Merits and demerits of the 2014 national confab

Merits and demerits of the 2014 national confab

By Rev Fr Tony Labbi Zakka

Introduction
Since the early days of the Jonathan administration, calls have been made by eminent Nigerians for a national conference which would be a platform for Nigerians to iron-out their existing differences, plan for a more acceptable union of ethnic nationalities and where possible, envision a brighter, more sustainable collective future for Nigeria in a civil manner. The calls for the conference were also made as an attempt to take a holistic precautionary measure to avert the much speculated CIA predicted break-up of Nigeria by the year 2015. In this article, the author intends to x-ray the Nigerian state before the National Conference (a.k.a. National Confab), briefly analyze the National Confab, and provide a fair analysis of the possible scenarios that may play out in Nigeria after the Confab, due to the Confab.

Nigeria before the Confab
In 2005, the Chief Olusegun Obasanjo led administration commissioned a National Political Reform Conference which was intended to address the burning issues of the nation at the time especially, as regards political reform. However, this conference although highly important and
imperative at the time did not yield much dividend primarily because, of the alarming effect of President Obasanjo’s Third Term Agenda on the polity and the attendant dust it raised.

By 2007, a new government had come to power in Nigeria and Nigerians battled with the menace of militancy in the nation’s oil-rich Niger-delta. This armed struggle effectively crippled oil production in the country even leading to the near pauperization of the nation.
Apart from the above, the militancy created acute instability as a lot of people were displaced, and property worth millions of naira was destroyed. Potential investors were scared away and national average cost of doing business skyrocketed. This period was so gory that no one alive in Nigeria today would want to witness it again especially, because, of the attendant economic
hardship it brought in its’ wake, the negative publicity it garnered for the country and the loss of government focus on development projects.

By the period of President Goodluck Jonathan’s ascent to the nation’s top job through what they called “doctrine of necessity”, militancy seemed to have been quelled in the Niger Delta partly due to the Amnesty provision, creation of the Niger Delta Development Commission and the Ministry of the Niger Delta.

Nigeria therefore, experienced relative peace until the volcanic post-election violence of 2011 in protest of the victory of the People’s Democratic Party at the highest level of government in the country, which claimed the lives of hundreds of Nigerians including National Youth Service Corps members and saw millions of naira-worth of property destroyed especially, in the Northern parts of Nigeria. This violence gave rise to increased attacks by the already well known Islamic fundamentalist group, Boko Haram with most attacks specially crafted to humiliate Nigeria and send wrong signals to the world. These include, the United Nation’s building bomb blast, Nigeria Police Force Headquarters bomb blast and other devastating terror attacks within and around the nation’s seat of government, Abuja, hence, calls intensified for a Sovereign National Conference, by the Nigerian elite.

Nigeria After the Confab
All the issues raised at the confab if adopted as recommended and passed into law by the Nigerian Senate at the end of the exercise have the potential to radically alter Nigeria. We must ensure that the amended constitution has the broad-based legitimacy that foundational documents need for a competitive democracy to thrive. Fortunately, in declaring the National Conference open on March 17, Jonathan said the National Assembly had already introduced the provision for a referendum in the proposed amendment of the Constitution. According to him, this should be relevant for this conference if at the end of the deliberations, the need for a referendum arises.

Conclusion
This country has vacillated long enough. Much now depends on Jonathan. His administration needs to act fast before the full cost of our system paralysis comes due, and the National Conference window may be our last chance and surest escape route from horror.

In sum, pre-Confab Nigeria was slowly but steadily drifting into the abyss of increased ethnic distrust and possible civil war, the Confab-Nigeria raised pertinent issues about Nigeria that have the capacity to pacify, sustain or incite certain groups and interests in the country. The post-Confab Nigeria will be a creation of representatives of the Nigerian people. Their actions and inactions all count to the Nigeria that would be available at the time and while there is great possibility of a catastrophic outcome for Nigeria due to Nigeria’s past performance of handling issues such as this, there is still a chance (no matter how small) of a victorious Nigeria through better management, selflessness and integrity of her leaders. Miracles do happen, miraclesvhappen in Nigeria and this could be yet another miracle!

Fr Tony Zakka is the Director of the Media Service Centre, Independence Way, Kaduna.

BLUEPRINT Newspaper; Sept. 11, 2014

El-Rufai, Ihejirika and Boko Haram

El-Rufai, Ihejirika and Boko Haram

On Thursday, August 28, 2014, the controversial APC chieftain, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, reported a statement made by Stephen Davis on Arise TV, UK, in which Davis alleged that former Gov Ali Modu Sherrif of Borno state and Gen Onyeaboh Azubuike Ihejirika, the immediate past Army Chief, are sponsors of Boko Haram, the Islamic insurgency group that has been tormenting Nigeria. El-Rufai ended his Facebook post with these comments: “Finally, the truth about BH is coming out. Hopefully, the murderers of General Muhammadu Shuwa, the abductors of the Chibok girls, those truly responsible for the Nyanya bombings, and attempted assassination of General Buhari and Sheikh Dahiru Bauchi will be known. We hope the authorities will take the steps necessary to act on this revelation, and thereby discharge their duty to protect us, the citizens of Nigeria. That is just what it is, a hope!”

In his response when contacted, Gen Ihejirika retorted, claiming that El-Rufai is one of the frontline commanders of Boko Haram. He reportedly added that “When the Boko Haram operation started, supporters of the sect like El-Rufai said that there was nothing like Boko Haram and that the army was just killing innocent youths”. “If you also remember” he proceeded to say, “not too long ago, some of their supporters including El-Rufai said that I was re-inventing the killing of the Ibos during the Biafra war following government’s determination to rid the country of terrorism.” Ihejiraka in fact went back memory lane: “The likes of El-Rufai have been supporting Boko Haram. In fact, El-Rufai and his likes are the same group of people that ensured the army did not to get the requested equipment to deal with this menace once and for all, as they used their cohorts to tell the government that procuring modern equipment were not necessary.”

I was not surprised when I saw El-Rufai’s social media post because of the wide suspicion of the military in the engagement of the insurgency generally. However, I found it curious that it was Stephen Davis that was making the allegation on a foreign TV station and very specifically mentioning the name of Ihejirika and not, say, the Army. Not that I believed the yarn simply.

But very shocking to me is the reaction of Ihejirika, a General, a gentleman, a military chief, a strategist and one who has led the Nigerian Army to engage the particular insurgency in question. I believe that his credentials and status in the national life of this country should have informed the manner in which he responded to the allegation. To go on a wild spew of claims on a subject such as this is, to my mind, rather unbecoming of his estate. Nigerians have suffered and are still suffering untold terror in the hands of this insurgency and the least any citizen expects out of this development is a determined attention by the state and concerned state actors, past and present, in the unraveling of the veracity or otherwise of the claim, and not blurring the issues with what is evidently turning out to be politics.

Davis has alleged against Ihejirika, on no other grounds except that the Boko Haram people have told him so – at least that is the most he has yet said. He was reported, after the General’s response to El-Rufai, by Sahara Reporters, to have said that he stands and insists on his claim. The burden is on Davis to prove his allegation and Ihejirika should insist on that. Such grave allegations should not be left on and to the pages of newspapers. If the government is not saying anything – as no comment has emanated from those quarters – the former Army Chief should seek to clear his name; at least he owes himself, his family and his ethnic group that much. I say ethnic group because since the end of the Biafran war in 1970, Ihejirika is the first Igbo man to head any Nigerian military arm, and we cannot run away from the fact that some opportunistic politicians will stop at nothing to play to those sentiments, perceived, real or mischievously. If one considers the fact that for quite a while now there have been Biafran cries, both within and outside the country, from people not necessarily any cahoots with him, then the need for him to protect his reputation becomes even more imperative. By the way, his tribesman, Dr. Dozie Ikedife, former President-General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, reportedly warned, two days ago, of a break-up of the country, if Nasir El-Rufai, and other northern leaders did not refrain from discrediting the immediate past Chief of Army Staff, General Ihejirika (rtd) and other Igbo icons. It is rather unfortunate that such a dire matter is being dragged into the mire of politics and ethnicity.

As controversial and loquacious as El-Rufai is deemed to be in many quarters, he has responded rather common-sensically to Gen Ihejirika’s own allegation on his person that he is a fronline commander of Boko Haram. He said he will go to court. At least one lead will be intelligently interrogated.

NB: Last week’s piece, credited to me, was a contribution by one who prefers anonymity.

BLUEPRINT Newspaper; Sept. 4, 2014

Let’s buy back Nigeria from the British!

Let’s buy back Nigeria from the British!

Odoh Diego Okenyodoh

When I learnt that Nigeria was bought from the Royal Niger Company for £865,000 in 1900, a lot of ‘coincidences’ started making sense. The British government bought this large piece of land for business and still holds the land in physical and spiritual bondage.

Before every major landmark event in our country, someone from the British monarchy paid a visit to the country and met with leading politicians. Queen Elizabeth came before Independence; in 1978, before Obasanjo would hand over to a relatively unknown Shagari, they were here.

After the military interregnum from 1984 to 1998, Prince Charles came and Obasanjo was let out of prison. Some meetings later, a bony Obasanjo became presidential candidate. He won. Obasanjo ruled for two terms and the challenges of who would take over stared all in the face.

Atiku Abubakar, Obasanjo’s vice president printed posters; the then outgoing governor of Kaduna State, Ahmed Makarfi, printed some too. Peter Odili put his private jet in the race alongside the Tinapa governer Donald Duke, and Akwa lbom’s Obong Victor Attah. The race was hot.

Then Prince Charles (what’s his surname again? Prince Charles Elizabeth?) flew into Nigeria again. It was November 2006. He landed in Abuja but rode straight to Katsina, held meetings with northern elders. He convened the babanrigas in Kaduna at the Arewa House auditorium and a week or so after, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, an unknown governor emerged. And he not only won the primaries in spite of the many times he collapsed on the campaign trail, he was forced on us as president.

That’s where we are with the meddlesome Brits. But what should we do?

Physically and spiritually we need to take back Nigeria. By any means necessary. At the physical level, the country’s leadership need to consciously, on behalf of the citizens, reimburse the British to the tune of £865,000. We agree that they have exploited our human and natural resources for a very long time since 1900. British companies, in the name of civilising the colonies, took advantage of cheap labour, land and natural resources, carting the proceeds out of our country. They paid little or nothing as tax. What they gave back to the land as infrastructure were self-serving roads and railways, and some schools. Some analysts may further argue that they gave us formal education and democracy as well as modern systems of governance. Nevertheless, they took our forefathers and sent them to die in the first and second world wars. At the moment, we are still being exploited as members of the Commonwealth. Our wealth is common for the British but we do not commonly own theirs.

This is why we ought to reimburse them and send them out of our lives. Of course, my readers who are Christians may argue that it is the British government that owes us reparations. In Exodus 22:5 it is said that: If a man shall cause a field or vineyard to be eaten, and shall put in his beast, and shall feed in another man’s field; of the best of his own field, and of the best of his own vineyard, shall he make restitution.

But verses that I can’t readily find in the Bible now assure that one can pay some form of restitution to receive spiritual freedom or deliverance from bondage. This is what my suggestion to the people of Nigeria is about. We need to free ourselves of the shackles of Britain. They should relate with us as any other sovereign state does with the others–on equal terms. The Nigerian government should package a bag of money (same way Obasanjo packaged for the legislators during the Third Term crisis) and hand that cash to the British High Commissioner in Nigeria. He should be told that it is a reimbursement for their exploration and exploitation of thia territory to this day. We are taking back what belongs to us. This symbolic act is important.

At a spiritual level, the significance of the physical refund of the British government’s money needs to be sealed and the action consolidated. All prayer warriors need to be mobilised across all religions to begin to wrest back the dignity and destiny of this land. An annual ceremony for this purpose would be in order.

When this is done, it is my belief that the malaise that afflicts us will die. Internationally renowned Nigerian technocrats return whom to become far less than average. All Nigerian elites want to become Americans or British. They airlift the pregnant wives to these countries in order that the children stand greater chance of holding dual citizenship. This phenomenon will die very soon.

 

BLUEPRINT Newspaper; August 28, 2014

Soldiers Revolt Again

Soldiers Revolt Again

When, some months ago at the heels of an attack on a school in his state where lads were slaughtered while setting the girls free with instruction never to return to school, Gov Shettima of Borno State stated rather bluntly that the Boko Haram insurgents were better equipped and better motivated than the Nigerian armed forces, tongues wagged. Many people, either without peering into the subtleties of Nigeria’s fight against the insurgents, or due to some form of sentiments for the government of the day or sentiments against those perceived to be against the government of the day for whatever reason lampooned the governor for his submission. They claimed that he did not exhibit the needed patriotism or that he was demoralizing not just the soldiers but also the entire Nigerian population. The man stood his ground and if anything, he was more dogged about that position of his.

Since then, the issue of how well soldiers are equipped to face a now clearly determined and danger-spelling insurgency – if events in Syria and Iraq with the Islamic State fighters are anything to go by – has continued to rear its ugly head in the unfolding of events. In May, soldiers at Giwa barracks fired at their GOC with a clear intention to kill, in protest of the killing of their colleagues due to inadequate weapons and a reading by them of suspect instructions from superior officers. Even the GOC that took over from him in the wake of the altercation was not spared the bitterness of the soldiers in the division. As a result, the media space was awash with report, founded or unfounded, that a number of senior military officers were undergoing court marshal. The military has since come out to “blur” the veracity of those reports.

Only within this month of August, we have seen two occasions where wives of soldiers have come out to openly protest or infact outrightly block the deployment of their husbands to go and engage the insurgents on account of inadequate equipping. The developments speak volumes to any discerning mind.

A third event played out two days ago when soldiers refused orders to deploy to Damboa and Gwoza towns from Maimalari barracks to fight the Boko Haram militants. They were reported to have, after having boarded and driven out of the barracks, stopped on the outskirts of the city and would not move an inch further until they were provided with better and adequate weapons to engage the enemy. The spokesman of the Nigerian army, Gen Chris Olukolade, was reported to have denied knowledge of the development. As for the Chief of Army Staff, Lt-Gen Minimah, he reportedly threatened the soldiers with death if found guilty of mutiny, accordingly; and as for the protesting wives, they risked whips of the “koboko” and being thrown out of the barracks.

A reading of these events lends credence to the very comments on the development credited to Gen Kolade: “that degree of cowardice is not in the character of real soldier of the Nigerian army”, he said. “Each soldier answers for his actions in terms of discipline”. He went ahead to add that “the overwhelming majority of the Nigerian soldiers remains as brave and disciplined as ever”.

From the actions of the soldiers and their wives, it is clear that Kolade is very correct, which is why the protest, or whatever you might call it, is not on whether the soldiers are ready to fight for the nation but on fitting and adequate equipment to be made available to them. The wives of the soldiers did not say that their husbands should not go to the warfront; they only said that they should be better equipped to confront the enemy. These last set of soldiers in question did not refuse to mobilize to the battle ground; they infact were enroute and then decided that the country for whom they are fighting and which is sending them on this mission should equip them adequately. This is not too much to ask. As it stands today, these soldiers have come to see themselves as mere cannon fodders in the hands of their superior officers. A soldier who spoke to the BBC Hausa was reported as saying “soldiers are dying like fowls… they (senior commanders) are sacrificing soldiers”. This is a precipitous situation for an army to reach.

The top command however is not responding to the real question. It is talking about mutiny when the men are only asking for adequate equipment. I think the military authorities should address the issues head-on. These men are ready to die for country, as Kolade has noted.

Nigerians are watching. This matter lies in the hands of the executive arm of government and the military authorities. Out of the about N5trillion 2014 budget, a whooping sum of N968billion – about 20percent – went to the defense sector. Between January and april, over N130billion was reportedly released to that sector.

BLUEPRINT Newspaper; August 21, 2014