Perhaps the biggest news this week so far, has been the
attempt by the Presidency to debunk the allegation that President Muhammadu
Buhari has been kinder to Northerners and Muslims in the recruitment of
persons into his administration. The published list, itself a response to an
earlier indictment by the BusinessDay newspaper, has been dismissed as
incomplete, selective and misleading but all of that draws attention to a
crisis at the heart of Nigerian politics, nay African politics. Matthew Hassan
Kukah once described this in our context as “the-myonisation-of-power”. That is
when a Nigerian from a particular part of the country becomes President, his
people including his kinsmen and his friends and associates from his community
and other parts of Nigeria see his ascendance as their own opportunity to have
a taste of the national cake. They fight over the proverbial cake. Invariably,
they benefit from what is called the politics of proximity. They get appointed to
the best positions. They gain better access to the seat and the man of
power than everyone else. Nigeria is not alone in this regard.
The same politics plays out in other African countries.
In Kenya, John Githongo, their once-upon-a-time anti-corruption czar, in
a book on him, the author, Michela Wrong complains that what prevails
in Kenyan politics is the syndrome of “it-is-our-turn-to-eat.” In that country,
the emergent politics is not even just about what to eat, it is about ego,
elite contestation, dynastic rivalry and power. Wrong is right in many ways.
That drama has been played out in the recent elections in Kenya but here in
Nigeria, we have also been dealing with the same crisis since independence.
The question has been and remains: who gets the
better share of the Nigerian national cake? Nigerian political actors do not
see their country as a country that is structured for progress, sustainable
development and unity. They see it as a cake to be shared. In their imagination
and consideration, the cake is so big, it is more than enough for everybody,
but they have seen that since independence, some people get a bigger share of
it, and the more access a particular group gets to power, the more advantage it
procures for its people.
Thus, any person who occupies a position - be it in the public
or private sector space is subjected to instant, accustomed suspicion and
harassment. No matter how well-meaning the person may be, the person is
monitored closely to see if his appointees or associates would be persons from
his church, mosque, community, ethnic group, or old school network. Ethnicity,
religion and other social indicators are often the alarm signals. This is
the background to the allegation and accusation that President
Muhammadu Buhari is systematically re-Northernizing Nigeria.
The prefix re- is instructive because one of the biggest
fears in Nigeria is that the political North, for there is no such thing as a
monolithic Northern Nigeria, or a strictly binary Nigeria, as the Western press
assumes, is determined to dominate the South, the entire South according to a
script written and acted out by the British colonialists and sustained by their
local successors. Indeed, the Nigerian military did not help matters by
practically Northernizing Nigeria with the politics of vendetta and imperialism
that propelled the Nigerian military establishment in power. The myth and
reality of Northern domination has nonetheless also done much damage to the
idea of national unity in Nigeria, even if there is enough evidence to
establish the sad fact that, every ethnic group in the country is involved in a
struggle for dominance.
The dominant truth is that Nigerians do not trust one
another. It does not matter where they are, or whatever the level of their
education or exposure, or the opportunities they have, they are all ethnic
gladiators at heart and should they struggle to be nationalistic, their kith
and kin will continually remind them of the need to obey and serve the tribe. I
use the word tribe here, deliberately against current convention.
It is for the foregoing reason that I consider the attempt
by the Presidency to write off the allegation of Northern domination under
President Muhammadu Buhari as futile. Ethnic politics in Nigeria is both a
matter of fact and perception. I offer four seemingly simple explanations of
the phenomenon. It is the fact first, that whenever a President from a
particular ethnic extraction arrives in Abuja, the fashion mode of the city
changes overnight. Under President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999-2007), the various
watering holes of Abuja adjusted their fashion codes. Even to the
night-clubs, people wore the Yoruba attires and caps. The people of the South
West including the Yoruba taxi drivers of Abuja became very voluble.
It was their time. It was their turn.
The moment President Obasanjo left, the Mallams returned,
that is the power-brokers of the North, with the emergence of President Umaru
Yar’Adua. Hausa language became the language of Abuja. President Yar’Adua died
in office and his deputy succeeded him. President Goodluck Jonathan, Nigeria’s
first Ijaw President also changed the face of fashion in Abuja. His kinsmen and
their colourful robes and walking sticks became the new face of Abuja. I recall
in those days, the security people insisting that walking sticks would not be
allowed inside the Villa because according to them, a walking stick is a
weapon! I doubt if anybody these days is still swinging any such weapons around
Abuja.
Two, when a Christian President is in power in Nigeria, the
most active part of the Villa would be the Chapel. By the same token, if
it is a Muslim President, the mosque in the Villa gains special focus. There is
never any doubt about the locus of affinity in Nigerian politics. In an
extremely superstitious society such as we have, our leaders don’t joke with
their spiritual well-being. Every big man’s wife is a prayer warrior. “My wife
is a prayer warrior”, is a common refrain in the corridors of power. The people
that pray for the big man, from his wife to her relatives and the spiritual
consultants eventually become so influential they could in fact influence
appointments and state policy. African leaders are so insecure, we must someday
attempt an intellectual assessment of the damage they have done to the
governance process in Africa, with their insecurity and fears.
Three, cronyism is a strong factor in African politics. Our
leaders are only comfortable with the people that they know. Whoever is not
known personally must have a Godfather or a minder that can be consulted. When people
win power in Nigeria, they don’t hand it over to other people that easily.
Everything is transactional. There are no big or average men – they are all
looking for what is in it for them. And this is what has held Nigerian down. If
anyone investigates the real underbelly of Nigeria, there will be no countryanymore because
it is Nigeria that feeds all the big men. It is in reality an unproductive
country with the rich depending on oil revenue and deceiving the poor and the
underprivileged. Our big men appoint cronies. They are afraid of
tomorrow.
Four, democracy was meant to help and advance our society.
But we do not have properly organized political parties. We also do not have
politicians in the sense of having people who are committed to the common good.
Nigerian politicians don’t owe allegiance to any body of ideas. They are here
today. They are there tomorrow. I recently accosted a Nigerian politician who
was quite prominent in the PDP-Jonathan administration. He has since realigned
and he is speaking up, loudly and boldly for the APC-Buhari administration. I
asked him how it is so easy for him to change camp so smoothly. His answer is
that when you move from Manchester United to Chelsea, your job is to score
against Man-U. This is the most apt description of Nigerian politics that I
have ever heard. Politics, like governance in Nigeria, is a game, a play, a
profitable illusion. We, the ordinary people are the ones who put so much
weight on it.
So when anyone accuses President Buhari of favouring his own
people, such a person misses the point about the way Nigeria is. Let me just
drop this one here: in the First Republic under Aguiyi-Ironsi, as short as that
period was, Igbos, with their man in power, dominated the Federal Civil
Service. The Hausa-Fulani, whenever it was their turn in power, lowered the
standards and the admission scores and positioned themselves. There is now a
Federal Character clause in the Nigerian Constitution, but Nigerians know that
they stand a chance to benefit more only when their kinsman is in charge at the
centre. It is Buhari’s turn today. It is the Hausa-Fulani’s time.
The Presidency has offered a so-called list of appointees,
but the forensic analysis of that list that has been attempted has shown that
the best positions in the most strategic sectors are in the hands of the core
Hausa-Fulani. That is how the game is played, sadly. And let me add this: it is
a pity the list did not disclose the identity of the cooks and closest aides in
the Presidential Villa. These are very strategic positions too, but which
Nigerian President would allow a man who does not speak his language to cook
for him or enter his bedroom?
Nigeria is a country that is ruled and driven by fear and
insecurity even at the highest levels. Nigerian leaders are as scared and as
insecure as the people they lead. While struggling to be Nigerian, and
nationalistic, they don’t ever forget their ethnic roots and the burden of
Nigerian history. We have a list which says President Buhari has appointed
persons from across Nigeria but how inclusive is that list?
We need, therefore to deal with the big issues, not givens.
We must insist that Nigeria needs such a leader who can break the ceilings. For
us that will be the true definition of change, and the extension of
transformation; in the process, imagined and extant givens will fail and the
country can be transformed. What Nigerians want when they complain about
marginalization and the absence of federalism is that they want a country that
is based on a foundation of merit, justice and equity. They want a meritocratic
society where the best and the brightest can aspire to the highest levels in
society regardless of their ethnic, religious or geographical extraction. It is
possible to interpret change otherwise as infrastructure, but a developing
country will always need infrastructure, depending on the commitment and
discipline of succeeding administrations. We need now and later, a value-driven
leadership, which also adds value in space and time.
To be sure that we are on the same page, our obsession with
ethnicity and nepotism is a poor reminder of how poorly our country continues
to turn out. The day a Nigerian can serve his or her local government, state,
Senatorial district, state and the Federal Government without anyone asking
where he or she comes from, but strictly on the basis of merit and
accomplishments, then may be, indeed may be, then we would have a country
again. For now, we are at best, a possible country in search of a nation.
0 Comments