he civil uprising in Tunisia that drove the country's leader into exile ultimately spilled across the border, still moving along with gusto and fury. Egypt went from simmering to a boiling point of a kind; the internal heat generated enough warning signals; like an earthquake whose eruption is predictable, the extent and degree of devastation are often not; the consequences of the outcome as in this instance overwhelmed even the Egyptians making their own history minute by minute, one day at a time. Before those angry occupants and mob squatters at Tahire Square had receded into the nooks and sprawling corners of Cairo, strongman Hosni Mubarak was headed into self-exile, holed inside his own country. The Egyptian military came to the rescue, took custody of whatever remained of Hosni's government on behalf of the people. After 30 years of tyranny laced in brutality, greed and corruption, Mubarak's last days could not have come early enough.

advertisement

The dust of Cairo had hardly settled with post-Mubarak sweeping of the "Liberation Square" as the big guns lit up the skies of Tripoli; the Libyan people could not wait any longer; they had had enough from one of their own, the same Colonel who came to power in 1969 by military coup. Muammer Gaddafi has held down his people with the same military rank for over 40 years. It is still wee hours in Benghazi and the street fight is fully engaged and joined with helicopter gun-fire raining down bullets on unarmed crowd; there is death and the smell of death is filling the air like never known before. The lucky ones have nowhere to hide, not even the chance to take care of the wounded or pick-up what is left of the dead. Unlike in Egypt, the Libyan people have no idea where rescue would come from if ever. Some Air Force pilots detailed to engage the demonstrators have chosen to fly under the radar into Malta. But Gaddafi would not give up; he has promised to stay on until he is the last one standing. An eye witness account is reporting the presence of military mercenaries hired to fight for the Colonel by proxy. Libya is unraveling before the world and nothing could be more dramatic. The Libyan people are claiming control in the Eastern provinces while Gaddafi is still holding court in the West; that battle line may seem blurred and diffused at his time; however the early throes may be sounding the beginning salvo for civil war.

The rest of the tin-gods of North Africa and their kinsmen of the Arab world, from Bahrain to Yemen and Jordan are peeping through the key hole; definitely they are listening for the knock at the door. The message coming from yonder is clear. Even the King of Saudi Arabia who has been convalescing in Morocco following medical operation in New York is listening. The rumblings on the shores of the Mediterranean and the Arabian Gulf have definitely gotten his attention. King Abdullah returned to his kingdom and right there at the tarmac at Riyadh airport gave orders for the release of over $37 Billion; the largess is to be distributed to the Saudi rank and file, mostly the poor, the unemployed, under-employed and the unfortunate members of the society. Incidentally nobody knew that catholic priest in frock and garb was also wearing anything else until the wind revealed his under pant. Before all these "Anger Movements" most of the world never knew Saudi Arabia had its own share of suffering people, in spite of the fact that the kingdom has been drowning itself in milk and honey. Surely the underclass and the most vulnerable were there when the King departed for New York last November for treatment. He must have had midnight visitation from the Holy One; in the process he read another chapter of the Koran, the new face of a religion ushering in change of heart towards the weak and the lowly. The era of civil unrest is here again; nobody seems sure of the immediate cause(s), be it the aftermath of global economic down-turn or another religious awakening similar in scope to the Iranian Islamic Revolution of the late 1970s, early 1980s. Whatever is in the offing is seemingly more ominous beyond the immediate conviction and certainty. This time, the real Ayatollah remains shrouded in a shadow, an unknown.

In making their case, the Egyptians had declared January 25, 2011 their "Anger Day", set aside for an open protest, calling for the removal of the interior minister, increase in minimum wage and the end to emergency rule. The key to their frustration was however lodged elsewhere, in the hidden vaults kept by strong man Hosni Mubarak. An Islamic cum military hegemony that had lasted over 30 years and counting in the hands of an 82-year old with ample shelf life and time to transform the Blue Nile but did not. If the desirable had yet to happen since Anwar Sadat left that parade ground, "Anger" alone would not be enough. Could what has ultimately become the thrust of a "Universal Band of Anger" be different this time from those that often filled the streets of Beirut in Lebanon and the kiosks on the West Bank, heralding the same angry voices of Islamic militancy known to Hamas and Hezbollah?

Whatever the precursor of the current rumbling in the north shores of the Sahara, the expansive and elastic rubber band that held up the bulge of human suffering appears to have been weakened, work-hardened enough to the limit of a snap. The one coming later to replace the dictator, the chosen one to hold the loosened end of that rubber band remains unknown. As often the case, populist militancy in the north countries eventually turns into faith-based acrimony after the street bloodbath would have gone into quench; before there is further blink, the purveyors of terror and anarchy take over, filling the void created by tyranny with radical effervescence, the ideology of Islamic brotherhood. The experts identify some of the demonstrators as anarchists; others think the movement is purely a radical advocacy for democracy. Nobody seems to know the real hue of democracy in the Arabian Desert. The country of Turkey is often cited as an example where Islam seems to be coexisting with some measure of democratic principles. Whatever that brand eventually turns out to become, the news of an impending violent change in the Arab World could not have come at a better time for Al Qaeda; no matter how seemingly hostile the emergent political structure becomes, Al Qaeda is most likely to take advantage of the crisis, regardless of how directed or controlled; radical Islamic ecumenism might not be enough for the Taliban foot-soldiers; the confusion is more likely to provide fodder for new recruitment and training ahead of the next campaign in global terror outreach.

Tunisia just as Egypt and Libya, might be a little further north, definitely and certainly, not Ivory Coast where Laurent Gbagbo has been rattling the cage closer home to Nigeria. The strong man has refused to concede defeat following last November's presidential election. His rival Alassane Ouattara, riding on the United Nation's chariot is making bold moves; he has chosen to ban cocoa export for one month; that way he would be testing the audacity in the authority of a shadow government; Outtara is still unsure the African Union (AU) would come to the rescue; that flat-footed, a toothless bulldog of an organization is threatening the use of force it can hardly muster. As expected, Nigeria is again brandishing a weathered armor, itching to enlist its own in yet another foreign battle to rescue democracy elsewhere but its own land. Hopefully, there are some grown-ups left since Babangida and Abacha made unscheduled exit from the theater at Aso Rock; such adults had better speak out now or forever drown in shame. The hope of course would be that the shoe would not be on another foot sooner than imagined by the bookmarkers come next April's "Selection" of a Nigerian President. If that impending change turns into a free-for-all for Nigeria, when winners become losers, Gbagbo might have a chance for the last laugh.

The reason for this short piece is definitely not the fear that Nigeria would eventually slump and become anything like Tunisia, Egypt, Libya or Ivory Coast before May 29, 2011. It is not quite clear any more what type of human suffering would be too terrible to generate the type of mass action, potent enough to cause an overthrow of a civilian government in Nigeria. Military take-over has receded into the realm of probability; the uncertainty would not be predicated upon the structural deficiencies of a would-be junta outfit but the nature of an emergent militia motivated by territorial interest to engage the country's armed forces in combat; unfortunately that fight would no longer be to keep "Nigeria one". As discussed elsewhere in other contributions, the fight for "One Nigeria" ended with Biafra.

Any other military coup or take-over of any government by armed siege, had better assess the options and prospects clearly and certainly ahead of time; the chances of controlling the instruments of power going forward might be as difficult as relinquishing them even through a negotiated choice. Nigeria has exhausted all viable options and avenues for sustaining any meaningful transition towards self-rule of any kind or type; the outcome from a mob action similar in scope to the Cairo movement of the people could not be a viable option either.

Assume the break-up of One Nigeria is possible; when and how it happens would never be as bloody or even more traumatizing as Biafra. However, after 41 years since that big one, every Nigerian has since identified which part of "One Nigeria" he or she would like to claim and ultimately keep defending. The motivation is no longer a collective bargain; every part of Nigeria has been reclaimed and defined with stakeholder interest pegged and chartered. The "Mine is mine and yours is mine" alternative is no longer tenable. This time no part of Nigeria can claim more access to big guns and bombs than the other; in reality, the Nigerian military has since lost its clout, respect and credibility, and equally as corrupt as the civilians.

In the past few weeks, too many Nigerians have been asking and answering their own questions with declarations and postulations. The arm-chair politicians and experts in domestic and foreign wars have shared their opinions. Many are wondering and imagining at the same time. Could Nigeria become Egypt? In other words would it be possible for Nigerians to match into Abuja, occupy Eagle Square and make their way towards the Presidential Villa demanding an immediate change of government? The short answer! Nigerians can but they would not; the long answer! The forces likely to disband Nigeria would most likely derive themselves through trepidations and attrition. The splitting of One Nigeria would be in the form of a political re-arrangement that essentially loosens the tight grip at the center in favor of regional autonomy. Such an arrangement or reorganization could be achieved in measures certainly less traumatizing than the contentions and sad events that once culminated in Biafra. The reality on the ground is that no part of Nigeria is fully capable of a complete independent existence; however, some elbow room is needed, separating both the protagonists from the antagonists. Would the Cairo model be desirable just to secure an easement for Nigerians? Nigerians would rather pray for divine intervention.

As the big guns keep firing their cannons in North Africa and the Arab world, Nigeria seems to be looking better than before. Those familiar with the events that led to the Iraq war could recall some of the views expressed and shared on this forum. No matter ones standing post on the merits and demerits of that invasion, there is one fact that would ever remain less controversial, perhaps incontrovertible. President George W. Bush, like him or hate him, did Nigeria the greatest favor by default. It was the essential aspect of those unintended consequences of war and its collateral dividends that ultimately gave the Obasanjo regime the spine to contain the tremors of "Sharia Politics" in Nigeria. The removal of Sadam Hussein and overall campaign on the war on terror helped limit off-shore insurgence of radical Islam into Nigeria, the late rise of the Boka Haram notwithstanding. Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Iran were busy watching their own backyards, including the barbed fence near the war borders; they had little time to think about how to expand faith-based "Wahabbi" influence into Nigeria. The current uprising in North Africa and the Arab world could be coming from the powers above, essentially unveiling and exposing the cloak of authoritarian regimes that seemed in glossy portrait more stable than Nigeria. All of a sudden, Sub-Saharan Africa is no longer the only troubled child in the world. The Arab countries have become victims of their own pretentions, exuberances, arrogance, greed and corruption. Looking at Nigeria from that stance, brings hope to the many still struggling to shape and reshape their country into what it should become rather than what it is at the moment. All the bookmakers should like Nigeria's chances given all the odds exposing the zone of instability and weakness within the Arabian enclaves.

As the uncertainty in leadership and its cadre of brutal dictators and corrupt royalty continue to unfold, the Arabs are struggling to figure out who is really in-charge; the challenge includes how to seek out the type of government best for an Islamic society lost in its own piety and faith-based traditions. Obviously the genie is out of the bottle and nothing would ever remain the same again; certainly not if the Taliban, the Moslem Brotherhood and the competing radicals separating the Sunnis from the Shiites have any say in the matter. With Brent Oil going for $110, the Sweet Crude of the Niger Delta would even fetch higher; obviously, that recommendation lately by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) asking Nigeria to consider currency devaluation to spur its economy has been overtaken by on-going current events. Nigeria's Central Bank Governor did not miss that call; he quickly returned it, telling the IMF, "Thanks but no thanks".

The motivation for this article is not necessarily what Gaddafi or Mubarak did or not do to and for his people. As Nigeria and the rest of the world is keeping watch over what is unfolding in the Arab world, it might be the right time to ask a few questions. What do Nigerians consider the major challenges facing their country at this moment? How can these challenges be addressed? What would you proffer as the solutions to these challenges? I would like to engage my Nigeriaworld readers in a virtual town hall conversation, regardless of each person's political leaning. No particular area of discussion is out of bounds. Feel free to write and send your views on Nigeria to [email protected] choosing any topic of concern; your views will be shared every week on this forum. It is possible the leadership in Nigeria and all those who claim ownership of Nigeria might decide to read your comments. In the end you would have contributed immensely towards the building and rebuilding of your country. Hopefully this exercise would help bring some sanity into the way and manner responsible Nigerians manage the peoples' business. With cool heads prevailing indoors, there is still an extra time left for discussion and dialogue; otherwise Nigerians might be headed to the streets. Either way, it is important to realize why the "Cairo Anger" model would not work for Nigeria at this time. Biafra happened.