The amazing and interesting part of the text was, the organization ‘is a socio-political organization established primarily to create an alternative platform for Nigerian youth to interact and articulate on national issues that affect the nation in which youth are major stakeholders.’ The preamble goes on to further articulate that, ‘ The political frenzy and seemingly confusion pervading our political space call for urgent deliberation and contribution from the youth since the future of this great country belongs to us.’ It does not stop at that. The preamble sounds encouraging and musical to ears,when it suggests, in the connection of the above observation that, ‘ Consequently the youth must do all it can that is humanly possible to protect and secure the overall interest of this potentially great country.’ Both the main body and the conclusion of the text were mixed-up and cleverly presented to the readers in three ( 3 ) different, but logically interwoven categories. These are ( a ) The Niger- Delta crises, ( b ) Religious riots and ( c ) Don Etiebet Induced Crisis in ANPP, as puts by the text. I was in the first place, dotty about the name of the organization, the caption of the text, the logically presented preamble and the member associations of the Alliance.

In fact the member associations and their representatives have their signatures contained therein.

The third category of that categorization, that was sub-themed, ‘Don Etiebet Induced Crisis In ANPP’ takes the 65% of the submission made by this Alliance. It is not titchy any longer when I ask why the submission is tilted more to the third category? So if the paper or rather the text was meant to titillate the good imagination of its readers, such thinking should definitely be revisited. That alone, in my understanding of the text, ridicules, endangers and raises dust. I mean to both the authors and the authored work.

By closely examining the paper one could quickly conclude that there are many loopholes in the way the Niger-Delta crises were presented. In fact the approach is naïve, not down-to-earth, and concurrently discardable. This part alone lacks proper thinking and placement of suitable variables. In other words, the part contributes nothing other than confusion and misleading argument about the whole issue. As far as the issue of Niger-Delta is concerned you are not saying anything, if you did not discuss the remote causes of the problems there. And the very time you opt for engaging in a wrong anlysis, it simply tells that you are blatantly disregarding the glaring realities on the ground. It is so glaring to whoever reads the text under scrutiny to understand that the authors are no other persons than Obasanjo’s apologists or something very similar to that.

Yes, agreed that, dialogue can solve more than half of any kind of crisis. But before you ‘ commend Mr President for adopting dialogue as a more productive way in resolving crises ‘ you have to first of all advice him to please start looking and studying inwardly. The very way you talk with authority also raises so many questions about the authenticity and intention of the text. Please my reader take a look at where the paper says, “…….as a matter of urgency release the remaining hostages and embrace peace……” The language here is very combatant! I therefore advice that, NYA should carefully study every word it is going to say in the subsequent presentations. The above command was given to the Niger-Delta militants.

I thought the paper will also call the attention of the governors of the oil producing areas. I am of course not overstretching my argument, if I mentioned that the case of the disgraceful former governor of Bayelsa state, DSP Alams is still fresh in our memories. So the text and the authors are largely suspicious as far as I am concerned. For, they turned a blind eye and deaf ears on what sufficiently constitutes the always over-talked and continuous difficulty of the Niger-Delta crisis. That is the great mismanagement of the public purse and mis-governance of the oil rich states, by the ( s ) elected governors and other representatives of those states. Lest I forget, the highly entrenched corrupt spendings of the so-called Niger Delta Development Commission ( NDDC ). And that worsens the situation.

To me and to all sane individual, capturing hostages is not the only thing that batters the economy of the region in particular, and the country in general. It is not the only thing that fuels all the intended and unintended crises.

Coming down to the religious riots, yes this act is totally condemnable. You asked some questions that are rhetorical in nature, shape and substance. The questions are, how long shall we continue to live in this state of insecurity and tension? Is there not a permanent solution to these crises in our land? As a matter of fact, the insensitive and lopsidedness nature of these questions made me to suggest that, why can’t the authors ask questions like, what are the causes of the insecurity and tension in the polity? Who is to blame for that? Who controls the power and at the same time has or have a say in the safety and security of the land? So also questions like, if there is a solution to such crises what is delaying the full application of the solution? Is very relevant and important.

The text recommends to government as follows : • Traditional rulers should take their positions as fathers and play a major role in bringing peace to their respective communities or be held responsible for any breakdown of a law and order.

• Government should intensify security in places of worship so as to fish out those who initiate religious hatred.

This position in my view is escapist. I then ask, who controls the apparatus of power and the law enforcement agencies? So if there is a breakdown of law and order who should be held responsible? Is it the traditional rulers who have control over their self-acclaimed servants and have no place in the constitution? Or the powers-that-be? It sounds like the National Youth Alliance is not up-to-date. Or to put it more appropriately, it seems like they are living on a different planet.

I think by mere taking positions as fathers, traditional rulers cannot, as the situation is, stop the breakdown of law and order. Why shouldn’t you recommend that they should first be given a role to play in the constitution? If you really meant to do justice to them. And then you follow with whatever you want to add. But your position is biased, subjective, half-baked and unimaginary. The position walls out a good reasoning from your discussion. The context of your piece is, to the best of my knowledge, a collection or rather documentation of failures. Take it or leave it! Instead of telling government to intensify security in places of worship, why can’t you suggest to government to intensify the security of lives and properties? May be through coming up with good, honest and workable economic and political policies or programmes, that could help put food on the table of Nigerians. And at the same time help produce good leadership with genuine political will. I think is better. If you think it is only in places of worship that religious intolerance is promoted, you have a long way to go in your analysis. Meaning the chemistry of your analysis is wrongly calculated. Does a hungry man, for instance, who in one way or the other involved in criminal activities, care to go to a place of worship? If you look at it carefully, whenever there is a religious crisis, the first thing that readily comes from the leaders is, the crisis was formented by group of hoodlums. And a great percentage of these hoodlums do not attend to their places of worship.

I am trying to look into the nitty-gritty areas of this text. In a way, one can put it this way that this press statement is nothing more than a calculable sponsored write-up aimed at rubbishing the personality of Chief Don Etiebet. By who? I do not know. And I do not want to know. But I think somebody might not be wrong if he says this write-up of yours was engineered from within the All Nigeria Peoples Party ( ANPP ) circle. Many things are positioned in hidden places.

I am not making brief for Etiebet. I do share an opinion that so long as Don Etiebet remains the National Chairman of ANPP, the party will not move an inch forward. The kind of opposition ANPP as a party at the national level supposed to give is very much lacking. To me, Etiebet should quickly find his exit as the chairman of the party. It is perceived that an annoying disaster is around the corner trying to befall the party very soon. So long as Etiebet remains the national chairman. He is, but a disgrace to the party.

Don Etiebet is a puppet, positioned in the party by external forces. His continuous stay in the leadership cadre of the party, spells doom to the survival of the party. His removal is therefore the only option left for the party. My quarrel with the authors of this piece is their silence over advising Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, the same way they talked to Etiebet, to resign. For the simple reason that he ( Obasanjo ) failed woefully. And has nothing to show as far as good governance is concerned.

And the press statement deliberately fails to talk on the most current, vibrant and confusing talk of the land. That is the happily embraced and lucratively oiled Obasanjo’s Third Term Agenda. That is why I said there is a semblance of a close nexus relationship between the text and the powers-that-be, on one hand, and a faction of ANPP, of course not Etiebet’s, on the other hand. In fact I doubt the vibrancy of some of the associations that signed the text.

I REST MY CASE

Abba Anwar, Kano state, Nigeria

abbanwar@yahoo.com