Resolving The Crises Of Nigeria As A Nation State

By Felix N. C. Oragwu

Nigeria’s Post-Colonial Crises and the Civil War of 1967-1970 taught the Nation State of Nigeria the following, namely:

*That progress in socio-economic growth, progress, security and prosperity of nations are driven not necessarily by natural resources endowment but more importantly by the developments in modern science and technology (S&T);

*That a Nation State needs real unity and real peace to develop its economy and to make real economic progress; and

To actualise the foregoing, a nation must have (a) Political Stability (b) Selfless Leadership Elite with vision for modern economic development (c) National Political cohesion and (d) Nationalism, Patriotism, Pride and Love of the Citizens for the Nation.

Most of the above attributes seem to be in short supply in the nation-state of Nigeria, particularly, since the end of the Civil War of 1967-1970.

What conclusions can we as a nation draw from the Civil War and the current endemic  political travails of Nigeria to enable us (Nigerians) build a united nation state? :

These, I believe include the following, namely:

*Understanding that in 1914, Nigeria became a nation state, albeit, by forced amalgamation or cobbling together of various independent and disparate ethnic nationalities and entities (Hausa, Igbo, Yoruba, Fulani, Kanuri, Ibibio, Tiv, Edo, Nupe, Ijaw, Uhrobo, etc.) numbering well over 200 (some with large, some with small populations) but with different cultures, religions, languages, and in specific geographical areas around the River Niger, by the virtue of British Imperial Power and Colonial diplomacy,

*The Colonial Authorities obviously and deliberately did not develop S&T as domestic instrument for modern economic growth and development, prosperity and security of the Nigerian State, possibly to avoid hurting the British home industry and economy or making Nigeria a prosperous modern competitive industrial and politically united nation, which would have compromised the British main objectives of Nigeria’s colonization;

*From 1914-1960, therefore, Nigeria was sustained as a nation state by virtue of British imperial power and colonial diplomacy but remained in fact a poorly structured and an unstable nation state “on paper, a geographical expression and or an artificial creation” whose political unity and economy was sustained by imported foreign developed (mostly British) industrial, scientific, engineering and technological infrastructure and security apparatus;

Nigeria: Federal Republic Of Inequality?

By Magnus Onyibe

The Federal Republic of Nigeria, FGN is the country we all call our own. Our country comprises of about 250 tribes or ethnic nationalities with the main ones being Hausa/Fulani,Yoruba, lgbo, Kanuri, ljaw, Nupe, Calabari, Tiv, Ijebu, lgara, Urhobo, Jukun, ldoma, fufulde, Ika Ibibio, Edo etc. In the inaugural speech of President Muhammadu Buhari on May 29, 2015, he was famously quoted as saying  ”l belong to everyone , l belong to no one”.

*Buhari with former Vice President Ekwueme 

That very welcoming and reassuring remark, which resonated very well with most Nigerians, became a quotable quote that featured in myriads of comments in the mainstream and online media, just as it also became a talking head in torrents of radio and television shows. The reason the quote was significant is quite simple. In the run up to the 2015 general elections, campaign rhetorics vaunting ethnic and regional sentiments were so rife that Nigeria became too polarised in such manner that the Hausa/Fulani in the northern parts of Nigeria were stacked behind, ex-military head of state, Muhammadu Buhari, who is from the Hausa/Fulani  stock, while the lgbos, ljaws and other minority tribes in the South east and South south part of Nigeria, queued up behind the then incumbent president, GoodLuck Jonathan, who is ljaw, and one of their own.

The Yorubas in the South west, who having had a shot at the presidency from 1999 to 2007,when ex-army General, Olusegun Obasanjo transited from prison to presidency, became the bride to be wooed by both the political forces from the north and south south parts of Nigeria. In the end, the Yorubas aligned with the north through acceptance of the Vice President slot which the acclaimed leader of the Yorubas, Bola Tinubu, former governor of Lagos state, conceded to a man of impeccable character, an evangelical pastor,his long time ally and former attorney general of Lagos state, Yemi Osinbajo.

Prior to his success at the 2015 polls, President Buhari had tried and failed to successfully clinch the presidency in 2003, 2007 and 2011 but on each of those occasions that he lost, Buhari swept the votes in the core northern states like, Katsina, Kebbi, Zamfara , Sokoto, etc, sometimes garnering about 12 million votes. Even with Yoruba’s vote in the kitty, Buhari still needed the votes from the South east and South south to fulfill the constitutional requirements that votes must be garnered from all parts of Nigeria for a candidate to be deemed to have won. This is to ensure that a situation whereby a particular candidate from an ethnic group with superior numerical strength, does not ride into the presidency relying only on votes from his Kith and kin.

That’s how Rotimi Amaechi, former governor of Rivers state, the heart  of South south, now minister of transport and Rochas Okorocha, incumbent governor of Imo state, the ground zero of lgbo land, became the game changers. With their support, substantial votes  in Rivers and lmo states were brought into Buhari’s kitty that already had the Hausa/Fulani and Yoruba votes and the rest, as they say is history. Politics is a game of strategy and democracy is also about numbers of people that politicians are able to swing to their side, which justifies the political dictum,majority carries the vote.

In 2015, Buhari reached out and built bridges across many deserts and rainforests into Yoruba land as well as crossed many bridges and rivers into lgbo and lkwere/Calabari mangroves and creeks and he reaped the  reward of the hard work by becoming Nigeria’s number one citizen. Now, it’s pay back time. In politics, as in business, settling lOUs is usually a very testy experience. In what many thought was a Freudian slip like the one famously made by British prime minister, David Cameroon about Nigeria being a fantastical corrupt country, in the wake of the anti corruption summit in London recently, president Buhari during an interactive session with some Nigerians and Americans, on the sideline of his visit to the USA, stated that he cannot be expected to treat the 95% who voted for him in the north equally with the less than 5% who voted in the south.

As expected in a multicultural multiethnic and multi-religious society, the comment got twisted and dissected with all manners of bias on online media platforms. Unsurprisingly, many members of the elite commentariat also took Mr. President up on the remark from the optics of the numerous ethnic and other primordial sentiments, and l thought the high level of condemnation would challenge Mr. president to offer some clarifications but that was not the case. With the public hue and cry about appointments so far made into executive positions, it would appear that Mr. President is sticking to his guns-literarily-to reward mainly voters from his home base by skewing appointments in their favour.

The Afenifere Threat To Secede From Nigeria: Open Letter To The Sultan Of Sokoto And The Caliphate’s MACBAN

—Part 2 of the Series “Buhari’s 100 Days—an X-ray”

By Chinweizu

Sundoor999@gmail.com

21oct15

President Buhari’s silence and inaction, during his 100 days, on the issue of Fulani herdsmen seems to have poured petrol on the long smoldering embers of the Fulani menace in Nigeria. So there is a need to raise two questions: (a) Is Buhari’s inaction part of his Caliphate hidden agenda? (b) Is the Sultan of Sokoto, as the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of MACBAN, the cattle breeders association, not the Grand Patron of a criminal enterprise--an enterprise that uses, for its economic gain, the crimes of trespassing, destruction of other people’s property, kidnapping, arson, murder, ethnic cleansing etc.?

In his Inaugural Address, President Buhari mentioned some security issues that he would solve as part of his change agenda. Among them was “herdsmen/farmer clashes”:

“Boko Haram is not only the security issue bedeviling our country. The spate of kidnappings, armed robberies, herdsmen/farmers clashes, cattle rustlings all help to add to the general air of insecurity in our land. We are going to erect and maintain an efficient, disciplined people–friendly and well–compensated security forces within an over–all security architecture.”

-- President Buhari’s inaugural speech, on May 29, 2015  

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2015/05/read-president-buhari-inaugural-speech/ 

Though he didn’t give it the priority and emphasis he gave to Boko Haram, these herdsmen/farmers clashes have quickly escalated into a security problem of far greater countrywide menace than even Boko Haram. Yet he has said nothing and done nothing visible to solve it. Perhaps his change agenda does not include change in this long-established security problem in Nigeria. If so why?

As we shall see further down in this x-ray, because of its territorial scope and its potential to ignite inter-ethnic war in 5 of the 6 zones of Nigeria, this Fulani menace is by far a greater threat to the lives of Nigerians and to the peace and territorial integrity of the Nigerian state than Boko Haram. Yet President Buhari has thus far chosen to leave it unaddressed.  Why?

Reports of the criminal activities of Fulani herdsmen have captured the headlines since May 29. And Afenifere, the apex socio-cultural organ of the Yoruba nationality, stung by the exceptional provocation of the abduction of Chief Olu Falae, a distinguished Nigerian, Yoruba grandee and one of Afenifere’s leaders, reacted by renewing its threat of Yoruba secession from Nigeria.