What Does the

What Does the “North” Want?

Chido Onumah

There are two basic questions that must be answered by all of us Nigerians. One, do we want to remain as one country? Two, if the answer is yes, under what conditions? – Chief Bola Ige.

The quote above is one of the most profound statements about Nigeria that I have come across. These are two important questions we have failed to answer and when we have bothered to address them, we apply the same candour a pimp applies to his prostitutes. Our responses have been half-hearted and insincere at best.

In addressing Chief Ige’s questions, I shall pose my own question with the hope that we can arrive at some meaningful understanding of what ails our dear country, Nigeria, and why nationhood has eluded us: What does the “North” want? Of course, even though this question is addressed to the “North” of Nigeria, it can serve as metaphor for the rest of the country.

For the sake of those not familiar with our political history, what is called the “North” in Nigeria today, is the remnant of one half of colonial Nigeria, the Northern Protectorate that was merged with the other half, the Southern Protectorate, by the British colonialists to create the entity called Nigeria exactly 100 years ago.

While the country has undergone significant transformations – from two protectorates to one country in 1914; from three regions before independence to four regions after independence; from 12 states on the eve of the civil war in 1967 to 36 states today – the “North” has managed to act or has been projected as an entity on its own. I shall return to this.

What does the “North” – or better still, those who claim to represent and speak for the “North” – want? Political power? A return to pre-independence Nigeria? A return to pre-amalgamation Nigeria? A separate country from the rest of Nigeria? I pose these questions based on certain developments and statements in the last few weeks by individuals and groups that claim to represent the “North”. Of course, these questions can also apply to the “East”, the “West”, the “Niger Delta”, etc. But my focus here is the “North”, so I must be forgiven if I make only passing reference to these other groups.

On March 11, 2014, the Northern Elders’ Forum (NEF) issued a communiqué at the end of its two-day meeting in Kano. Among other things, the NEF dismissed the National Conference saying, it “lacks a constitutional basis or any form of legitimacy or authority to speak for the people of the North or other Nigerians.” It said “the proceedings, conclusions and recommendations of the confab would not be accepted by the people of the North.”

I crave the indulgence of readers to quote extensively from the communiqué of the NEF: “Assured that Northerners have no negative issues with any ethnic group in Nigeria, and have, in fact, enjoyed the full support and understanding of all groups and regions on issues the North raised in the interest of the peace and unity of Nigeria; same manner that the North stood by all ethnic groups when they had issues at historic turning points in our national history.

“The current status of the North in the context of the economy and politics of Nigeria is undeserved and unacceptable; that the unfair and unjust allocation of resources of the nation which deprive the North of its legitimate rights (emphasis added) must cease; and the North must intensify efforts to improve the exploitation and management of its own (emphasis mine) human and other resources.”

It resolved to “mobilize the entire people of the North to resist further assaults on our security and political and economic fortunes” and to “restore hope and faith of Northerners in their capacity and ability to negotiate a better deal in the context of contemporary Nigeria; or in any circumstances (emphasis mine) which best suit their interests.”

I think these observations and demands are clear enough. At the same forum, one of the lead speakers, Dr. Usman Bugaje, was reported as saying that, “It is wrong for any state to claim that it is oil-producing because 72% of the total land mass in the country belongs to the North and by the United Nation’s law, it is only the North that actually has the right to claim ownership.”

According to Bugaje, “Whatever mileage you get in the sea, according to the United Nations Law of the sea, is a measure of the land mass that you have; that is what gives you the mileage into the sea…and the land mass of this country, that gives that long 200 nautical miles or more into the ocean, is because of that 72% of the land mass of this country, which is the North.”

“What they claim is the offshore oil is actually the oil of the North. We should stop using these terms that have no sense at all. There are no oil-producing states. The only oil producing state is the Nigerian state itself,” Bugaje concluded.

Of course, Bugaje is not the first person from the “North” to theorize about the source and ownership of the oil in Nigeria. During the dictatorship of Gen. Sani Abacha, at the height of the June 12 crisis, eminent historian, the late Dr. Bala Usman, had argued that hydrocarbons, the principal constituents of petroleum and natural gas were the product of thousands of years of accumulated fossil that dripped from the “North” to the Niger Delta.

Clearly, Nigeria is really about the political economy of oil. This is the only thing that binds the unpatriotic and duplicitous political class across the country and the politics of oil explains the way this class responds to Nigeria and its many problems. It is crude oil, stupid! Those who have it are holding us to ransom; those who want it or want to control it have taken the rest of us hostage.

On March 23, 2014, Sunday Punch reported that after a retreat of northern delegates to the National Conference on Thursday, March 20, the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF), an association referred to as the “umbrella body of northern Nigeria”, resolved that the “North” had “buried its initial plan to walk out of the National Conference, if the agenda of the conference does not address issues that affect the North.”

According the paper, the ACF stated that the “North” would fully participate in the conference. Its national publicity secretary, Mr. Muhammadu Ibrahim, said the ‘Kano Declaration’ had become a thing of the past. “Forget about the ‘Kano Declaration’ that the North may stage a walkout. It is now a buried issue. We are participating fully in the conference. We are participating because we are interested in the unity of Nigeria,” Ibrahim concluded.

In the view of Dr. Junaid Mohammed, a delegate representing Kano State at the National Conference who attended the retreat, “Nigeria has ‘federal units’ and not ‘federating units’ as proponents of fiscal federalism would want others to believe. What is it they call fiscal federalism? Why are we talking about federating units as opposed to federal units? Federating units are quasi-independent countries that agreed to come together and devolve certain powers to a federal or central government.”

“They would also agree to devolve certain financial control commensurate to the powers devolved to the central government,” Mohammed noted. “Every state in Nigeria today is not a federating unit, it is a federal state. It is a creation of the Federal Government. If the Federal Government decides to withhold money generated by it, it is justified in law. The states, which make up our federal system today, are a creation of the fiat of the Federal Government.”

Mohammed said “he and his northern colleagues were prepared to build a consensus with delegates from every part of the country on issues of common national interest,” but that “they were not prepared to ‘indulge anyone’ whose idea was based on narrow, self-serving interests.”

Mohammed makes a powerful argument, except that in one breadth he notes that there are no federating units; and in another breadth, he is willing to defend the interest of the “North” which positions itself as a federating unit. So what really is the “North”? If we go by the arguments of the NEF, Bugaje and Mohammed then there is a social and political entity referred to as the “North”.

Finally, while contributing to the debate on how many delegates are required to agree before an issue can be passed at the National Conference, the Lamido of Adamawa, Dr. Muhammadu Mustapha, veered off when he threatened to “lead his people out of the conference,” noting that his “kingdom extended to Cameroon.” He said he still had “his people there that would receive him and his kingdom if they seceded from Nigeria.”

This piece is not a response to the “North’s” position on the National Conference. I believe every individual or group has the right to respond to the conference as they deem necessary. Rather, it seeks to address the crisis of identity which is at the root of the Nigerian tragedy.

Who are we? What is Nigeria? The answer to these questions can help us understand the various issues confronting us as a country and what our responses have been, whether it is the politics of oil, religion or geo-political space.

There is nothing new about the comments of those who claim to represent the “North”. If we look at developments in pre-independence Nigeria, the “North’s” response to the Unification Decree No. 34 of May 24, 1966, by the military junta led by Gen. Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi, or the introduction of Sharia law in some states in the “North”, historically, the “North” has always been in favour of political autonomy and fiscal federalism. It is strange, therefore, that there is so much angst in the “North” when it comes to the issue of autonomy and fiscal federalism.

When we hear people talk about the “North” in Nigeria, what exactly are they talking about? Is it a people bound by a common religion, culture, history or geography? Are there really “Northerners” in the sense that there are Fulanis, Hausas, Jukuns, Tivs, Igbos, Egons Yorubas, Ijaws, Efiks, etc? I assume that just as the Afenifere Renewal Group and Odu’a People’s Congress can’t claim to represent the “West”, Ohaneze Ndigbo and Biafra Zionist Federation (BZF) can’t claim to represent the “East”, the NEF and the ACF can’t claim to represent the “North”.

Which people or what interest do our “northern” hegemonists represent? That of the major ethnicities in the “North” or that of a particular religion? Will the proponents of the theory of the “North” accept, for example, a President David Mark or Bukola Saraki – not that I wish for either man to come anywhere near the presidency – as truly representative of the “North”?

I don’t know what goes on in the minds of the likes of Bugaje, Mohammed and their fellow travellers in the NEF and ACF when they have to refer to themselves as Nigerians or when they see Nigerians who are not from the “North”. They approbate and reprobate at the same time. Bugaje, for example, appropriates 72% of Nigeria for his “North”; the NEF talks about the “exploitation and management of its own (emphasis mine) human and other resources,” yet they deny other people the right to lay claim to “their land” and its resources!

The political and intellectual class in northern Nigeria talks and acts as if the “North” is a separate country from the rest of Nigeria. But the “North”, just as the concept of the “West” and the “East”, is a myth; a convenient alibi for those who seek to perpetually keep Nigeria disunited in the promotion of their personal agenda.

Of course, northern Nigeria may have peculiar problems which are the result of the activities of the criminal band called rulers (many of them from the “North”) Nigeria has had since independence, but if we see the “North” as part and parcel of Nigeria, then these problems become the problems of Nigeria rather than the problems of the “North”.

Perhaps, the belief in the theory of a monolithic “North” explains the warped view of some commentators who, rather than hold military dictators like Ibrahim Babangida and Sani Abacha responsible for ruining the country, make reference to the “North” as being responsible for the country’s woes. As if the majority of the downtrodden in the “North” gathered and agreed to give power to these iniquitous generals and join them in the ruination of Nigeria.

We can find many Usman Bugajes and Junaid Mohammeds around the country; people who still live with the pre-1914 and civil war mentality. When we talk of the “North”, “East” or “West” the way Bugaje and others describe it, we set ourselves in perpetual conflict with Nigeria. The political and military class from the “North” has ruled Nigeria for the better part of its independence. What have northerners, much less the rest of the country, to show for it?

It is scandalous that after more than 50 years of independence we are still embroiled in the debate of “who owns the oil”. While other countries are working hard to wean themselves off oil and develop alternative sources of energy, we are busy wasting scarce human and financial resources searching for more oil. Rather than planning for a life after oil and developing other resources in the country, our indolent military and political rulers luxuriated in the easy and quick wealth that crude oil provided.

They became drunk on crude oil and nourished a generation of Nigerians for whom nothing else matters apart from oil. Perhaps, if that vermin, Sani Abacha, and the “Evil Genius”, Ibrahim Babangida, both military dictators from the “North” knew that the oil belonged to the “North”, they would have used the proceeds judiciously in the interest of the working and toiling people of the “North” whose names are invoked at every opportunity.

Nigeria will not be great simply because our rulers say so. Nigeria will not be united just because our politicians say at every opportunity that, “The unity of Nigeria is non-negotiable” or that “Nigeria will not disintegrate”. Nation-building is not a whimsical business. Our rulers have done absolutely nothing to advance the unity of Nigeria. What our rulers have succeeded in doing is that where we should see Nigerians we see Christians or Muslims, Igbos, Yorubas, Fulanis, Ijaws, Jukuns, Efiks, Tivs, northerners, etc.

We argue that there are more Muslims in the “North” and more Christians in the “South”, so we talk about “Muslim North” and “Christian South” and give ammunition to those whose interest is to keep us perpetually divided as if it matters to the Muslims and Christians in Sokoto, Owerri or Lagos who earn N18,000 a month what label they wear.

Let’s take four major cities (Lagos, Port Harcourt, Enugu and Kano) as examples. Have we asked ourselves why more than five decades after independence, an “Igbo man” born and bred in Lagos, a “Fulani man” born and bred in Port Harcourt, an “Ijaw man” born and bred in Kano or a “Yoruba man” born and bred in Enugu can’t aspire to be a local government chairman much less a representative or senator. There are politicians across Nigeria who can make this happen but won’t because of their provincialism and greed. Yet we go to foreign countries and aspire to run for political offices in places where we have no roots.

The fact that the “North”, according to Bugaje, has 72% of the land mass does not make “northerners” more Nigerian than the rest of the country or give them more right to anything that Nigeria has to offer. The delusional theory of the “North” explains why the so-called representatives of the “North” are paranoid about the presidency of Nigeria. If you have 72% of the country and 60% of the population, it is only natural to assume that the presidency of the country is your birthright; after all, democracy is a question of numbers.

Back to the structure of Nigeria. There is nothing like the “North”. It only exists in the imagination of those who are benefiting or seek to benefit from what that agenda offers. The so-called “North” came to an end on May 27, 1967, when Gen. Yakubu Gowon divided the country into 12 states. The “North” is a fairy tale. We shouldn't buy it! The Constitution of Nigeria recognizes only states and local government areas, not regions. Perhaps, we can talk about geo-political zones for planning and administrative convenience.

We gloss over these issues at our own peril. We can’t talk about building a united Nigeria, a new nation that will be a global contender, while still clinging to the old ethnic, religious and regional stereotypes and fault lines that do us no good.

What is Nigeria and who is a Nigerian? If Nigeria is a federal republic, what constitutes or should constitute the federating units? Is Nigeria just a geo-political space or a mosaic of multiculturalism and multi-ethnicities? Is a Nigerian anyone born in Nigeria or with Nigerian parentage with equal rights and opportunities wherever they find themselves in Nigeria? These are some of the issues that should concern delegates at the National Conference.

We need to build a nation that is workable and acceptable to a majority, if not all Nigerians; one that the Bugajes and Mohammeds of the “North” can live freely anywhere they like and enjoy the God-given resources in the state they are domiciled while contributing their quota to the uplift of the state and the country; not a country where, at every opportunity, we talk about what divides us; a country where we treat foreigners better than our fellow countrymen and women because they speak our language or share our faith.

Clearly, Nigeria has a greater chance today of becoming the poster child of failed nations – à la Somalia – than it has of following the footsteps of Czechoslovakia and Sudan.

Beyond the sleeping delegates and the squabbles over allowances for personal aides, pimps and prostitutes, the National Conference is bringing into sharper focus the many prejudices in the country. How do we overcome these prejudices?

This is the discussion we must have – of course, in a civil manner.