreign immigration. The reasons are largely domestic. That is where the solution lies. As a matter of fact, foreign immigrants to Britain have had a positive impact on the British economy, by holding down wages and, thereby, keeping inflationary pressures in Britain low. Without them wages in the UK will sky rocket.

    The current British Conservative government has rightly embarked on savage cuts in public expenditure to reduce Britain’s huge budget deficit, the real reason for the economic downturn in Britain. The cuts are having a significant impact on jobs and public service delivery. This negative trend has made the Conservative government rather unpopular in Britain. There are security considerations involved as well in this new visa policy. The countries targeted in the fresh visa proposal are considered the major sources of terrorist attacks in Britain. Only a few weeks ago two British citizens of Nigerian ancestry were named in the killing of a British policeman. They are both currently facing trial for the murder. But the two suspects were born and bred in Britain, not in Nigeria. It was in Britain that they were indoctrinated by Islamic extremist groups. The truth is that there are more British born would be terrorists in Britain than those seeking entry into Britain from countries such as Nigeria.

    The British visa review proposal is a knee jerk reaction to both the economic and security challenges facing Britain and other Western countries. It will not on its own solve Britain’s economic or security problems. What is needed to meet this particular challenge is a global and not unilateral response to a problem that is festering globally. The UN could provide a forum where this visa problem can be discussed and debated with a view to working out a framework based on a global consensus. Otherwise, there is a strong danger that the world could run into a global visa quagmire. This could undermine the much touted globalisation of the world’s economy as every country shuts down its borders to foreign immigrants. This is a real danger that the UK government should not ignore.

    The Nigerian authorities are right to convey to the British authorities their concerns about this proposed discriminatory visa policy. While it is conceded that Britain has the right to determine its immigration policy, this new measure targeted at some Commonwealth countries will damage the cordial relations hitherto existing between Britain and Nigeria. It will also weaken Commonwealth ties, already fragile for historical reasons. Britain is no longer a major world power. It has for decades now been on the retreat from its global and old imperial responsibilities. In fact, it is less nostalgic now about the historic ties of the Commonwealth than its partners. But it is still the leader of the Commonwealth of which its Queen is the head. This status imposes certain moral and political responsibilities on Britain which she now seems to have abandoned in recent years.

    True, Britain’s major political and economic interests are now centred mainly in Europe. Her economic relations with the Third World have declined somewhat. But that is where Britain should be seeking to strengthen its economic ties. Can Britain really ignore her long standing friendship and economic ties with the new Commonwealth countries? Can she afford to weaken her ties with these countries, including India, which have vast economic potentials? Such countries will be right in coming to the conclusion that Britain no longer cares about her Commonwealth ties and has effectively turned her back on the Commonwealth. They too will be justified in looking elsewhere for their major economic partners. Many of them are already doing so to the detriment of Britain’s economic ties with the Third World countries from the Commonwealth.

    As far as Nigeria is concerned, there is no point in the federal government seeking retaliation against Britain over this visa matter. This is hardly a viable option for Nigeria. Britain is not South Africa. We too should put our economic house in order. Many of our youths have no jobs. They seek emigration abroad to escape poverty at home. Yes, we have every right to be angry about the new visa policy, but our bilateral relations with Britain are so wide and comprehensive that this little matter should not be allowed to lead to any major diplomatic row between the two countries. This diplomatic wrangling is better resolved through diplomatic channels. There is no reason for instance why Nigeria should not undertake to be the channel for the visa bond being planned by the UK. At independence and for decades afterwards, Nigerians traveling abroad for the first time were legally obliged to post a repatriation deposit with the Nigerian immigration authorities. This requirement can be reactivated to meet the concerns of the British authorities.

    Diplomatic rows between Nigeria and Britain are not new. It is a road we have travelled several times before in our bilateral relations with Britain over the years. Examples of this include the row over the Anglo-Nigerian defence pact in 1962, differences with Britain in the period of our civil war, and the face off over Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe). But we were able to resolve these disputes through diplomatic engagements. There is no reason why this method of resolving our disputes should not be adopted in the present row. The situation calls for the utmost restraint on both sides.

  • One season, two strikes

    Among industrial unions in the country, the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) and the National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG) pack a lot of weight. Whenever they call their members out on strike, the nation trembles because they have the power to paralyse socio-economic activities.

    Whenever they announce their intentions to go on strike, the public becomes worried. The source of their worry is not farfetched. It has to do with the disruption in academic and socio-economic life during such strikes. ASUU and NUPENG’s strikes are usually devastating. As for ASUU, its strike disrupts the academic calendar of public universities, while that of NUPENG makes life generally difficult and frustrating for the people.

    When ASUU is on strike as it is now, public universities are virtually shutdown because nothing works during the period. Students are left to do their own thing and in such a situation, an idle mind become the devil’s workshop. Many students have becomes wayward all because they had nobody to guide them during such periods. It is not that ASUU should not go on strike whenever there is a compelling need for it, but it should be mindful of the consequences of its action not only on the students but also on the larger society.

    ASUU’s ongoing strike has to do with the 2009 agreement it signed with the Federal Government on how to revitalise the universities. What is delaying the implementation of this agreement, some four years after it was signed? The Onosode panel is believed to have smoothened the rough edges of the agreerment in order to facilitate its implementation. If this is so, why are we still hearing about ASUU strike? The government should do the needful to stop this incessant ASUU strike.

    Thank God that NUPENG has called off its own strike. We tend to blame the union for resorting to strike at the least provocation. Is it proper to do so if we don’t do what is right in order to prevent the strike in the first place? NUPENG may be doing things in excess at times, but is the blame really the union’s going by the way we handle such cases? But two strikes by two powerful unions at the same time does not augur well for the economy.

    RE : Travails of a war hero

    no matter how people feel about Brig – Gen Benjamin Adekunle, what is for sure is that he cannot be ignored. Love him or hate him, the general commands a following not only among those who fought under him during the 1967 – 70 civil war, but also among the populace. Reactions were swift to the write – up on him last week. Many of the respondents wondered why the nation treats its heroes with such contempt. They submitted that a man like Adekunle should not be allowed to suffer considering his sacrifice and that of others to ‘’keep Nigeria one’’. Others have a different view of the matter. But no matter our positions, the fact remains that Adekunle discharged his duty diligently to his fatherland during the war. Nothing can detract from the fact that he was a soldier’s soldier. He may have his faults like other human beings, but we cannot hold that against him at this hour that he needs the help of the nation that he served with all his ‘’heart and might’’.

    Do not let us waste our time by calling on the army authority or the present ruling class, let us call on the one and only Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu to assist this hero of our time. I know that he has a large and will be ready to do it. I don’t know how to reach him, but please relay this important Save Our Soul (SOS) to him. From Adetunji Folayan, Oworonsoki, Lagos (08033920391).

    Gen Adekunle’s case is pathetic and shameful. May God almighty come to his rescue. From Sam Adamu, Port Harcourt (08085588490)

    I read about Gen Adekunle and how he dealt with my people… I honestly don’t know what to feel for him. Well, as a student I can’t do much for him. However, I wish him well. From Ngwu Chukwuebuka (08133931248).

    Indeed, the country awaits the response of the Chief of Army Staff (COAS). I have today (June 27) again dropped another letter at the Army Headquarters in Abuja. I will not cease until the right thing is done. From Abiodun Adekunle (08067860987).

    Adekunle must not die. Should Gen Adekunle be left to die miserably, then Nigeria would have added a greater ‘’minus’’ to what Governor Fashola called empty ‘moral infrastructure’. I pray that, that does not happen. Where is is Gen Gowon while Gen Adekunle suffers? Where is Gen Obasanjo? Has he forgotten how Adekunle made victory easy for him towards the end of the war? Where is Gen Femi Williams while Gen Adekunle is in such a pathetic condition? Does he still remember what Adekunle did for him when he was wounded at the Owerri war front? Adekunle’s dynamic solutions to reviving the Nigerian Ports Authority cannot be forgotten. The slogan ‘’to keep Nigeria one’’ was the only tonic that propelled Adekunle to shell Biafra to submission. I will not beg anybody to look back at Adekunle , but those who have left undone what they should do, will suffer from the memory of what Adekunle went through before the capture of Calabar and Port Harcourt. From Pa Odutayo, (08023149828).

    Who were the enemies? If he did all that, please tell him to do it again. How come the people he fought for cannot send him to Ghana? Also tell him tyo prepare for the main war. :08097153657.

    Adekunle was not fighting his enemies, but only fought to unify the country. From Rev Emon, Jos (08060198831).

    I am a 63-year-old wounded military pensioner on monthly payment of N21,000, just like most of my colleagues dead or alive. In 2010, President Goodluck Jonathan announced a 53 percent increase in military pension, but till date, the increase has not been effected . My fellow Nigerian, you will agree with me that Nigeria is not worth fighting or dying for. From Iduwe Sunday (08069187363).

    Is it still a numbers’ game?

    Bravo, Jonah Jang, the chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF). If you don’t like that, then wait for the outcome of the case, which Governor Babatunde Fashola of Lagos State instituted in court. If you don’t understand the position of First Lady, you can’t understand NGF’s position APC wants to use Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State against President Goodluck Jonathan and a focused Governor Jang, but we are wiser than him and his backers. 08055469972

    The First Lady is probably reacting the same way any woman would have reacted if her husband is being disrespected by someone junior to him no matter that person’s position. Your write – up would have carried more weight if you had been seen in the past condemning the governors talking down at the president. 0818884775.

    No, it is no longer a numbers’ game although 16 can be reversed to read and mean 19, thereby becoming ‘Jona Jang Theorem’. From Pa Odutayo (08023149828).

    We in Port Harcourt are ‘solidly’ behind President Jonathan. 08035450232.

    The year 2015 is by the corner, let us show them what failure is. 08054026170.

    A lion in winter

    Mandela is a transparent person. Because of his transparency, he was honoured by the United Kingdom. As a true leader, he left office after serving one term. If it is possible, Mandela should live forever, but then death is inevitable. From Sylvester, Libolo Edda, Ebonyi State (08179754774).

    Indeed, Mandela is a super man; an icon. From Charles Umeadi, Port Harcourt (08187104543).

    Can we ever get a man like Madiba? Everyday, I pray for him, forgetting my own challenges. 08072305653.