The basic ambition of the bigger ethnic groups in Nigeria has always been to control the country so as to take full charge of the revenue, and therefore the army, and all the trappings of power. This has been the politics that has failed us every time, with Amadu Bello, Balewa, Azikiwe, Akintola and Okpara. This brand of tribal horse trading also surfaced in 1979, when by a compromise brokered by the military, a northerner, Ahaji Shehu Shagari, came to power, and an Igbo, Dr. Alex Ekwueme, played second fiddle. The northern Militay always try to adopt this oppressive pattern, because it serves their purpose. It keeps them as King-makers and the source of power.
There is also the fear among many of the Yorubas, the Igbos and the Ijaws that the north will wage war on them if they try to SEPARATE. Not surprisingly, the term “SECESSION” still causes instant diarrhoea to many from the big tribes, and is a terror that can keep them as slaves to the north for eternity. But in considering what is good for us, we do not need to consider the arguments of cowardice. Cowards, they say, “die many times before their death”. We can’t save them. It is the brave that inherit the earth.
In Europe cowards are despised, and that is why you see so few. They are usually worthless renegades(here I think of a normal human as one who values justice and dignity). Anyway, everyone will die, and it’s more honourable to die in pursuit of justice on one’s own behalf, with no greater justice being one’s rights. On that score the north has absolutely no justifiable claim on the lands and resources of the Niger Delta peoples. If they fight on account of it , they will lose. They will lose because 900,000 East Timorese fought for their rights against 200,000,000 highly sophisticated Indonesian war machines, and won. They will lose because in South Africa members of the ANC fought apartheid, in the end successfully, and always without cowardice. These are just two precedents(while, I might add, our northerners are not even one per cent formidable as the apartheid leaders were in South Africa). Then of course the history of Europe is the history of brave men and women ever fighting for their rights, and without looking back. In the end justice always triumphs, it comes from the people.
Fortunately, the great majority of Igbos, Yorubas, Ijaws and others in Southern Nigeria are exceedingly valorous. They know that scrambling for top positions will continue to make the country’s economy baseless. We must cease this piggyback of the north, and be free. If we do that, I know we can work hard and catch up with the rest of the world, with all its breathtaking technology.
In 1998, many Nigerians in London were highly impressed by a letter published in The Times on 15th July. Although it was written as a contribution to the ongoing argument against too much integration of the EU, it showed some relation to Nigeria, particularly because the author, Sir Peter Smithson, was, at the time when Nigeria’s independence was being discussed, a senior member of the British cabinet. His letter was headed “Nigerian Lesson”, and said “During the negotiation for the independence of Nigeria, the view of the Secretary of State at the time, with which I agreed, was that in Nigeria we should attempt to put together a large and powerful state with ample material resources, which would play a leading part in the affairs of the continent and the world. This was attractive, but it involved forcing several different ethnic and cultural groups into a single political structure. In retrospect of 40 years it is clear that this was a grave mistake which has cost many lives and will probably continue to do so. It would have been better to establish several smaller states in a free trade area. In exculpation it must be said that we did not then have the example of the collapse of Yugoslavia and of the Soviet Union before our eyes. It should be clear for all but the wilfully blind to see that it is extremely dangerous to force diverse racial and social entities into a single rigid political structure.”
Hardly could Sir Peter Smithson know that less than two years after he had written this letter, Africa’s most bloodthirsty leader of the age, General Olusegun Obasanjo, would send bombers on a mission that destroyed whole towns and villages, killing pregnant women and thousands of others in the Delta. Those who thought that fellow-Africans were likely to be sympathetic to one another, must now be ashamed of such atrocities, while their God-given resources are being exploited. The number of deaths and the intensity of the destruction were far greater than inflicted on black people in South Africa.
After the event, Obasanjo is believe to have congratulated himself by saying “I de kamkpe”, which , as a combination of pidgin English and vernacular, means “I’m great”. They called the incident Nigeria’s silent holocaust, for even some European journalists who knew of it played it down. Strangely Obasanjo seems to enjoy the goodwill of some European leaders and their press. I can only say to that that the regime spends a fortune and lots of oil money promoting itself all over the world.
A year after the bombing both General Obasanjo and his defence minister, General Danjuma, said they were sorry, but did not remove their troops from the area. These continue to rape women and rob old men at gunpoint. In summer of 2000, pictures of this rape and destruction were printed in a booklet called Nigeria’s silent Holocaust, and were ghastly indeed. Many women in UK and Germany could not bear the sight of them. They were withdrawn.
Obasanjo worships great world leaders, thinking that their influence will obscure his iniquities. He is the only head of state in Africa who has his picture on the country’s postage stamps. It is being rumoured that it will also soon appear on the country’s bank notes.
Nigeria has offered no advantage to its peoples and to Africa as a whole. Instead its size and grotesque ethnic and religious composition have made it a terrible curse to everyone. What surprises many Nigerians is that those in Europe who oppose greater integration in the EU are some of the same who think that Nigeria should continue in its present deadly union. The country has seen the first ever genocide in Africa, the longest relay of military regimes in Africa, the most corrupt community in Africa, and we create the worst refugee problems in the world.
The lesson of East Timor shows that if the world concerns itself with the plight of a small community of weak and timid people, then it can also help to set them free. Obasanjo did not become president of Nigeria in order to help the people at all. The story peddled among juju men in the Delta was that as Abacha died, his spirit visited Obasanjo’s cell and entered into Obasanjo’s body. Then Obasanjo’s spirit entered into Abacha’s body, and was buried. So what we got was Abacha, reincarnated, and he is it was, who bombed the Niger Delta on new millennium night. In the Delta many believe this story, because they can’t comprehend that a person like Obasanjo, who had been in a death cell only nine months before, could carry out such an atrocity.
Separation without fragmentation is the only answer. In Southern Nigeria(free from amalgamation with the North), there will be a Yoruba nation, an Igbo nation, and the rest (including the Ijaws, who have never been accused of dominating any one; and who in the lower Niger Delta) may grouped to form two or more other nations. It’s important to remember that the ijaws in the east of the Niger are more mixed than those, west of the Niger. The Yorubas, even as they were in 1952, number more than 18,000,000. The Igbos(east of the Niger) alone also number more than 15,000,000. The states of Edo, Delta, Bayelsa, Rivers, Cross Rivers and Akwa Ibom are home to more than seventy different ethnic communities, of which the Ijaws are in majority. The all have deep dialectical differences and have never been under the same administration. It may also be expedient that two nations are created in the Delta – one east of the Niger to include Bayelsa, Rivers, Cross Rivers and Akwa Ibom, the other to its west to include the states of Edo and Delta. This has been the-midwest region formed in 1963.
An important principle must be that no ethnic group shall be forced to join any other group or nation. That is to say, any group wanting to go it alone, should be able to do so. This arrangement will no doubt stimulate speedy growth as well as technological advancement among the various peoples.
A federation of autonomous states for all in the Niger Delta is not likely to succeed if it contains too many different ethnic communities or large one and a number of smaller ones. The vital consideration must be that diverse ethnic communities are not forced into one rigid political structure. If that happens it would be like another Nigeria – a monster. All the nations or countries here discussed will be larger in population than the average in west Africa, and also, will be larger than more than fifty nations who are members of the UN.
It will be a wonderful arrangement if all these nations could co-operate, rather like those in the EU, where the citizens of one country have the right to live and carry on employment in any other. One could call the whole thing the Co-operating Nations of West Africa, with membership open to any country with attitude liberal to religion. In this way others like the middle belt area in northern Nigeria, including the former Benue-Plateau state, could also be welcomed. Surely such arrangement is more likely to encourage peace than the use of force. Force hardly ever ensures justice.
Each ethnic group must try to look after itself, without others depending on it. A tree invaded by parasites can never develop, and to the south, the north is a malignant parasite.
Why do some assume that the south can pull together? In Nigeria some well informed people do ask such questions. If the north and south do not do well, what makes anyone think that the south with the west and east, encompassing more than seventy different ethnic communities, would do better as one nation. This is a reasonable question if what is intended is that the south is one nation, under a single administration or government, whether a federation or confederation. However, what is suggested here in this work is neither a federation nor a confederation. It is suggested that each of the groups – that is the Yorubas, the Igbos and the rest of them grouped as the Niger Delta – would each become one sovereign nation. That is to say, each of them would become self-governing. Like other nations of the world, such as the nations of western Europe, they would talk and trade with each other, and travel in each other’s countries. This has to be borne very much in mind when it is possible that the Delta may split into two nations, and the former mid-western state is likely to be one nation. In all of this we have no better lesson than the USSR and Yugoslavia, which were created in much the same way as Nigeria, all at once and maintained by force. We have seen what happened there, and all of us ought to be able to think again.
Throughout the history of southern Nigeria, from the time when it was the Niger Coast Protectorate, to the time when it was merged with the north in 1914, there were never rival ethnic clashes between any of the communities, except probably within one group such as the Kalabaris and Okrika(that clashed over fishing rights in 1930). Instead the different peoples lived in harmony, celebrating each other’s religious festivals, be they Christian or Islamic. A residue of this is the Yorubas, who are an exceedingly unbigoted people. They are so carefree that even in one family, whether polygamous or monogamous, the children sometimes belong to different religious groups. While husband and wife may both be Christian or Islamic, the children may even belong to different Christian denominations. With this type of tolerance, the south can succeed in creating a union, like the EU, that can attract others in West Africa.
Aliyi Ekineh
I salute you. Na gbedu.
Posted by: Joogle | October 29, 2008 at 02:08 PM