The character of a nation is not the character of its
president; the character of a nation is the character of its
people—Elizabeth Warren, U.S. Senator
When Nigeria obtained independence in 1960, the consensus among
leaders was that Nigeria was the result of human construction, hence,
the various constitutional conferences that culminated in the Republican
Constitution of 1963. Nobody, not Frederick Lugard, Ahmadu Bello,
Obafemi Awolowo, and Nnamdi Azikiwe, called Nigeria a creation of God.
It was not common in the world at that time to pass the buck of poor
architecture to God, as many highly placed leaders tend to do these
days. In order to reinforce the status quo, political and cultural
leaders have had for too long the tendency to make claims that are not
realistic or rational, namely that it is God who created Nigeria and
nobody should do or say anything that challenges God’s design.
For example, long before anybody demanded for revival of Nigeria,
many stakeholders warded off demands for restoration of federalism as an
attempt to commit sacrilege, an abuse of a celestial or divine process
and product, Nigeria. Much more than before, the notion that Nigeria is
a creation of God got transformed into an advertorial in the last few
years, particularly since self-styled Indigenous People of Biafra became
a force to tame, if Nigeria is to survive as one geographical entity.
Former vice presidents, sitting vice president, traditional rulers,
governors, and legislators amplified the narrative of divine design of
Nigeria, perhaps to put the mind of ordinary people who are perceived as
fertile grounds for false consciousness planting at rest and protect
such fragile minds from corruption by those calling for any manner of
reform of the status quo. In both cases, apostles of the status quo or
nothing else were enthusiastic in shutting up demand for reform on the
excuse that such demands tamper with celestial design of Nigeria.
Before this season, Nigerians were already used to hearing that it is
God that appoints leaders, especially when some nosy citizens accused
ruling parties of election manipulation. This happened in 1979, 1983,
1993, 1999, 2003, 2007, and even in 2011, particularly when those who
lost elections challenged the integrity of such elections. Resorting to
metaphysical explanations of political activities has been for some time
part of political rhetoric in the country, but it got to a crescendo in
the last few years, particularly since demand for restructuring by a
section of Yoruba opinion leaders and later with the rise of MASSOB and
IPOB’s call for secession or disintegration.
Mystification and distortion started to become popular during the
regime of President Obasanjo, who equated call for restructuring with
demand for secession, in order to call the dog of restructuring a bad
name to get it ready for hanging. Most Nigerians had no reason to expect
that there would be an emergence of such dare-devils as the Kanu group
with irrational ambition: breaking Nigeria so that Biafra can be
revived, to allow what the group considers a maste- race nationality in
Nigeria to move ahead and reclaim its manifest destiny.
When MASSOB and IPOB emerged on the landscape of the country’s
geopolitical struggle for the soul of Nigeria, those calling for
restructuring got eclipsed by the bellicose rhetoric of IPOB. And some
of the new theorists of etiology seized the moment to remind citizens
that it was God in his/her infinite mercies that created Nigeria and
that nobody born of women has a right to question God’s design. Of
course, mystification has its function. It either makes people
interrogate what they perceive to be overdone or get them intoxicated or
indoctrinated by the sheer force of the oversize image that may have no
bearing with reality.
Unfortunately, attempts by political and cultural leaders to create
images designed to indoctrinate citizens backfired for all of us.
Instead of calling for a dialogue to identify the problems and make
amends where necessary, politicians in power used the excuse of
recession to de-emphasise the frustration of several Nigerian groups,
without even considering that recession itself can be an immediate cause
for irrational demand, such as Kanu’s. Kanu’s stature began to rise
meteorically and without justification, until the Arewa Youth
Organisation decided to occupy what they thought was a vacuum.
Without any belief in the constitution, the Arewa Youth Organisation
started to issue ultimatums. They first issued a military type of
ultimatum to Igbos living in the 19 states of the north to migrate back
home by October 1, failing which they would face extermination. The
world quickly expressed shock at what could become a major international
refugee problem. Those who have a sense of Nigeria before the civil war
that Kanu wanted to re-enact got scared about the possibility of
conflagration. The Acting President quickly went to work, calling
meetings of regional stakeholders including modern and traditional
rulers. Given the sharp response to the first ultimatum, the Arewa Youth
Forum issued another ultimatum. This time to the Vice President, to
urge him commence disengagement process between Nigeria and Kanu’s
Biafra. And the rest is fast becoming history. Some Igbo leaders are
showing readiness to accept an offer of the presidency in 2019 as a
sufficient evidence of Nigeria’s willingness to de-marginalise Kanu’s
followers.
Suddenly, what started as a practical joke by MASSOB and IPOB after
the change of presidential power in 2015 grew into a national crisis.
Some organisations encouraged Igbos to vacate the North and for
Hausa-Fulani to leave Biafraland. Even some Yoruba organisations said
that the Arewa fatwa to the Igbos is a fatwa to all the people of the
South including Yoruba people, whose recurrent demand since 1993 or
earlier has been for return of federalism to Nigeria through negotiation
among all federating units. Better put, a threat to the Igbos in the
North is a threat to all lovers of human rights everywhere.
For too long, political and cultural leaders have relished in
self-delusion by making God responsible for the way Nigeria has become,
since gradual erosion of federal provisions in the country’s
constitution. Our failure to respond to demands for restructuring on the
excuse that this is the way God wants Nigeria to be got replaced by
demand for secession, which has now put everyone on his/her toes.
Decision by Arewa youth to call the bluff of IPOB has also aggravated
the tension. It is reassuring that the VP has moved fast to engage
stakeholders in the Nigerian enterprise. As one of the northern
governors said at one of the meetings with the acting president,
“nation-building is a work in progress” that requires appropriate
response to inevitability of change. Recently, two states, California
and Texas mooted the idea of secession, and such demand did not lead to
scattering of the tribes as it has done in Nigeria. Ethiopia has a
secession provision in its constitution, and nobody has attempted to
invoke it.
It is dangerous for those who profit from understanding of transitive
and intransitive use of religion to attribute the way Nigeria is or has
been to God. Children who are growing up with a scientific mind with
the hope of connecting cause and effect in what they do may be
discouraged from cultivating scientific and rational minds. Young
students are already calling their mentors in a country that
discontinued the study of history for many years to find out what is
correct: amalgamation of Northern and Southern Nigeria in 1914 by
Frederick Lugard or the creation of Nigeria by God? It is too late in
human progress to use mystification to deal with political matters.
Doing so increases the risk of irrational demands. If Kanu had wanted to
secede, he would not have made a religion of talking about it. He would
have confronted the rest of Nigeria with a new Biafran army and await
the response.
Those who govern and those being governed need to understand that
Nigeria, like any other country, has not been perfectly made, largely
because modern countries are not made by God. Citizens have the right to
make demands designed to make the country better. Shunning for too long
those who call for peaceful reform (such as restructuring) risks
emergence of those who are ready to throw away the baby with the
bathwater, like MASSOB, IPOB, and the Arewa Youth Organisation behind
ultimatums to the Igbos and Vice President Osinbajo. The new
announcement of APC governors’ commitment to restructuring for
federalism clearly renews and reinforces the progressive party’s
election promise to: “initiate action to amend our Constitution with a
view to devolving powers, duties and responsibilities to states and
local governments in order to entrench true Federalism and the Federal
spirit.”
If there are still people who want to break Nigeria up, they will need to look for new reasons other than marginalisation.
Roposek@msn.com
