PEOPLE & POLITICS BY MOHAMMED HARUNA

Between Adekunle and Obasanjo

kudugana@yahoo.com

 

 

When my friend and fellow journalist, Karl Maier, a former Nigerian correspondent of The Independent of London wrote his controversial book about the contemporary political history of Nigeria four years ago, he sounded somewhat despondent about the country’s prospects.  To begin with, the very title of the book, THIS HOUSE HAS FALLEN, could hardly evoke optimism in the reader.

 

Karl took the title from a quotation by Chinua Achebe, himself by no means very optimistic about Nigeria, gauging from his now famous essay, The Problem with Nigeria, and gauging also from his Booker Prize winning novel, Anthill in the Savannah, not to mention his recent rejection of the award of Commander of the Federal Republic from the Obasanjo administration, on account of the mess he said the administration has made of Nigeria in general and his native Anambra State in particular.

 

“This” Karl quotes Achebe as saying, “is an example of a country that has fallen down; it has collapsed.  This house has fallen.”

 

Not only did Karl choose a rather despondent title for his book, he also concluded it on an equally despondent note.  Three things, he said, could happen to Nigeria .  First, President Obasanjo could meet Nigerians’ expectations of him as a tested leader who has returned to heal past wounds and lead Nigeria down the path to the Promised Land.  Second, he could disappoint and merely lead the country from one crisis to another.  Finally, things could spin out of control and lead to the return of the military.  This “worst case scenario,” said Karl, could spark another civil war which, this time, may lead to the disintegration of Nigeria . 

 

Karl had little doubt that the soldiers have been too discredited by their dismal record in politics to stage a come-back.  Even then he did not think the Obasanjo administration was up to the task of stemming the rot it had inherited.  “By early 2000,” Karl said, “there appeared to be scant reason for optimism.  There were simply too many problems, too much anger and too little time; Nigeria seemed to be an approaching firestorm…”

 

Obasanjo, as we all know, took over from General Abdulsalami Abubakar in May 1999.  Karl’s book appeared less than a year after that.  Therefore his judgment of Obasanjo’s record at the time must have seemed rather harsh to many.  In retrospect, however, it now looks as if Karl was anything but harsh; five years on and with the president dead set in his ways and  convictions about his infallibility, it now seems Nigerians put too much faith in his capabilities.

 

A recent self descriptive book, THE NIGERIA-BIAFRA WAR LETTERS:  A Soldier’s story (Volume I), by Abiodun A. Adekunle, the son of Brigadier Benjamin Adekunle, a.k.a. The Black Scorpion, provides perhaps one of the best insights into why Obasanjo has made a harsh of his job of leading Nigeria back from the brink.  As the son of Brigadier Adekunle, Abiodun obviously has an axe to grind with Obasanjo for apparently snatching his father’s crowning glory of accepting the surrender of the Biafrans in 1970.  For, of all the Nigerian war commanders, none fought and won anywhere near as many battles against the Biafrans as Adekunle.  But not only did he lose his command at the eleventh hour to Obasanjo, he was eventually disgraced out of the army as an accomplice of a hemp peddler, the socialite Iyabo Olorunkoya.

 

However, even though Abiodun has an axe to grind with Obasanjo over his father’s behalf, it is hard to dispute his charge that Obasanjo’s claim to fame and good political fortune has been more due to cunning and good old simple luck than to competence and integrity in the sense of fidelity to his self-acclaimed “born-again” values. 

 

“It is legitimate,” said Adekunle, the son, in his introduction to the book, “to ask what role may fairly be attributed to my father in bringing the war to its conclusion.  Nigerians, more particularly the Yorubas, have perhaps been fortunate that Obasanjo has always been available to fill the roles of other fallen comrades, such as my father after his loss of command, Murtala Mohammed after his assassination and again MKO Abiola, after his premature death.  OVER THE LENGTH OF HIS CAREER, FROM THE VERY START UNTIL THE PRESENT, GENERAL OBASANJO SEEMS TO HAVE DISPLAYED AN UNCANNY ABILITY OF REAPING WHERE OTHERS HAVE TOILED (Emphasis mine).

 

I am not sure Nigeria would have been better off under the Black Scorpion than under Obasanjo.  As his war letters clearly demonstrate, he was too temperamental and schizophrenic to provide good leadership in peace time.  It is also apparent from his son’s book that he believed the war was about oil, not Nigeria ’s unity.  “Plainly speaking” he said in the biographical section of the Book, “the Federal troops fought the civil war because of the rich crude oil found in the coastal areas.  Those who fought are never told the truth.”

 

Twenty-six years after the war, Adekunle seemed to have changed his story.  In an interview with the Weekend Concord (July 6, 1996) which the son quoted in the book, the Black Scorpion regretted that he fought, not for oil, but to keep Nigeria one.  “While some of us were dying in the battlefield for the restoration of Nigeria as one country,” he said, “some people have their eyes on one particular subject – oil, the live wire of the economy, the new fulcrum or pendulum of power.  While we fought for one country, some people have been reaping where they did not sow.  They have been reaping from bogus population figures fashioned to suit their selfish purposes…”

 

The Black Scorpion’s grouse this time was obviously directed, not at Obasanjo who, in effect, snatched his crown as the most pre-eminent Nigerian war commander, but at the North whose crime is that it is the biggest and most populous region of Nigeria .  This grouse and a similar one betrayed by another interview with another publication – this time Tell magazine(May, 2000) – further exposed the Black Scorpion’s temperamental nature, and worse, it also exposed his poor grasp of Nigeria ’s economy and the complexity of governance.

 

Obasanjo’s problem he told Tell as quoted extensively in the book, was simply and squarely the North because the president stopped the “business as usual” that Northerners were used to.  “Obasanjo is saying no to them and that’s why he’s getting the problem.  And this Sharia thing is part of it.  Sharia, is the biggest headache they can give Obasanjo, after that nothing more,” said Adekunle in his new found fondness for the president.

 

Asked by Tell how, if he were Obasanjo, he would tackle the Sharia issue, the war commander in him came to the fore. “As far as I am concerned,” he said, “the state of emergency is there, just declare it.  You have got a diseased child.  But he President is trying to practice democracy, trying to have a ‘Talk Shop’.  But this is a situation where nobody is going to reason about Sharia… They give you, give them back”.

 

With a command mind-set like this, a mindset worse that Obasanjo’s, it was probably a good thing Adekunle never became the country’s peacetime leader.  We are even the luckier that our socio-economy never came under his management because his claim that oil was the live wire of our economy clearly betrayed a very shallow grasp of its workings. 

 

Adekunle is of course not the only one in this misreading of the place of oil in our economy.  Many an otherwise educated politician and pundit have made similar claims for the commodity.  True, oil, because it seems to provide easy money, has since become “the oil fulcrum of power”, to use Adekunle’s words. Again, true, oil is an important component of the economy, but agriculture, despite its abject neglect, and not oil, remains the live-wire of our economy.  Agriculture, along with livestock, accounts for more than 45% of our GDP, while oil accounts for less than 30%.  Agriculture also accounts for more than 70% of our employment rate.

 

Oil, one the other hand, accounts for at least 90% of government revenue and a similar percentage of our foreign exchange earnings.  But then government revenue and foreign exchange are not the same as the entire economy.  If that were so, the country would have since been economically dead and buried given the marginal impact oil revenue has had on the lives of ordinary Nigerians whether they live in Warri, Ibadan, Kano, Maiduguri, Jos, or Bida, or wherever.

 

Now, while the chances are that Nigeria would have been worse off under Adekunle than under Obasanjo, it still does not detract from Adekunle, the son’s, insight into why Obasanjo seems out of his depth in fixing our political economy.  Events in the last one year alone – the genocide in Plateau, the more recent mindless destruction of public property in Anambra, and the galloping cost of petroleum products – suggest that while the president has cunning and sheer luck in abundance, he lacks the other qualities – credibility, a firm belief that not even the president is infallible, and the absence of malice against each and every one – needed to do a good job of leading a country in big trouble like Nigeria.

 

Is it any wonder then that the Nigeria House under his watch is falling down all around him?  On the other hand, is it not a cause for much wonder that some of his courtiers have tried to stretch his luck by contemplating a third term for him, possibly with his own consent?

 

Justice Bello: a man of courage

It speaks volumes of the level of security in this country that the residence of a former Chief Justice of the Federation would be raided by armed robbers with impunity.  But this was precisely what happened to Justice Mohammed Bello who died recently.  On at least three occasions, his modest home at Inuwa Wada Road , Unguwan Rimi G.R.A., Kaduna , was raided by armed robbers.  On the first occasion, they showed no regard for his age and rough-handled him.  On all three occasions no one was ever caught and prosecuted, at least as far as I know.

 

After the first robbery incident, you would expect the authorities to have provided him and his family with adequate police protection to discourage future robberies.  I do not know if Justice Bello  asked for one, but none was provided.  I do not also remember the old judge making any hue and cry about it, certainly not on the pages of newspapers as he could easily have done.  I thought this reticence in the face of little or no protection for his life and property and those of his family, was a mark of his humility and of his courage, particularly the latter.

 

 In his tribute to the late Chief Justice in the Daily Trust of November 10, Chief S,B.Awoniyi, the Aro of Mopa and Chairman, Arewa Consultative Forum, said the late Chief Justice was truly  “a most courageous man.”  I am not very familiar with his record on the bench, but on at least two occasions outside the bench he demonstrated such courage.

 

The first was back in February 1990 when he tried to defend the retention of Decree 2, albeit in a watered down version of the original one. Readers familiar with the controversy that surrounded Bello ’s defense of the detention without trial decree may wonder if my notion of courage is not strange, since courage to most people lies in speaking truth to government. 

 

This may be true, but problem with this notion of courage, however, is that it assumes only government is the enemy of free speech.  True government is a powerful institution, but other institutions as well as public opinion, sometimes right, sometimes wrong, but all the time fickle, can be more powerful in threatening free speach than government.

 

Powerful institutions like the Nigerian Bar Association and the mass media believed and said Decree 2 was unjust and I agreed with them in an article I wrote in my Perspective column in the rested Today weekly newspaper of March 4 – 10, 1990 .   In the course of criticizing the chief justice, some pundits even ridiculed him. Still that did not stop the Chief Justice from maintaining his stand that the law was necessary if a country under military rule was to avoid anarchy.

 

The second time Justice Bello displayed real courage was when he intervened in the Sharia controversy at a National Seminar organized by a Jamaatu Nasril Islam, early 2000.  That intervention, along with another by Professor Ben Nwabueze, a constitutional lawyer and a former education minister, were probably the most scholarly and level headed interventions in the Sharia controversy.   Certainly Justice Bello’s intervention was the most helpful in dowsing the fire that the adoption of Sharia by a number of northern states, led by Zamfara, seemed to have sparked.

 

In a language that avoided emotion and vulgarity, the judge listed the constitutional obstacles in the way of wholesale adoption of Sharia.  Then through the force of fact and logic, he showed which obstacles were surmountable and which ones, not, for the continued existence of a multi-religious Nigeria .  Justice Bello’s audience was essentially pro-Sharia, but that did not stop him from speaking truth to the audience as he saw it.

 

His humility and rare courage will be sorely missed, especially at a time when the country is suffering from a severe shortage of humble leaders who have the courage of their convictions, instead of leaders who like to peddle the convictions of powerful outsiders.

 

May the soul of Justice Bello rest in  peace.  And may the relations and the friends he has   left behind have the courage to bear his loss.