|
 |
|
|
Nigeria: An anomaly among States |
|
By Rev. Fr. Ahamefule Nnorom, Ph.D. (EMAIL) Forwarded by: Chukwunulu Ndubuisi Tuesday, May 15, 2001 
|
|
|
THE DISASTER
Perhaps you already know that Nigeria has earned more than $500billion from crude oil and is presently earning millions of dollars from its gas reserves but has little to show for it except the billions of dollars hidden in secret accounts worldwide. Do you know that until the emergence of the Bakassi Boys, the internal security situation in Nigeria was so terrible that many US- based Nigerians visiting home, especially those from the Southeast, rarely told their friends and relatives the actual time and date of arrival in Nigeria for fear of being robbed and/ or killed in transit to their ancestral homes? And that even if they arrived home safely, do you know that many did not sleep in their homes but had to move from place to place in search of more secure accommodation? Do you know that there are no known records of the thousands of Igbo and other non- Moslems killed during the recent Sharia massacres in northern Nigeria or of the mass exodus of refugees to the southern parts of the country? And that when this writer sought such information from Nigerian government officials, they said that they had none! And that even the US State Department, which monitors religious and ethnic cleansing in foreign countries through its embassies, failed to do so in Nigeria! That when this writer asked Susan Rice, the then US Assistant Secretary of State for Africa, for statistics on the victims of the Sharia killings, she bluntly replied: " We have none. Bring me some if you have any." I am sure you are aware that according to Transparency International, the highly reputed group that monitors global corruption, Nigeria is the most corrupt in the world. That most Nigerian companies are operating on one third their capacity; and that hundreds of thousands of Nigerian graduates are still unemployed six years after graduation. Perhaps you already know that in spite of Obasanjo's numerous foreign trips, few foreign companies have invested in Nigeria since he became president. No doubt, you are aware that no serious and enterprising foreign company would invest in such an unstable land, infested by Sharia- induced Muslim fundamentalism and religious and ethnic cleansing. What has happened to Nigeria, lamented Michel Camdessus, President of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), " is a historic scandal. " How", he wondered, " with the resources of this country, and the talents of so many of its cadres, can such a situation be justified for so long?" THE WRONG ANSWER Many prominent Nigerians have for so long battled with Camdessus' question as to why a country so blessed with such incredible human and material resources remains so poor, so chaotic, so unstable, and so ungovernable. One of the those flabbergasted by the Nigerian situation is Chinua Achebe, the famous Igbo novelist. In his book The Trouble With Nigeria, he opines that " the trouble with Nigeria is simply and squarely a failure of leadership." According to him, what the country needs is " a leader who is altruistic, dedicated, selfless, non- tribal and patriotic... one whose sincerity of purpose is not in doubt and is ... able to induce the generality of Nigerians to follow him ..." Both Emeka Anyaoku, the former Commonwealth Secretary General and Richard Akinjide, Nigeria's former Attorney General, see the amendment of the Nigerian constitution as the panacea of the country's problems. For the former, such a document must contain " ingredients for successful government in a plural society... (and) must validate both equality and diversity as well encourage interdependence among the component parts of the country. " For the latter, however, the real obstacle to progress in Nigeria lies not in the separation of powers between the executive and the legislature but in the creation of a true federal system in which each state has its own constitution. "The present structure of Nigeria", he emphasized," is a unitary system masquerading as a federal system. "Yet, for others like Olusegun Obasanjo, the problem with Nigeria is not political but economic. Indeed the retired general seems to truly believe that with the forgiveness of the country's foreign debt and an increase of external investment, Nigeria will soon reach a socio- economic and political nirvana. Another Nigerian who envisages the emergence of Nigeria as a great power is Abubakar Umar, the former military administrator of Kaduna State. In an article entitled "Healing the Nation's Wounds" in the July 3, issue of Tell magazine, he said that the solution to the country's problems lies only in its survival as a united entity. Nigerians, he believes, can only prosper in a large, diverse and democratic country, as India and Indonesia, two other large, democratic and multi- national states, have shown. But the most interesting apologia for Nigeria comes from those apologists who argue that the country is a "nascent' (young) democracy that needs several decades to emerge as a stable and prosperous country. They often cite the tumultuous experience of the US and other European countries prior to their emergence prosperous states to support their position. But like a fool at forty, is Nigeria not a fool forever? THE REAL TROUBLE WITH NIGERIA However, the real trouble with Nigeria is this: The would- be doctors of the country's perennial ailments have constantly and consistently made the wrong diagnoses and recommended the wrong medicine. Their approach is not unlike that of an American doctor who stubbornly continues to give his African patient asprin while the poor patient is dying of malaria. Unfortunately, they have failed to acknowledge that what Nigeria needs is not cosmetic surgery but political lobotomy. They do not know and have refused to know that the country is not a normal but an abnormal state. That Nigeria is indeed a deviation from established rules in state creation, a "weird state" and an anomaly among states. Consequently, it does not fit into either of the two terms traditionally used by social scientists to identify states. Traditionally, political scientists have employed two terms to identify the structure of the political entity known as the state: homogeneous and heterogeneous. The homogeneous state - the nation per se - is defined as "a single people, traditionally living on a well- defined territory, speaking the same language, practicing the same religion, possessing a distinctive culture, and united by many generations of shared historical experience." Japan and the two Koreas are good examples of the homogeneous state. A Biafran nation comprising only of Ndigbo would qualify as such a state. But most states, however, are heterogeneous or multiethnic. They encompass countries such as Britain, BraziI, India, Indonesia, Nigeria and the U.S. Political scientists also call such political units nation- states, a term that denotes the gradual fusion that may occur between the diverse national and cultural groups within the state after prolonged maintenance of political control by the central government over the given territory and its inhabitants. Such a fusion was supposed to have occurred after the English conquered the Scots, the Welsh and the Irish several centuries ago in a futile attempt to turn them into good English men in a new entity known as Great Britain. Devolution- the struggle by these minority British national groups for greater autonomy - shows the futility of the earlier attempt by the English to fuse them into a greater England. On the other hand, however, and given its peculiar historical circumstances, integration has mostly been achieved in the U.S and could with great difficulty be fostered in India and Indonesia, three large democracies that have often been compared to the "giant of Africa". But such an experiment is virtually impossible in Nigeria. And here are the reasons. INDIA With a population of one billion people and 400 ethnic groups consisting of Bengali, Tamil, Punjabi, Marathi, and others who speak more than 200 languages, India is the second most populous country in the world. It has a land area of 1.2 million square miles or a little two- fifths the size of the continental U.S. The birthplace of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism, the country has really only 12 languages of major importance. It gained its independence from Britain in 1947. Yet, inspite of its diversity, India qualifies as a nation- state. It has a national language and a predominant religion, Hinduism, which is practiced by 90% of the population. Its diverse peoples have a long history of cohabitation having been once ruled by the mighty Moslem Mogul empire. Moreover, India's founding fathers were determined to build one united country even before independence; and in a steely determination to achieve their objective, smashed and neutralized the country's ancient and powerful kingdoms that could have promoted centripetal nationalisms and loyalties. Consequently, India is today a nuclear power, a computer giant, and feeds itself. This Asian power has developed a powerful navy that is the main challenge to the U.S navy in the Indian Ocean. And despite the troubles in Kashmir, Sikh revolts, and occasional Hindu attacks against Christians and Moslems, India is a stable country. It possesses at least three elements necessary for nationhood: a national language, a predominant religion and a long history of organized cohabitation among its various peoples. INDONESIA Populated by 210 million inhabitants who live on 17,000 islands and speak more than 300 languages, Indonesia is the world's fourth most populous country. Inhabited by ancient peoples and kingdoms like the Balinese, Batak, Asmat, and others, it is a proto- type of the multi- national state. Yet, the country has greater potential for integration than meets the eye. Like India, Indonesia boasts of at least three elements of nationhood: It has a national language, Bahasa Indonesia, a predominant religion, Islam, which is practiced by 90% of the population (the world's largest Muslim population), and was ruled in the 1300's by a foreign power, the Majapahit Hindu empire. Two other factors have also facilitated the fostering of a common Indonesian identity: the shared experience of the people in the bloody war that led to independence from the Dutch in 1949, and the ruthless suppression of national groups bent on the creation of separate independent republics by Sukarno, the country's first president. Thus, despite the present struggle for self-determination in the Acheh region and the Moslem slaughter of Christians in the Muluku islands (Spice Islands), Indonesia has prospered. Its gross domestic product per head has grown from $200 in 1974 to $1,000 in 2001. The country is unlikely to disintegrate because it has, at least, three qualities necessary for nationhood: a common language, a predominant religion, and a long history of co-habitation as well as a more recent history of common suffering under the Dutch. THE UNITED STATES But the greatest mistake is made by those who propose the US to Nigeria as a model of integration for its various peoples, races, religions, and cultures. Indeed such proponents have failed to understand three important and interrelated aspects of American political history and culture. First, they do not seem to realize that integration in the US - no matter how selective and convoluted - was, nonetheless, a sacred canon even at the very dawn of the republic. And that the American founding fathers were determined from the earliest years of the country to build from many nationalities, cultures, and religions, one nation (e pluribus unum) and to usher in a new world order (novo ordo saeculorum) Second, that America does indeed have a national culture built on the mainstream White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) values- Christian, European, and based on English common law. Third, that while this culture tolerates diversity by allowing non-WASP minority national groups in the US to preserve and even to nurture their respective cultures and traditions, it also demands in a non- subtle manner that those who want to achieve the American dream must , first, join the American mainstream by embracing the WASP way of life- the American way. This is the reason for the often rabid opposition by many Americans to the introduction of Spanish as a second language. However, the opportunity to join the mainstream is a challenge that many immigrants- often fleeing the poverty and instability of their ancestral homelands- have historically and gladly accepted. For with the exception of American- Indians and African- Americans, integration was mostly by choice and not by force among Americans. Therefore, America should not be seen as a model of integration for Nigeria. NIGERIA Like India, Indonesia and, the US, Nigeria is also a multi- national state. Populated by about 100 million people (no one is really sure of the numbers since there is no accurate census), it is made up of 300 national groups and is endowed with incredible human and material resources. Like Indonesia, it is a major oil producing country - number one in Africa and fifth in the world. But unlike India, Indonesia and the US, it lacks all the basic requirements for nation building. It has no single major national group capable of forming the basis for national integration. Rather it consists of three major nationalities, Igbo, Yoruba, and Hausa, each claiming a population of about 40 million people. The remainder of the population is made up of hundreds of larger and smaller minority groups- Ibibio, Ijaw, Efik, Tiv, Bini, Urhobo and others. Indeed the root of the country's problems is due to the anomalous political structure imposed by the British on the diverse and disparate peoples of Nigeria. And the foundation of that structure was based on the Moslem Hausa- Fulani, a group that the British had chosen as the master nationality that would perpetually rule Nigeria and guarantee its stability. It is, therefore, against this background that the northern Nigerian Moslem ruling elite developed a "born to rule" mentality, a fanatical and aggressive state of mind propelling their dogged and unrelenting efforts to "Sharianize" Nigeria and impose the Hausa and Arabic languages and culture on its peoples. But in his important book, This House Has Fallen, Karl Maier, an American journalist who was once based in Nigeria, warned that as a result of the greed, corruption and colossal ineptitude displayed by the northern Nigerian Moslem ruling class, the political architecture created for Nigeria by the British had already collapsed. In the same vein, the erudite and perceptive Professor Adebayo Williams has warned of the danger inherent in any attempt to engineer a Nigerian nation. In an article entitled "Lord Lugard and the End of an Epoch", in the May 2000 issue of Africa Today, the erudite and perceptive describes the impossible task of rebuilding the fallen Nigerian house that the British built. "To imagine this impossible Babel Tower", he writes, "is to imagine a situation in which the Gauls, the Prussians of East Germany, the Dutch and the English were forcibly brought together under the rubric of a nation." A more complete picture of the Nigerian national nightmare would have, however, included the Iranians, Iraqis, Israelis and Saudis - all forced to live together in one country. And when these diverse nationalities lack a common language, an important ingredient in nation- building, is it surprising that the various national groups feel like foreigners to each other. For example, an Igbo Christian feels more secure and has a greater chance of success in any given profession in Cameroon, Gabon, the Ivory Coast or in any part of Europe or America than in his "fatherland." He is more comfortable with a Frenchman than with a Fulaniman. A Hausa man would prefer to hire a fellow Pakistani Moslem than a fellow Ibibio Christian country man. Indeed it is this lack of ethnic, linguistic, religious, and cultural affinity between Nigeria's diverse national groups that has made the country so unstable, ungovernable, and poor. The historical and cultural divide in Nigeria is so real and deep that while Dr. Emeagwali, the Igbo computer genius whose magical mathematical calculations for the computer industry, was ushering mankind into new frontiers of the information age, Governor Sani of Zamfara state was harking back to the dark ages by purchasing thousands of donkeys to improve transportation in his Sharia state. Indeed the Nigerian state is so divided and unmanageable that even if God came down to earth and took over the government of Nigeria, He will still find it an impossible task : For even though He is almighty and omnipotent, He will never draw a square circle. For after over eighty six years of living in the same country, experience shows that building a single, united and prosperous Nigeria is like drawing a square circle, an exercise in futility. However, the greatest obstacle to Nigeria's survival as one country lies in its religious structure. While Nigerian Moslems have traditionally claimed to be in the majority, impartial population experts state that there are almost equal numbers of Christians and Moslems in the country. For example, Professor Barry divides Nigeria's religious affiliation thus: Christians- 48%; Moslems- 45%; while the rest belongs to African traditional religions. Could the fear that they are really in the minority explain the vehement opposition of the northern Nigeria Moslem ruling elite to both a national identity card for Nigerians or a census conducted by an impartial international organization? For with the exception of Lebanon, a cauldron of ethnic and religious wars itself, no other country has such a Chrisian- Muslim divide as Nigeria. But Lebanon has, however, certain integrational advantages that Nigeria lacks. First, it is an older and smaller country, and therefore, easier to control. Second, both its Maronite Christian and Moslem population belongs to the same national group: They are Arabs. Third it has Arabic as the national language. Yet, in spite of all these integrational factors, it has taken years of permanent Syrian military presence to prevent inter- religious wars and maintain a measure of peace and stability in the country. Indeed Lebanon has been relatively stable in recent times because the Lebanese have been able to devise a fair and sophisticated system of power sharing that has led to temporary peace and stability. Such an arrangement is impossible in Nigeria, especially with the introduction of a violent type of Islamic Sharia in northern Nigeria and the crusade by Moslem militants to spread it across the country. Moreover, the present Nigerian constitution, engineered by the corrupt and Moslem- dominated Nigerian ethnic army, is unacceptable to most Nigerians because it was designed to perpetuate their continued domination of the country. Indeed it will now take a measure of political abracadabra to create a just and stable political system acceptable to the country's diverse peoples. For only the convocation of a sovereign national conference will prevent a violent dissolution of the British artifice called Nigeria. A progressive ideology is another instrument of integration which Nigeria has historically lacked. Bereft of other characteristics essential for unity, one would have thought that the country would have developed a political ideology, a basic ingredient of integration, and a guiding and restraining variable in the political behavior of groups, individuals, and nation- states. But it was not done. Nonetheless, in both China and the former Soviet Union, two countries that adopted communism as an instrument of integrating its diverse nationalities, the limits of ideology could not have been more obvious. For in spite of its ideology and military super- power status, the U.S.S.R collapsed over a decade ago; and China, a confused and zenophobic communist country, may follow suit. Like its former ideological kin, it can not avoid the revenge of religion and nationalism. Thus, unlike both countries, Nigeria never adopted a progressive political ideology; so its chances of survival as a political unit even for a few more decades is virtually nonexistent. NIGERIA'S WORST ENEMIES Unfortunately, Nigeria's worst enemies are the very people who claim to "love" her most. They include the military, bureaucratic, political, and contracting elites among others. Most of them are multimillionaires, people who have promoted and benefited from the chaotic unmanageable, and unaccountable culture of the Nigerian state. They are the ones who shout one Nigeria the loudest while at the same time supporting either the ethno- religious cleansing Moslem Sharia code or remain silent before its murderous massacres. They are also the ones who are vehemently opposed to a peaceful restructuring of the country and are prepared to go to war to maintain Nigeria's territorial integrity, a euphemism for maintaining continued control over the country's oil and gas resources in the southeastern and south- southern parts of the country. In their greed and selfishness, they have closed their eyes to the lessons of history: That other federations, like Nigeria, which proved unstable and untenable, have ceased to exist: Egypt and Syria, Rhodesia and Nyasaland, Malaya and Singapore, and the Caribbean federation; they have also forgotten that the end of the Cold War has brought about a major shift in global politics that is characterized by a genuine thirst for democracy, human rights, and the quest for self-determination. It was this development that led to the demise of the mighty USSR, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia, an impossible scenario in the heydays of communism. While shouting loudest about the need to maintain the Nigerian status quo, the enemies of Nigeria have shamelessly lent their total support to present and former misrulers who have robbed and ruined the country, a situation that would have been virtually impossible in an Oduduwa or Biafran state. Moreover, if ever a tyrant like Abacha or Babaginda were to come to power in either state, it would not be long before they were either killed by the masses or run out of the country. This was what happened in Iran under the Shah, in the Philipines under Marcos, and in Haiti under Baby "Doc" Duvalier. Thus, while the beauty of these nation- states was the facility with which the people could be mobilized in the face of tyranny, the trouble with Nigeria, however, is that such a national mobilization is impossible within her borders. As the Abiola debacle sadly showed, only an ethnically- based process of mobilization has the potential for success in the country. Consequently, lacking a pan- Nigerian prism, Nigeria may be likened to a community goat claimed by everyone but owned by none. It slowly dies of neglect and hunger. So, dear friends, when you wonder why Nigeria is so poor but yet so rich; why the country is so chaotic and ungovernable; why NEPA, the national power company, produces only darkness; why the phones are permanently dead; why soccer and the culture of corruption are the country's only unifying elements; why Sharia Moslem murderers go unchecked and unpunished; and why a former murderous, kleptocratic, and corrupt military misruler could be occupying Aso Rock instead of Kirikiri, the answer is crystal clear: Nigeria is neither really a nation nor even a nation- state; it is more of an empire in which the resources of the "conquered peoples" are used to develop the land of the conquerors while they themselves wallow in poverty and disease. Indeed Nigeria is a "weird state", an anomaly among states. So, dear friends, the fault is not in our stars nor even in us that Nigeria is such a tragedy. The fault is in the structure. A radical change of that structure based on a healthy respect of its ethno- religious diversity would surely usher in an era of peace, stability, and prosperity for its various nationalities. That- not the development of a rearmed and more powerful military machine for internal repression- is the unstoppable wave of the future.  |
o you know that before you finish reading this article, a pregnant Nigerian woman will be dead. Yes, a Nigerian woman is condemned to death by pregnancy every minute due to a lack of basic healthcare in many parts of the country. Do you know that according to the Washington, D.C.- based Population Reference Bureau, the average Nigerian family income is $240, the lowest in West Africa and among the eleven poorest in the world? Yes, while Nigeria's military misrulers were spending $5 billion to "bring democracy" to Liberia and Sierra Leone, while civilian politicians are presently spending millions of dollars on salaries and other creature comforts, 67 million Nigerians live below the poverty line, existing on less than $1 a day. Do you know that in 1979, one naira was equal to two US dollars, and that today, it is worth less than one cent? Do you know that in the 1960's, Nigeria was the world's premier producer of palm oil and taught Malaysia how to grow the crop? And that today, the "giant of Africa", is at the bottom of the palm oil producing countries while by the 1970's, Malaysia already accounted for about 80% of net world output with export earnings averaging $5 billion and the main source of livelihood for 300,000 families.