I learnt of the death of Venezuela’s ailing President Hugo Chavez about the same time that I read about the appeal of the Sultan of Sokoto to the Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan to give a general amnesty to Boko Haram, just after its leader had reportedly threatened to unleash more terror in the North. At the same time, I was pondering over what I had just read in the book Financialism co authored by Asiwaju Ahmed Tinubu and Brian Browne on the Nigeria military’s several incursion into politics. The book noted rather wryly that the Nigerian military adopted the central control pattern of political administration inherent in socialism in governing Nigeria, without any thought or intention of using that to bridge social inequalities which is the goal of socialism as an ideology.
Also along the way, I was monitoring a story about a book launch on former President Obasanjo’s term in office in a two- volume book by 20 scholars whose editorship was coordinated by a professor of medicine Professor Oladipo Akinkugbe in which it was said that former Secretary to the Obasanjo Government Alhaji Yayale and present National Coordinator on the Economy Dr Ngozi Nweala, Obasanjo’s Finance Minister were the two people that scuttled the reforms planned and executed by the Obasanjo Administration from 1999 to 2007. These events, the issues and personalities involved form the nucleus of my discussion today.
Venezuelans have trooped to the streets to mourn their fallen leader Hugo Chavez who fought cancer and death, as if both devils were part of his military command and at his behest and call. Of course he lost his life and the battle, but he never lost the love of his countrymen because of the way he used his adopted version of socialism to take care of their welfare and reduce social inequalities in Venezuela. Hence his adoration by his people, both on his death bed and his final passing. Hugo Chavez was not a saint but he was a very clever soldier – politician who at the age of 21 as a young military officer decided he would be a leftist in life and alleviate the poverty of his people and he succeeded to a large extent.
He planned a coup and was imprisoned. When released the military were still suspicious of him and did not give him a combat job but asked him to handle training but he used the opportunity to recruit bright officers for his ambition of ruling Venezuela which he achieved by winning the presidential elections and ruling his nation for 14 years till he died this week. Chavez used Venezuela’s oil wealth to reduce poverty in his nation and to promote socialism amongst his neighbors hence reducing social inequalities in the region . His foreign policy was anti American just as it was pro Cuba and helped Cuba immensely to battle the crippling sanctions imposed on it by the USA.
To rub salt on US wound and discomfiture on this, Chavez even created diplomatic rapport with the Iranians who are sworn enemies of the US because of that nation’s one – sided support for Israel over the Palestinian issue .In effect then, Chavez created a niche for his nation in the comity of nations as an effective and independent voice of socialism, fearless of the US, and not in any way beholden to its global financial agent , the IMF. Yet Chavez started out as a soldier before dropping military uniform for the politician’s attire and making a success of leadership on both fronts.
It is in this light that I want to compare Chavez’s leadership role in Venezuela with the viewpoint of the co authors of Financialism on the role of the military alongside socialism in Nigeria during military rule. Ironically a staunch ally of Asiwaju Tinubu, the governor of Oshun state, Ogbeni Aregbesola noted at the book launch last Thursday that Asiwaju is more of a socialist in his concern for and actions on poverty alleviation than the capitalist he claims to be. But it is the assertion in the book that the military adopted the state control posture of socialism without any respect for poverty bridging ideals of socialism that I want to comment upon. This is because the military had the same opportunity that Chavez had in Venezuela but blew it literally as each military regime left the nation poorer than it met it. At the end of the day the Nigerian masses became literally fed up with military regimes and loathed their memories intensely. Indeed when the late General Abacha died people celebrated all over the nation, just as Venezuelans mourned the departure of their leader with deep sorrow this week.
Again the admitted failure of the Obasanjo Reforms in his two terms and the identification of the culprits raise serious questions on leadership in Nigeria and again begs for comparison with Hugo Chavez’s record in Venezuela. This is because Chavez and Obasanjo had similar opportunities to change events in their nations. Chavez staged an unsuccessful coup before being elected president whereas Obasanjo did not stage a coup but was the beneficiary of a failed coup that made him the head of the military after the assassination of Murtala Muhammed. In addition Obasanjo was the first Nigerian military ruler that handed power over to a civilian regime; a feat that made his leadership stature to grow till today in diplomatic circles. Twenty years after this Obasanjo was elected a civilian head of state and served for two terms of four years only to end up with this damning report that two of his appointees sabotaged his reform program. Which really bothers me as I do not see the import of this information which is like crying over spilt milk which all the forces in the universe can not bring together. Or closing the stables door after the horses have bolted. Worse still I am surprised that the Obasanjo government did not expect the role played by the two identified culprits. I will explain.
With regard to his Head of Service then, the information will definitely make him a hero amongst the Administrative Class in the civil service, both past and present. This is because he protected his fellow bureaucrats against the record of Obasanjo and the military against the leadership of the civil service. The 1975 purge of the civil service, when the late Murtala Muhammed daily announced that ‘this administration will not tolerate indiscipline, this administration will not condone abuse of office ‘ was all what Yayale was trying to prevent happening ever again, on his watch. This purge though popular then, decapitated the leadership of the civil service and Obasanjo was very much part of it first ,as the Chief of Staff, Supreme Headquarters, and later as Head of State and Commander In Chief . Unknown to Obasanjo, espirit de corps was and still is a guiding leadership principle for the leadership class of the Nigerian bureaucracy just as it has always been for the officer cadre of the army, in and out of office , or uniform till today.
In addition the second culprit could not have performed otherwise given the fact that she was brought from the World Bank and her brief was for an IMF reform like the ones causing riots in Portugal, Spain and Greece of recent. The Obasanjo book noted that she curiously and suddenly resigned but it is no secret that she went back to her job and got promoted too for her effort as Obasanjo’s Finance Minister. Anyway she is back in the same job and should be able to speak for herself on her role in the Obasanjo Administration between 1999 and 2007.
Lastly, I understand the concern of the Sultan of Sokoto on amnesty for the Boko Haram terrorists but I do not think he is right in making such a call. Boko Haram terrorists have killed and bombed Churches and attacked Northern leaders including the Emir of Kano and an amnesty will not stop them. Instead it will be mistaken as a sign of weakness on the part of the Nigerian state. Terrorism is a form of blackmail and this is no different. If amnesty is granted it will be like paying a ransom and once that is started there is no end to it. The cost of settling for amnesty in this case far outweighs the benefits or the insurance of security for the Nigerian nation in this avoidable and smoldering debacle that is fast consuming our national psyche and threatening our corporate existence so direly.
