That we may live

That We May Live: Historical and Political Panorama of Nigeria

Dr. P. O Nwaogu

This article will help one put in perspective events that have tried to shape the state called Nigeria. Nigeria as it is today is a country of many nationalities brought together by the British colonialists. Awolowo did call the edifice as created by the imperial power ‘a geographical expression’. The peoples are diverse in different respects –culturally, socially, religiously, educationally and even philosophically. The event of 1914 usually known as the Amalgamation of the northern and southern protectorates did not conform to democratic norm. Choice is the main principle implicit in democracy. The British used its colonizing power to attain its objective. The diverse peoples (with different languages, culture and outlook) were not consulted before the lopsided architecture was erected. This monster has threatened the citizens many times with death, incapacitation, religious zealotry etc. The amalgamation was a political watershed contrived for the service of British commercial and imperialistic interests. It is known that in certain parts of the world different peoples have been lumped together as a political entity but when the union was found to be unworkable, efforts were made to dissolve it. Northern and Southern Rhodesia stand as an example from among others in the African continent. Yugoslavia under Tito progressed as a union of different nationalities but after the death of the dictator his edifice disintegrated.

Britain planted hot spots all over the world during the epoch of empire building. There was a time the British Empire was described as an ‘empire where the sun never sets’. Yes, that was the way it was. Their colonies were scattered all over the four corners of the globe. The British are to be recognized as adroit diplomats and astute administrators in the superlative degree. But their policies in the administered territories never endured. Eastern Pakistan had to break away from the unholy union with Pakistan even though the two territories forged together were not contiguous. The Eastern Pakistan became Bangladesh in 1971 after a civil war in which India played a major role in the defeat of Pakistani troops. The United Kingdom is made up of England, Scotland and Wales each with a distinct people, culture and language but the people are bound together by mutual respect in the pursuit of the political term ‘United Kingdom’. Each territory, as it were, is an autonomous entity but there are certain areas that they see themselves as one. In Nigeria since we were regarded as uncivilized by the British (having been colonized by them) the imperial master decided without consultation to form a country whose administration tended towards a unitary government. Why, anybody might ask, did the British not form a United Nigeria as it is (the way their ‘unity’ operates) in the United Kingdom? During the colonial period, the British knew that two Nigerias existed- the progressive and the feudal and it was clear to them that oil and water would not mix. At independence Britain made it possible for political power to be retained in the North even though the North under Ahmadu Bello chorused ‘north for the northerners’.

Independence constitution did recognize the three regions-East, North and West and later Mid-West. The centre was loose and the regions had their autonomy. The January 1966 coup came as a result of the problems in the Western Region. There was power struggle /rivalry between Akintola and Awolowo as to which party would administer the region. The North under the Northern People’s Congress (N.P.C) had allied with Akintola’s United People’s Party for the control of the West but this phenomenon Awolowo and his party the Action Group (AG) resisted. As a result there was a break down of law and order in the West and unfortunately the central government did nothing to arrest the situation. The coup came on the heels of the lackadaisical approach and insensitivity of the federal government towards the fracas which engulfed the Western Region. ‘Rome, as it were, was burning but the central government cared less. The coup was popular and involved officers from the regions even though the leader was Nzeogwu, an Igbo. Later, the coup was misinterpreted as an Igbo coup and Britain helped to fuel the crisis by aiding the North towards revenge. This was accomplished in July 1966 when the federal government under Aguiyi Ironsi was over thrown in a counter coup masterminded by northern soldiers. It should be stated here that Nzeogwu’s broadcast after the coup did not mention the dismemberment of Nigeria. The broadcast of Gowon, which came later specifically mentioned the concept of ‘Araba’ and adumbrated to high heavens that there was ‘no basis for unity’ in the Nigerian Federation. Genuine efforts were made to bring discipline to the army after the coup, but the northern officers refused to hand over mantle of power to Ogundipe. Indiscipline in the army bred unpleasant consequences bearing in mind what happened after the counter coup. The northern soldiers let loose their guns, not only on the soldiers of Eastern origin, but also on civilians as well. A right thinking individual should have thought that the revenge killings would have been restricted to the army. But that was not so. The magnitude of the pogrom was unimaginable and it was widespread, involving all ethnic groups from Eastern Region living in the Western Region, Lagos and all areas throughout the Northern Region. These dates stand out significantly in the northern agenda to wipe out a group of people from the face of the earth- May 29, July 29 and September 29. Efforts made to let tempers cool was disregarded by Gowon especially after Aburi accord. Gowon reneged on what was mutually agreed on the instigation of the British government. Biafra was a child of circumstance. It would be evil for one who is rejected to reject himself/herself. That Biafra was proclaimed was a bold attempt to avoid the extermination of a people. During the war the south- south (people of the Niger Delta) allied with the people of the north and proclaimed them their real brothers. Lest we forget, it is germane here to ask: Who killed Adaka Boro, Ken Sero Wiwa and who visited Odi with fire and brimstone? These heinous acts were perpetrated by the ‘brothers’ of the people of the Niger Delta and their collaborators. Even though Biafra was defeated, one feels happy about the efforts made by a determined people to resist injustice that was implicit in the Nigerian edifice. The south south people have a right to the ownership of the mineral found on their doorstep but they should not forget that unholy alliance usually brings about unpleasant consequences. The Afonja debacle/case in Yoruba history illustrates what I mean. During the war declared by Gowon to keep Nigeria one (remember Araba, no basis for unity) most Nigerians saw no evil in what was meted out to Easterners. However, one eminent Yoruba intellectual, Prof. Wole Soyinka, was a lone voice against what became a gargantuan execution of planned genocide. Enahoro should remember his activities as a Federal Commissioner of Information in Gowon’s government. His trips abroad yielded fruits in bringing Russia’s war machine to the war. The civil war became internationalized. Britain, an implacable enemy of the Eastern Block (Russia) at that time, decided to dine with its adversary in order to bring about the defeat of the nascent Republic of Biafra. Enahoro at his age in 2005 is now fighting for equality in the Nigerian Federation. I am sure that his motion in the federal parliament that set the ball rolling for independence was not done with the conviction that an independent Nigeria would be made up of superior and inferior Nigerians. Enahoro’s PRONACO has some merits-Sovereign National Conference (SNC) but he should be aware that he helped the north to acquire the political power that the region is brandishing today over their southern counterpart. My support for PRONACO is based on the fact that one outstanding and credible Nigerian (Wole Soyinka) among others is associated with the organization. In the scheme of things, nobody would readily forget Awolowo’s twenty pounds (£20.00) ‘generosity’ granted to easterners after the war for drawing on their bank account during the war. That signalled the institution of marginalization by a government that paraded ‘no victor no vanquished’ policy. Injustice has been the way of life in the Nigerian Federation. Think of the intolerable life of the talakawas of the north, the suppression of the Middle Belters, the suffocation of the people of the Niger Delta, the marginalization of Ndigbo and the dwarfing of Yoruba in Kogi!

Nigeria is Nigeria only when a northerner is the president of Nigeria but that thinking has to change if we consider/regard ourselves as citizens of this country. In reality, are we equal citizens in Nigeria? Please pause and think!! Can the people of the Niger Delta and indeed other people from the south settle in Zamfara, Jigawa, Kano, Sokoto states etc without being visited with riots occasioned by religious and social intolerance? The citizen/settler dichotomy is a language of the north. The despicable and savage killing of Akaluka in Kano is typical of the inhuman relationship that is sustained by the northerners.

We all believe in one Nigeria. Are we speaking on the same wave length when the concept is used by a southerner and a northerner? However, one Nigeria should be negotiated on the basis of justice, equality and fair-play for all Nigerians. Let us recognize the six geopolitical zones of the country as already created. In my opinion, the Middle Belt ought to have been given a zone of its own but if the people are at home with the present dispensation let it be. The presidency should rotate for the interim so that the south east and the south south should have the chance to taste the exalted position. What is wrong with Nigerian politicians is that they are greedy and are enveloped by the pervading superiority and inferiority complex. It beats my imagination that the north is still jostling for power come 2007 after the region has produced 8 out of 12 leaders that have ruled this country since independence. Those from the north are Balewa, Gowon, Murtala, Shagari, Buhari, Babangida, Abacha and Abubakar. From the south are Ironsi, Obasanjo, Shonekan and Obasanjo. (8:4 leaders; 36:9 years in favour of the north) From the foregoing, it is obvious that 2007 Presidency should be left for the southeast and south south. The rotation should kick off with either of these zones. And that would be justice and fair-play par excellence.

The just concluded National Political Reform Conference was a farce in many respects beginning from its inception to the winding up of its proceedings. It achieved nothing significant towards building a healthy polity. However, it was only able to unmask the hidden agenda of the north. By opposing the 25% derivation principle canvassed by the south south, the northern delegates exposed their true colour. I am not at all happy that the south south delegates gave their benchmark at 25% derivation when in fact 50% had been used when the East produced palm oil, North groundnuts and West cocoa. What is good for the goose should also be good for the gander. Very illogical and bizarre reasons have been adduced by the north in order to expropriate the south south people of their legitimate ownership of the mineral in their land. The Obasanjo military government had a hidden agenda when it promulgated the land use decree. This decree should be expunged from our statute book.

The foregoing analysis is made to abreast everybody of the torturous history of the Nigerian experiment towards nationhood. The 21^st century Nigerians should be allowed to fashion an umbrella under which all the nationalities will exist in the Nigerian federation. The master servant relationship does not hold water any longer. If PRONOCO will succeed, the planners must lay all issues plaguing Nigeria since independence on the table for discussion and eventual adoption by the elected conferees. Our preoccupation in this 21^st century Nigeria would not be to dwell too much now on the ills of the past (every one was guilty of one impropriety or the other against the Nigerian State whether one came from Annang, Edo, Efik, Ekoi, Fulani, Hausa, Ibibio, Igbo, Ijaw, Isoko, Jukun, Kanuri, Nupe, Ogoni, Urhobo, Yoruba etc). Even the maintenance silence during the execution of unjust policies is tantamount to impropriety. We all have sinned and let us collectively plan for the future, leaving the black days in the country’s past history behind. This type of philosophy was what Mandela preached and adopted in fashioning a new South Africa.

A secure and stimulating environment for us, our children and future generations to develop uninhibited, should be the preoccupation of the 21^st century Nigerians.Any chameleonic tendencies from any quarters will succeed in leaving us in the doldrums. The time to act is now, so that we may live.

Dr. Nwaogu writes from the Department of Educational Foundations, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.