Recently,
General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida,
Nigeria
’s former military president granted a press
interview to Newswatch (Newswatch
June 14, 2004
) in which he declared his interest in the 2007
presidential election. He made wide-ranging statements on issues
affecting the Nigerian nation and added his voice to the persistent
calls for a national conference. He identified issues that should be
discussed during the conference and these included; revenue allocation
formula, the relationship between the state and federal government,
resource control, the question of ethnic nationalities and of course a
hint that he might contest the presidential election come 2007.
The
General suggested that President Obasanjo’s reluctance to institute a
national conference was his fear that it might lead to a break up of the
country. He however, added that the fear might be allayed if there are
some “no go areas” in the agenda of the conference. This demand, in
my view, is unacceptable to Nigerians because it not only constitutes an
insult to the intelligence of eminent men and women that will attend the
conference but will make nonsense of the entire exercise. All the
problems that that need to be considered should be tabled and if in the
mature opinion of Nigerians issues such as ethnic and religious
conflicts are unresolvable, then refusing to call a national conference
will only amount to postponing the evil day. No person can claim to be
wiser or more patriotic than a representative group of Nigerians.
However,
I do not believe that right thinking Nigerians will opt for a break-up
of the country for obvious reasons. A break-up may dismember the country
into tiny unviable entities. A nation is often as important as its
geographical and population size, especially if it is able to develop a
large and robust middle class.
China
and
India
are increasingly important countries in the globe
today, in part, because of their large size. Even Western Europeans who
historically have valued their ethnic separateness are now finding ways
to cooperate as larger economic and political entities as depicted by
the European Union. For these and other reasons, it is therefore
unlikely that a national conference will lead to a break up of the
country.
To
achieve our objective of building a strong and prosperous nation or
merely continuing as one country, the problems of ethnic and religious
conflicts must be sincerely discussed with a view to finding mutually
agreeable solutions. Many people believe that the frequent inter-ethnic
and religious disturbances now threatening the existence of
Nigeria
are traceable to the machinations of our elite.
Notable among such crises are the frequent
Kano
riots, the latest and perhaps bloodiest of which
occurred in 2004. Others are the
Kaduna
and Jos riots, and the incessant Urhobo, Itchekiri
and Ijaw conflicts. The question is, why do these upheavals occur and
who is behind them? A look at
Nigeria
’s history will reveal that the country is made up
of discrete independent nationalities woven together by the British with
astute nation building brinkmanship. Soon people learned to regard
Nigeria
as their country and so elements from various
nationalities crisscrossed the entire land and settled in other
localities to pursue economic activities of their choice. In the process
they formed economic and friendship ties and some even contracted
inter-ethnic marriages and lived peacefully together in major cities
throughout the country.
This
happy and progressive condition suffered a change with the emergence of
party politics after the country’s independence when the elite
exploited the differences between our ethnic nationalities. The masses
were encouraged to feel more loyal to their tribes than to the country.
General Babangida was forthright in assigning responsibility for this
unwholesome development. Said he, “if you observe, the problem we have
in this country is not always from ordinary people. They are never the
problem. Today, you can go to Banga near our border with
Cameroun
and you will find, Kanuri, Yoruba, Efik-every tribe
you name it. They live together in peace. They just don’t think of
their differences. The problem is rather from the elite class.”
If
the General’s statement is correct, it is reasonable to suggest that
since the elite are the root cause of the problems, they too should be
able to find a solution to them. The starting point is for them to
undergo a complete re-orientation to see themselves first and foremost
as Nigerians. And since the national conference which the General now
supports will be an assembly of the elite, the question of ethnic
nationalities, that is the question of mutual accommodation will now
take the from burner. The issue will not be that individual ethnic
identities, namely Igbo, Hausa, Ibibio, Yoruba, Tiv and other will
disappear, but that we will have an incentive to give less prominence to
the things that divide us. The
way we identify with our country and the passion with which we do so
speaks to the maturity of our nation state. If asked, where are you
from, our answer should be
Nigeria
; what part of
Nigeria
?
Enugu
State
,
Rivers
State
,
Kano
State
. Where an individual Nigerian has decided to settle,
pay taxes and contribute their quota to society, should assume a greater
prominence in the person’s life than his tribal origin.
To
further clarify the above point I would like to refer to what obtains in
the
United States
from where we borrowed the present system of
government. In the
U.S.
if a person is born in
New York
State
, for example, he is automatically from that state
regardless of where his parents came from. If a person moves from
Texas
to
New York
and settles for a period of at least two years, he
becomes a resident of
New York
provided he is a citizen of the
United States
. Such a person is entitled to all the privileges and
obligations to which the original settlers of
New York
are entitled. All these are provided for in the laws
that govern the state.
We
should borrow a leaf from the
United States
and include in our laws forward-looking provisions
such as the above. A situation in which a citizen of this country lives
in one of its states for upwards of twenty years paying taxes, providing
services and is still regarded as a foreigner and is denied privileges
such as job opportunities is indeed a bad one. Worse still when it suits
the elite they instigate the idle and vulnerable youth against those
regarded as strangers in their state.
General
Babangida shares the view that Nigerians should be treated as Nigerians
wherever they are found. He believes that the type of mayhem that
recently occurred in Plateau and
Kano
states arose because we did not address vital issues
affecting our mutual relationship. This implies that our current laws do
not adequately define how the various nationalities should relate to one
another. He called attention to Nigerian history and cited cases in the
past in which people from other tribes played major roles in areas other
than those in which they were born. He said, “In 1959, a man from
Sokoto was the mayor of
Enugu
. It didn’t matter then. Later we had a Kanuri man
who represented a constituency in
Benue
state. That is the vision I have for
Nigeria
.”
The
General’s vision constitutes a welcome change- a shift from ethnic
persuasion to true national appeal. Ethnic politics is one of the
principal factors that have done incalculable harm to the progress of
Nigeria
and is likely to undermine our democracy.
If
the General sincerely believes in divesting Nigeria of ethnic/ religious
politics and accepts merit as a precondition for holding high office
such as the presidency, he should not talk of or uphold the idea of
power shift or zoning which his party now advocates because that would
contradict what he calls his vision for Nigeria. And I understand that
vision to mean, in addition to detribalizing Nigerians, to be able to
choose the best man for the job and that would avoid ethnic, religious
and geographic balancing. In the view of the General, the elite are the
spoilers. According to him, “it is they who would tell you how
ministers should be appointed to reflect geographical consideration. If
you succeed in balancing in terms of religious factor, then the question
is how do you relate to those around you.”
The
General is talking from experience and we better listen. This balancing
has impeded our progress all these years. It has often led us to put
square pegs in round holes and the result is retrogression. The
balancing takes different colours and appears in everything we do. If it
is not quota system, it is federal character. Even in constituting our
national football team the same idea is evoked with disastrous
consequences. In politics it is called zoning, a concept that is
synonymous with ethnic balancing and is used in determining where the
president, governor etc. will come from.
The
purpose is to ensure that the Presidency in any particular election year
goes either to a Hausa Fulani, Yoruba or Igbo. While the elite know what
they derive from this game of zoning, the common man gains nothing from
it. The Hausa-Fulani group has dominated political power in our country
since
Nigeria
’s independence. In what way has this fact changed
the life of the common man in the North? Is he not part of the sea of
poverty that surrounds tiny islands of affluence dispersed throughout
the North? Also, President Obasanjo has ruled
Nigeria
more than five years not including his earlier
tenure. In what way has this improved the life of the ordinary Yoruba
man? Is he not a participant in the agonizing suffering to which the
masses of
Nigeria
are now exposed? The ordinary man has listened to
the drum of ethnic politics for too long but has derived little benefit
from it. May I inject here the thoughts of the greatest thinker and
teacher the world has ever known-Jesus Christ himself. He told the Jews
the story of a man who was on a journey but was attacked by robbers who
beat and wounded him and left him unconscious on the roadside. His
fellow Jews including a priest passed by and did not help him. A
Samaritan, a non-Jew, saw him, pitied, picked him up and took him to an
inn. There he dresses his wounds and left him in the care of innkeeper
promising to pay back all that he might spend on the man. Who is the
wounded man’s brother, his fellow Jews or the Samaritan? The answer to
this question will suggest to the ordinary Nigerian which way to go. It
will help him to realize that a Nigerian, be he Yoruba, Efik, Hausa,
Igbo, or Gwari, that assists to make his life more comfortable is he
true relation.
While
the General’s vision on the problems of ethnicity and religion is
commendable, his answer to a serious question posed by Newswatch was
revealing. The question: “If you have an opportunity of providing
leadership for this country again, what kind of changes would you like
to seeking regarding the way things are done?
His
answer, “To be very honest with you, I believe that what we have done
so far (and when I say we, I mean the federal government) is enough
platform for this country to be strong. Everything that needs to be done
has been done and everything that needs to be said has been said. The
government has an objective, which its programs are meant to achieve. We
should stick to that objective. The effect of it may not be easy for
people, but later on they will get to understand why they did things the
way they did.”
This
answer raises a number of questions. Does the General believe that
Nigerians are so naïve that they do not know what is good for them? Or
is he sincerely unaware of the massive problems which currently engulf
Nigeria
some of them threatening the very existence of the
country? One would have expected him to identify problems such as the
country’s derailed economy, the frightening lack of security of life
and property, the neglect and consequent decay of our educational
system, the defects in our health care delivery system, corruption which
repeal local and foreign investment, and high unemployment rates. If the
General is unaware of the existence of these problems, which are the
main features of
Nigeria
’s underdevelopment, he is most unlikely to proffer
solutions to them.
By
endorsing the performance of the present administration, he is telling
Nigerians that he cannot do better. The present economic policies that
he admires are suffocating the people. For example, every Nigerian feels
the pinch of the current policy on the price of petroleum products.
While the government appears to revisit this policy on a daily basis, no
thought is given to its effects on the lives of the people. Official
records show that the inflation rate rose from 11 percent in 2003 to 18
percent in April 2004. The increase in the inflation rate is sequel to
the increase in the price of petroleum products and consequent hike in
production and transportation costs. These again are reflected in the
high price of consumer goods that creates severe hardship for the
ordinary people and the poor.
Similarly,
the present policy on education does not seem to him out of step with
the advances of the 21st century.
President Obasanjo whose policies he extols declared in at a
speech at the
University
of
Calabar
in 2000 that university lecturers did not contribute
to development. As if he did not shock Nigerian’s enough, he allowed
all the country’s universities to remain closed for more than six
months. The consequence of this type of neglect, now and in the recent
past, has been a continuing nose-dive in our standard of education.
Today, the products of our universities, who prior to the Babangida and
Obasanjo administrations were rated world class are now suspect in
advanced countries and indeed within the more sophisticated companies at
home.
Nigeria
needs leaders who value education, who understand
what brainpower, can achieve and not those who pursue money as an end in
itself. Our leaders should curtail the frequency of their visits to such
places, as
Washington
DC
,
New York
and
London
for such visits appear to get them dazed and
confused. They should instead visit places like
India
, and ask the leaders there, “how do you do it?”
They will learn, for example, that India which in the fifties and
sixties could not feed its people, spent enormous amounts of money on
education and research institutions and consequently came up with the
green revolution programme, which indeed revolutionarised her food
production. Furthermore, those institutions have been recording
impressive scientific and technological breakthroughs. In the year 2000,
India
’s software exports (products of the brain)
constituted 12 percent of the country’s total exports. Her brainpower
is tantalizing American companies, although it is at the same time
intimidating American labour. According to Business Week of
December 8, 2003
, “the remarkable tech rise of
India
is a much less told tale than the ascendancy of
China
. Yet its impact might be greater.”
India
is now a major base for developing new applications
for finance, digital appliances and industrial plants. American
companies that employ high technology man power from India argue that by
augmenting U.S. highly skilled labour with a sampling of the 260,000
engineers pumped out of Indian schools each year, they can afford to
throw more brains at the task and speed up product launches, develop
more proto-types and upgrade quality.
Nigeria
needs leaders whose vision for education and for
science and technology will compare favorably with that of Indian
leaders.
In
view of his limited vision of the problems of the country, it is not yet
clear to Nigerians why Babangida wants to run for president in 2007. Is
it because his performance as Military President is adjudged as
pre-eminently good and effective and therefore needs to be re-enacted?
Or does he genuinely believe that
Nigeria
is bereft of presidential material? If he believes
any of the above, he is grossly mistaken. He led the country for eight
years as military president during which time he wielded absolute power
with which he could have taken the country to any height he desired. His
performance then is now history and I believe Nigerian do not want a
repeat of it.
Nigeria
is endowed with millions of intelligent men and
women dispersed both at home and in the Diaspora. We should at this
point in time give these people a chance to try their hands at the
country’s governance.
Finally,
it is pertinent to remind the General that in the sixties,
Nigeria
, along with countries of
Asia
–
China
,
India
, the
Koreas
and
Taiwan
were classified as developing countries. Today,
these Asian countries (without the advantage of
Nigeria
mineral wealth) are emerging from the club of
developing countries to that of the developed world. On the contrary,
Nigeria
has indeed been downgraded and according to the
United Nations rating is one of the poorest countries in the world. It
is now imperative that anyone who has a hand in our sorry state or
played a significant role in past governments that led us to the
squandering of our promise as a country should steer clear of its future
leadership.
Nigeria
has lost enough time and should henceforth look for
messiahs regardless of what region of the country they come from. Now is
the time for our present leaders to realize that the latitude for
exploiting people’s ignorance is shrinking fast and that they may not
for long contain the fury of the frustrated, hungry and unemployed youth
of our country.