By Reuben Abati

INTERNATIONAL organisations and other stakeholders commenting on the coup that took place in Niger on February 19 have been making the right diplomatic and politically correct noises. While all that familiar stuff about a military coup being an aberration and a major setback for the democratic process in Africa is acceptable, the truth is that this is a perfect case of good riddance to bad rubbish in Niger. Mamadou Tandja had become a nuisance, holding that poor nation and its people hostage for more than a year to pursue a selfish ambition that saw him getting an additional three years in office last November. Tandja’s two-term tenure of five years each expired in December but long before then, he came up with the idea of prolonging his tenure in office by another three years, obviously the first step towards life rule. Everyone who opposed him was hounded into silence or exile. He sacked the Constitutional Court.

Members of his Cabinet who dared to raise a voice were expelled too. The media was harrassed. Civil society activists were intimidated and blackmailed. Tandja put together a team of sycophants who shouted Tazarce: continuity. He suspended the Constitution, started ruling by decrees and issued arrest warrants for opposition leaders. The referendum that was held in August 2009 was a kangaroo exercise with a predictable outcome. Tandja had his way. But he underestimated the people. For a whole week leading up to the coup that took place on Friday, civil society protesters took to the streets in Niamey and elsewhere. When the military junta struck, there was dancing in the same streets. Tandja is said to be in a military facility and the coup plotters have announced that he is in good health. Whatever pains he may be going through is self-inflicted. He is the victim of his own greed.

One of the first assignments of the junta should be to put Tandja and his cohorts on trial. His self-perpetuation gambit was based on the funny script that his government had done so much for Nigeriens, and that he needed to consolidate the gains of his government’s economic reforms. A lie. What reforms? Tandja’s economic reform brought Chinese investors and more money into the pockets of crooks. Niger is one of the poorest countries in the world. For the ten years that Tandja reigned, that country’s development index travelled consistently Southwards. At 71, Mamadou Tandja had no fresh ideas, no new tricks that he could play to promote the people’s interests. He was acting out a bad script that had been authored before him in Nigeria, and it failed on stage, and even in those countries where the leaders became monarchs hoping to die in office, the ultimate outcome was one of shame. Remember Mobutu Sese Seko, Kamuzu Banda, Houphouet-Boigny, Idi Amin Dada: Africa ’s despots.

The more important value of what has happened in Niger lies in the strong message that it sends to African leaders, many of whom may be tempted to copy the Tandja experiment. The coup is not merely a military coup, it is a triumph of sorts for the Nigerien civil society. It produced in that regard an interesting paradox, with the leaders of the “revolution”, Col Djibril Adamou Harouna and Major Salou Djibo promising that they intend to ensure Niger becomes “an example of democracy and good governance.” The ousted Tandja rode on the back of the military to power in 1999; he has taken the same route out of power. His exit sends another message: that dictatorship creates the conditions for its own failure.

Following his decision to force himself on the people of Niger, both ECOWAS and the African Union suspended the country. The US and the EU withdrew aid. On Thursday, Nigeria, Niger ’s neighbour, and the regional power, quickly rushed a statement to the press condemning the coup. Former Nigerian Head of State, General Abdusalami Abubakar is the leader of a team to Niger holding talks with the coup makers. Where was Nigeria all this while? Tandja was able to flourish in part, because Nigeria looked the other way.

Now it is being speculated that the coup in Niger has a Nigerian element: not necessarily the fact that certain persons in the international community thought they heard Nigeria instead of Niger , with an immediate effect on oil prices, but that the coup is meant to test possible international reactions to a similar incident in Nigeria . Mischievous as this may sound, it should not be discountenanced, more so as there has been a copy-cat pattern to military interventions in West African politics. Besides, for more than two months, the Nigerian political leadership has been engaged in a death-wish. When politicians suspend the Constitution as Tandja did, and as the Nigerian leadership appears to be doing, they write a long letter to trouble. Political leaders should not seek to remain in power because it suits their animal instincts, they are required to respect the law, and not succumb to the temptation to bend or change it for selfish reasons.

Col Djibril Adamou Harouna told Nigeriens: “The army loves the people and will always stand by Niger .” The best way to demonstrate that love and commitment is for the junta to make its intervention brief. It should set about initiating fresh elections within the shortest possible time, and ensure that Niger returns quickly to the path of democratic governance. I recommend six months. It must live up to its assumed name: “Supreme Council for the Restoration of Democracy,” and turn its intervention into an opportunity for a new beginning. The long-term challenge however, will be to rescue that country from the claws of poverty, instability and insecurity.

In addition to the ECOWAS framework, Nigeria should see the urgent need to contribute to the task of bringing stability to our neighbour to the North, a country with which Nigeria shares not just a border but intertwined lives and cultures. Poor governance combined with elite greed poses the biggest threat to Africa ’s democratisation process in addition to ethnic/religious differences and mass illiteracy. As these transform into elements of state failure, more African states, from Guinea to Zimbabwe, to Kenya and Angola may implode. This is a terrible burden for a continent left behind by the development clock. The democratisation project in Africa is in as great a need for protection and promotion now as was the case two decades ago. Too many African states are pseudo-democracies, Nigeria inclusive; and although there has been considerable growth in civil society responsiveness and the role of international actors, altogether the conflicting spectacle of progress and failure invites much pessimism about now and the future.

If You See The Saudi King…

THE six-man delegation appointed by the Executive Council of the Federation is travelling today to Saudi Arabia to do two things: visit the sick Nigerian President whose ill-health held the entire country hostage for more than 70 days before the National Assembly organised a “civilian coup”, and then thank the Saudi King for his hospitality. Shopping, disappearing to take care of personal issues, staying back to pursue family interests- all of this is not part of the trip and we are hoping that all six men will return before the next meeting of the Executive Council on Wednesday with useful information.

It has been reported that one Nigerian, Mrs Turai Yar’Adua, who also happens to be the first wife of the President, is the one who determines who sees the President or not. Too many fruitless trips have been made to Saudi Arabia by government officials with all the emissaries unable to see the President because Madam Turai says no. We can give her the benefit of the doubt: the President is probably being hidden from visitors on doctors’ advice. But doctors also ought to recognise extra-ordinary situations. If leprosy is not one of the cocktail of ailments that they are treating, they should allow the six-man delegation from Nigeria ’s Federal Cabinet to see our President. They are coming to the hospital as “the eyes and ears” of all Nigerians. They don’t have to say a word to him; they can just wave and nod, and observe carefully. Nigeria today stands at a crossroads: not too many countries have been so affected by Presidential ill-health.

The King of Saudi Arabia has been identified repeatedly in the last 72 hours as the good host who is picking up President Yar’Adua’s bills. Some reports suggest that President Yar’çdua is no longer in a hospital but in a special facility provided by the Saudi King. The Saudi Arabian authorities must clear the air at once: to reassure Nigerians that in purporting to act as Yar’Adua’s keeper, they have no intentions of violating Nigeria ’s sovereignty. For it is this country’s sovereignty that is being compromised if the head of another sovereign nation is allowed to keep our President as a willing medical hostage, without allowing access to him.

The six men going to Saudi Arabia have all obtained their visas. Given the importance of the trip to Nigerians, and we hope the Saudi Embassy in Nigeria is awake to its duties, this can be taken as sign that the Saudi King has been duly informed, diplomatic protocols have been sorted out and the six envoys will get a chance to deliver their message. Anything short of that will amount to an unfriendly act. My fear though is that a low-ranking officer may be assigned to attend to the “nosey” folks from Nigeria ! Should that happen, and an insult posted to Nigeria’s 140 million people, the Jonathan administration should immediately invite the Nigerian Ambassador to Saudi Arabia and the Saudi Arabian Ambassador to Nigeria for very serious discussions.

King Abdullah recently hosted the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton to a buffet lunch, showing that when he wants to play the diplomatic game, he sure knows how to do it. If the Federal Government delegation succeeds in having an audience with the King, they shouldn’t be more interested in bowing and scraping, they should tell him Nigeria’s immediate future hangs in the balance, because its President is stranded in Saudi Arabia and the people have no information about him. The Nigerian team, comprising five Ministers and the Secretary to the Government of the Federation should not return empty-handed.

Tiger Woods’ Apology

SO Tiger Woods has now apologised, publicly and properly for being “irresponsible” and “selfish”: kudos to his media handlers who want him back in the good books of all conservative elements who think his infidelity is worse than the original sin. But they want more than that: they want the withdrawn endorsements and goodwill back. Fine. I think Tiger Woods has paid enough penance. This hand-wringing over sexual dalliances, in addition to sex addiction therapy, strikes all the necessary moral notes, but can we go back to golf before Tiger Woods begins to imagine himself an eternal victim? No one is asking all the ladies who “stole” him from his wife to offer any apologies. If guilt is to be shared they are just as guilty.

By apologising, Tiger Woods has reassured everyone who invested faith and energy in his talents and success that he is aware and appreciative of the burden he bears as role model and public figure. A strong sense of his humility and humanism is well-conveyed. It is a necessary lesson for all public figures about the moral compass that defines their role-playing, a compass that is beyond their control.

Postponing Tiger’s return to competitive golf extends his saga needlessly. He is a champion on the golf course: that is the best place to work all of this out. Tiger Woods’ mother probably has the best perspective. Shortly after her son’s press conference, she told reporters: “Sometimes think there is double standard. He didn’t do anything illegal. He didn’t kill anybody. But he try to improve himself. He try to go to therapy and help. He change that and making better. When he do all this thing, he will come out stronger and better person…I am so proud to be his mother, period.” Momma is right.

By Dele Momodu

My second coming, even if intermittently, had been foretold by no less a “prophet” than Simon Kolawole. He had told me it was virtually impossible for a restless writer like me to ignore the sad developments in Nigeria. We had this encounter on the day American Chronicle published on its website that President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua had died as far back as December last year, which was too sensational to be true. The news was so rife that most Nigerians made frantic calls everywhere and to everyone who could have any iota of clue. I had attempted to speak to the President’s spokesman, Segun Adeniyi, who was then in Angola but was not so lucky. He probably knew why his phones would have been ringing off the hook. I really felt for this great guy, and for what must have been his personal and private anguish.

I decided to try Simon, who confirmed that the raging news had been debunked and that in fact, our offshore President was going to speak to BBC Hausa Service. I instantly concluded that we were carrying this nonsense too far. How at this time and age can the President of a great nation as Nigeria just vanish from the surface of the earth without any trace? How can the family of our President turn a matter of greatest public interest into such a disgraceful circus clownery? How can our politicians fail to realise the danger they are attracting to us all by their endless irrational behaviour? (Don’t forget that Niger is just next door). Is life all about grabbing power at all costs? Why can’t the First Family spare Nigerians this unwarranted agony? These were the thoughts criss-crossing my mind.

As predicted, our President mysteriously, but not without some serious doubts, spoke from his groove in Saudi Arabia, and granted what must have been the most incoherent interview ever aired by any of the famous BBC channels. Many are still convinced till this day, that that interview was the handiwork of desperados who wanted to hoodwink what they believe is a largely gullible citizenry. Even the BBC which secured the exclusive interview of this century seems not to have been proud of its amazing achievement. The powerful radio channel has not been flaunting the interview the way you would expect of such rare interviews.

Let’s not waste too much energy and time on the dirty tricks with which the hawks have tried to mesmerise Nigerians. The meat of it all is that Nigerians have found a new freedom which is not likely toyed with anymore. It is a great pity if some day-dreamers cannot see that the last train has since departed the terminus. They can continue to waste our scarce resources, but the day of reckoning will come. It is obvious that these guys don’t care a hoot about the President. It is all about their pockets. The poor man I’m sure is not aware of the atrocities his acolytes have committed in his name. It is a shame that some Nigerians can still drag us down this hopeless route. But we shall rise above them. The ball is now in the hands of the Acting President, Goodluck Jonathan, who must act speedily and courageously. God has given him power, and it is Mr Jonathan alone who shall account for it. All the sycophants will simply move on when the chips are down.

His ascendancy is nothing short of a modern day miracle. Those who are still contesting the will of God are wasting their time. They are resisting Jonathan because they don’t want to lose their grip on power. They want to stall for as long as it takes so as to make it impossible for Jonathan to settle down to serious business. They know that the attention span of Nigerians are very short. Very soon, the fuse would blow, and we shall be plunged into darkness. And they thrive in that state of anomie. This is the reason Jonathan must seize the initiative and beat them in their game. He can. These guys are cowards. President Olusegun Obasanjo cowed and canned them, like corned beef, until he fell into their trap by dreaming of a third term. Nigerians have never united behind any man since they did on June 12, 1993, the way they have cuddled Jonathan. Just imagine that Jonathan did not have to lift a finger. He even looked like a man who loves his boss more than himself. But head or tail, he had to carry this cross that was placed on his laps by his benevolent Creator. And he would have to step on toes. Now that he has crossed the Rubicon, there is no turning back.

All roads must now lead to heaven or to hell. The choice is that limited. The road to heaven is a road to redemption. The road to hell is that littered with thorns and can only lead to perdition. In less than 16 months, Jonathan has a chance of recording monumental achievements. It is like being asked to play a penalty in a most gripping game. He must shun all distractions, and shut off the cacophony of the crowd all over the stadium. It is a game of death. When you score, you are a hero. When you miss, you are a villain. In Jonathan’s case, he needs to fire a blinder, and all his friends and foes will stand ramrod at full attention. He looks fit enough to score.

If I were in his shoes, I will recall the security details of our President from their mission in Saudi Arabia, and replace them with fresh ones. I will summon our Ambassador to Saudi Arabia home to debrief him. I will write a letter to the Saudi King, and express both appreciation for his kindness towards our President, and disgust for the manner Nigerians have been totally snubbed in the matter. I will remind His Royal Highness that when the former King Fahd ibn Abdulaziz had a stroke, he was the Crown Prince Abdullah ibn Abdulaziz at the time and was allowed to rule for many years. As a matter of irony, the current Crown Prince Sultan ibn Abdulaziz has been ill and was actually flown to the United States of America for intensive care. The Saudis were not kept in the dark. The media went agog with blow-by-blow account of his progress or lack of it. When he got better and was flown to Morocco to fully recuperate, the Saudi media followed him with the same frenzy.

The Saudis should remember that Nigeria is a major player in the oil business. And whatever happens later may be termed as a deliberate attempt at rubbishing a rival nation. The shame is that while they spent their proceeds into building a most modern society, our leaders wasted our proceeds on frivolities. For the first time in our chequered history, we had two former university teachers as President and Vice President. One would have expected President Yar’Adua to build one of the best University Teaching Hospitals in Africa. And to think that his health challenges actually dictated the urgent need for such a glorious investment. Today, he has paid the price for such humongous short-sightedness. If Yar’Adua was vegetating on a local hospital bed in Nigeria, no one except the soldiers would have dared remove him the way it was done by our National Assembly recently. The politicians who were too scared to discuss the health of a man no one has seen in three months would have been too timid to even table it before the National legislators. We must salute the gallant Nigerians who fought spiritedly for our liberation.

Acting President Jonathan must assemble a powerful team as a matter of urgency and ignore the advice of those who never wished him well in the first instance. The Present team needs to be energised. Everyone remembers with nostalgia a few of those bright stars in Obasanjo’s government. The debt repayment package of that era was a great boost. If such had been translated into rebuilding our infrastructure aggressively, we can all imagine where Nigeria would have been by now. Mr. Jonathan should not worry too much about playing dirty politics for now. If he performs well, Nigerians will beg him to stay on. We are very generous to those we love. And we are not asking for much.

He must rebuild our roads. They are all in bad shapes. Nigerian cities look like war-ravaged zones. And it speaks volumes about our crass irresponsibility and shamelessness. Our airports must be urgently rehabilitated. I flew through Murtala Mohammed International airport last night and nearly burst into tears. Nigerians and foreigners alike were hissing and cursing. Our power and energy situations would never improve unless Jonathan is willing to take on the various cartels that litter our landscape. Our education is currently a huge joke. As a former teacher, he should personally enter into dialogue with his former colleagues on the way forward. We must stop the present drift where our children are being tossed across the seas with reckless abandon. Our hospitals must be upgraded to reasonable standards. Our economy is in tatters, and we must rise above the uncertainties of the moment. The war against corruption can only be won when the leader is ready to subject his person to some levels of discomfort. A good leader must be bold. We must know where he stands on every issue.

Something tells me Jonathan is on the threshold of history. He could not have been raised this high if he was not destined for greatness. I pray he appreciates the enormous challenges ahead of him. By next week, he must convince us that he is ready, and must leave no one in doubt of who’s in charge.

May God help him.

by Reuben Abati

Nigeria has a new ‘acting’ president courtesy of the action taken by the National Assembly to resolve the terrible impasse into which President Umaru Yar’Adua had thrown the entire country by refusing to transmit a letter to the National Assembly in line with Section 145 of the Constitution. There is no doubting the fact that ‘expediency and pragmatism’ informed the decision but in passing the resolution by both Chambers of the National Assembly, the rule of law was jettisoned; the action it must be said had absolutely nothing to do with the law.

Nigeria was faced with a desperate situation; desperate tactics were adopted to save the situation from descending into sheer anarchy, what with some misguided elements in society already mouthing the nonsense that such times called for military intervention. What was done on Tuesday was not a resolution per se, it was a revolution: it was a case of the National Assembly, conniving with the Vice President, the Governors and a vocal section of the civil society, to do what seemed expedient. Nigeria needed to be saved from drifting, from the rush of uncertainties, it needed to be rescued from the hands of a cabal that had taken hold of it – but at what cost?

Establishing a constitution-driven society requires that both chambers either use the case of expediency to change the law or execute same through observance of the constitution. We cannot fumble and wobble our way out of the constitutional quagmire we have found ourselves through the irresponsibility of those taking care of a sick president, who from all accounts, was in no state or faculty to take the necessary steps as provided for by the constitution at the time of leaving office.

Nigerians have embraced the situation and found it acceptable because it serves our purpose; because it seems to be the only way to check the intrigues of those who were misinterpreting the law and making the presidency seem more important than the country itself.

While we look the other way and ask those who are protesting that violating the Constitution to save a desperate situation will create more problems in the long run, we should do a prompt reality check. It is as follows: the development in the National Assembly on Tuesday came about as a result of our collective helplessness. President Yar’Adua and his aides had continued to insist that he is well and capable of running Nigeria from anywhere in the world. Meanwhile, the man has allegedly been in a Jeddah hospital since November 23. Nigerians do not know the exact truth about his state of health. He and his family and megaphones have held the country to ransom and have now been beaten at their own game.

This however should not be the end of the story. We cannot proceed without resolving what happened or is happening to our president. The logjam from which we think we have extricated ourselves may be further extended and the Constitutional crisis that we think we have side-stepped may be blown full scale in due course. It is better in matters such as this, therefore, to insist on first principles. The National Assembly had to act ultra vires by interpreting the Constitution to suit its purpose. The word transmit in Section 145 suddenly was stretched to cover the BBC interview by President Umaru Yar’çdua. To all intents and purposes, that BBC interview belongs to the BBC.

It is not the property of the Nigerian government, not an official communication; it was not in any way directed to the National Assembly. To resolve this impasse by relying on the BBC is to submit our sovereignty to a foreign media – How did the BBC secure such an interview when the Nigerian Security Service, National Assembly, Federal Executive Council, Secretary to the Federal Government and indeed key staff members of the kitchen cabinet and the presidency could not gain access to him?

The appropriate thing for the National Assembly to do should have been to insist on the President sending a letter to the National Assembly asking to go on vacation to attend to his health. What then was the purpose of the meeting with Senator Muhammad Abba Ajji, “the presidential letter courier” last week? Where is the letter he promised? There were reports that David Edevbie, the President’s Principal Private Secretary had travelled to Saudi Arabia to bring the letter, the same way he took the Appropriation Act to Saudi Arabia for presidential signature. At what point between last week and Tuesday this week, did it become impossible to get the President’s signature or thumb print, therefore compelling the National Assembly to suspend the Constitution and act expediently?

No man can be more important than the country. Not even the President. By refusing to obey the Constitution, the President has committed a major breach. He has by his inability to sign a letter, confirmed his incapacitation. Why didn’t the National Assembly insist on the Federal Executive Council acting as directed in Section 144 of the Constitution? What has been proven now is that it is alright in certain situations for the Constitution to be subjected to the force of circumstances. Nigeria has never had the experience of a President going AWOL. It became a testy situation because of the failure of the professional political elite to behave properly. The National Assembly has not yet resolved the Yar’çdua issue.

On this debate rests the unresolved issue of a signed Appropriation bill. To accept that the president was in no way able to sign a letter confirming his leave of absence is to raise a fundamental and grave issue bothering on possible forgery and outright criminal deception carried out and executed by the presidency.

However, clearing the mess that had been created and strengthening public confidence in the rule of law should be Dr. Goodluck Jonathan’s first assignment in his new posting. This would mean his addressing the issue of President Umaru Yar’Adua’s ill health. As Acting President, albeit the product of a democratic coup, willed into reality by overwhelming public consensus, he must direct a delegation immediately to go to Saudi Arabia to establish the true location of the missing President, his true circumstances, his true state of health, the bills that he has incurred.

There are reports that the President’s family prevents people from seeing him. They cannot do that. They must be told that the Nigerian President belongs to the Nigerian people. We should have a right of access to him and the right to pry into his private life. Acting President Goodluck Jonathan must give appropriate orders for full and detailed information about President Yar’Adua. Our national security is at stake. Besides, who is picking up the huge bills that the president must have chalked up in the last 79 days? If it is the Nigerian taxpayer’s money that is being spent, then the people’s right to know must be protected.

Did anyone take special notice of the fact that the same day Goodluck Jonathan was declared Acting President by the National Assembly, the first official visitors he received were the American Ambassador and a special envoy from President Barack Obama. They were in Abuja, waiting. Ambassador Johnnie Carson brought a special message from President Barack Obama and Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. He also met with some stakeholders, including Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ojo Maduekwe, and note this: former President Ibrahim Babangida! Who are the other stakeholders that the Americans met? Carson talked publicly about Nigerians upholding the Constitution but it is not difficult to establish where America’s interest in the matter lies. Two weeks earlier, Mrs Hillary Clinton and EU leaders had signed a statement expressing concern about the uncertainty in Nigeria. They warned that Nigeria is too strategic in the West African region to be allowed to disintegrate. Imagine 150 million people spilling into our neighbouring countries as refugees. It would be worse than Haiti and Somalia combined. America and the rest of the international cannot afford such risk.

Then, there is the crude oil factor. With MEND declaring that it would not do business with Goodluck Jonathan because he lacks authority, the relative peace that had been achieved in the Niger Delta faced the real threat of derailment. MEND had put the oil multinationals on notice that the next round of offensive will be an all-out war. That won’t be in America’s interest either. With Goodluck Jonathan now acting President, the thunder has been taken out of MEND’s sail. In the end, the Tuesday revolution was not merely about Nigeria’s interest, there were external interests actively involved.

America has always showed up at interesting times in the life of this nation. Recall that the day MKO Abiola died, the Americans were in town. The day Goodluck Jonathan was declared Acting President, the Americans were again in town, standing by as events unfolded. Jonathan did not help matters when he addressed the nation looking as if he was at a funeral. He looked too glum for a man who had just been made Acting President! Did the Americans apply, as they say, subtle pressure? If this had been a better-managed country, we wouldn’t have needed the Americans and other external interests to push us.

Acting President Goodluck Jonathan may have no more than a week or two months in office, since the Senate has made it clear that President Yar’çdua will assume his position, the moment he returns to the country. It is worth stating however that President Yar’çdua must not return to the country like a thief in the night. The National Assembly and the Executive Council of the Federation are not likely to impeach him, but if he must take over, there must be clear and compelling evidence that he is healthy enough to do so.

As far as the Nigerian people are concerned, Goodluck Jonathan should be allowed to finish the remaining 18 months of the Yar’çdua Presidency. For more than two years, the country has been in a lull. The people want real dynamism. They are hoping that Jonathan will be able to provide it. He has on his shoulders a historic responsibility. He tried to show a little swagger on Wednesday by redeploying the controversial Michael Aondoakaa who as Attorney General and Minister of Justice acquired a notorious reputation for bending the law to serve narrow interests.

That wasn’t good enough. Jonathan should have dissolved the entire cabinet and announce new Ministers immediately. Nigerians need a new beginning. A Federal cabinet of position-seekers cannot provide the needed momentum. He also must set to work immediately. There are files that have been awaiting Presidential signature since October including due retirements in the Armed Forces that have not been authorised. There are vacancies in INEC that have not been filled. Professor Maurice Iwu’s tenure as INEC Chairman will end in June, he should be asked to proceed on terminal leave, and another man appointed quickly to start studying the terrain ahead of the 2011 elections. What is Jonathan still waiting for?

While engaged in house-cleaning, the ‘Acting’ President should also take time out to tour the country. That shouldn’t take more than three weeks, off and on. Anyone who wants to rule Nigeria must make an effort to know this country. We have had too many people running Nigeria who know near to absolutely nothing about the country or the people.

In a country where history is treated shabbily, this should not be surprising. But Nigeria now needs more than good luck to move forward. We must put an end to the tradition of people jumping from their villages, or the army barracks to Presidential office. By reading a few history books and moving round the country to see things for himself, Jonathan should be able to get a crash induction into life Nigeriana.

Electoral Reform: He is in a position to do something about that too, more so as he is not likely to be a candidate in the 2011 Presidential election. Resource control: the people of the Niger Delta have always asked for this; through Jonathan as Acting President, they are now in charge of Nigerian resources, but will Jonathan be bold enough to take consequential steps to address the Niger Delta question? In addition to everything else, let him engage the services of a wardrobe director, and learn how to smile!

by Okey Ndibe

In addition to sheer amazement, many of us following the argument that a comatose Umaru Yar’Adua is fit to run Nigeria must have a sense of déjà vu. Nigeria is not the only country that falls into the hands of inept, clueless leadership. But it may well be one of the rare countries where seemingly sane people argue that inept leaders are indispensable. Cast a backward glance at Nigeria’s woeful past and you’ll see examples galore of shameless apologists who told the world that Nigeria’s fate was bound up with that of some certified mediocrity in power. Yakubu Gowon trumpeted his own indispensability when he sought to persuade Nigerians that it wasn’t feasible for him to exit the political stage in 1976. Yet, Nigeria survived Gowon’s removal in a coup led by the late General Murtala Muhammed.

In 1983, the National Party of Nigeria deployed a variant of the argument to justify its rigging regatta to ensure that a confounded Shehu Shagari continued to preside over the affairs of Nigeria.

How about General Ibrahim Babangida? Even as the nation tottered under his watch, he and his coterie tried to package him as a genius of statecraft. Convinced by his own propaganda, Mr. Babangida set and then sabotaged successive timetables for his withdrawal. It took his June 12 misadventure to finally expose the insincerity of his transition program, and to precipitate his forced exit.

Then came Sani Abacha, one of the most puzzling and dangerous of Nigeria’s cast of visionless, greedy, and tragically mischievous rulers. A failure at everything else it takes to be a transformative leader, Abacha achieved mastery in the art and science of sustaining himself in power. Using a Machiavellian mix of carrots and sticks, he intimidated or bought off much of the political class.

Week after week, a retinue of traditional rulers (with little or no tradition) and politicians flocked to Abuja to venerate Abacha. In stunning assaults on language and logic, they proclaimed Abacha a “dynamic leader.” They told him that the nation would be hopeless without him to lead it. Speaking from rehearsed lines, they pleaded with Abacha to ignore his “disgruntled” critics and to go ahead and succeed himself.

In the midst of this absurd theatre of worship, Abacha slumped and died. The style and circumstances of his death were fitting: surrounded by prostitutes, some of them imported from abroad. For the first time in Nigeria’s history, the death of a head of state provoked spontaneous and widespread ululation, dancing and bingeing – a fiesta of celebration.

Olusegun Obasanjo, a victim of Abacha’s repression, was brought out of prison and – without psychiatric evaluation – installed as president. He spent his first term, of four years, on an endless junket to foreign countries. Then he spent the second term – which he achieved by dint of rigging – to display his vindictive and grasping tendencies. Nearing the end of his ruinous run as president, he and his cohorts concocted a depraved plan: to change the Nigerian constitution to enable him to run (and rig) a third term.

Those who championed that awful scheme told us that Nigeria could not afford to be Obasanjoless. They claimed that he had founded modern Nigeria – never mind that he built few roads, despite hundreds of billions voted each year, or that his guarantee, on his “honor,” of regular, uninterrupted power supply had turned into a $10 billion bad joke, or that he openly disdained the judiciary, meddled with the legislature, imposed candidates both on his party as well as voters, and enthroned a culture of primitive pocketing of public funds and brazen disregard for decency and ethics.

In an insult to a nation of 140 million, his stalwarts asked, “If not Obasanjo, who?” They contended that Obasanjo, and Obasanjo alone, was capable of husbanding the reforms they alleged that he’d initiated. That argument, stupid on the face of it, nevertheless found traction even with people who ought to know better. In exasperation, I asked one of them: “What if we allowed Obasanjo to steal a third term, is he going to guarantee us, on his honor, that he would never die? Otherwise, if he died, would Nigerians then send a strongly-worded petition to God to raise him from the dead to avert the very extinction of Nigeria?”

Once it dawned on Mr. Obasanjo that Nigerians were in no mood to gratify his illicit third term aspiration, he manufactured a vengeful, do-or-die response. First, he imposed a feeble Yar’Adua as the presidential candidate of the PDP, and then – in an act of supreme malice – foisted his anointed on the nation.

Obasanjo’s recent effort to rewrite the history of his imposition of Yar’Adua was seen by many Nigerians for what it is: a bald fabrication.

Meanwhile, with Yar’Adua, Nigerians are back in familiar territory. Since leaving on November 23 – not on his feet, but on a stretcher – Yar’Adua seems to have fallen into a black hole. Abjectly incompetent even in his healthiest of days, the man cannot now maintain any semblance of being in charge.

That fact has not fazed his acolytes who are using his name to gorge fat on Nigeria’s treasury. Michael Aondoakaa, the inner circle’s most visible spokesman, has told us that Yar’Adua is governing Nigeria from his hospital bed in Saudi Arabia.

For the Aondoakaas of our world, it is okay to reduce Nigeria to Yar’Adua’s size. If Yar’Adua ends up spending six or more months in a foreign hospital, there’s nothing wrong – in Aondoakaa’s book – with letting Nigeria flounder, as long as Yar’Adua’s (and his proxies’) narrow interests are served. If Nigeria must die, so be it, but Turai Yar’Adua’s desire to reign on as “First Lady” must not be tampered with.

Where’s proof that Yar’Adua even recognizes that there’s an entity called Nigeria much less that he is governing? Ask Aondoakaa and he’s likely to tell you that the sick man signed a budget (a scam) or that he spoke with the British Broadcasting Corporation for – wait for this – fifty-one seconds!

Parts of Nigeria are still experiencing acute fuel shortages. What’s Yar’Adua’s antidote for that? The US recently added Nigeria on the list of nations to watch on matters of terrorism. Pray, how many times has Yar’Adua spoken to President Barack Obama to register his objection? Hundreds of Nigerians have perished in sectarian violence in Bauchi and Jos. What leadership has Yar’Adua provided to calm nerves, to commiserate with the bereaved, or to settle thousands of displaced citizens? Nigerians continue to lose jobs as a fall-out of the nation’s bleak economic climate. What answers has our bed-ridden Yar’Adua offered to arrest or ameliorate the situation?

Turai and Aondoakaa are by no means the exclusive villains in this sordid drama. Last week, I asked a Nigerian senator why they had not moved to impeach Yar’Adua. His confessional response disarmed and shocked in equal measure: a lot of money was being disbursed, he confided. He said that, when legislators raised their voices against Yar’Adua, it was often a ploy to jerk up their fees.

Sooner or later – sooner than later, my hunch tells me – this contemptible game at the expense of Nigerians will run its course.

(okeyndibe@gmail.com)

By Luke Onyekakeyah

THE catastrophic 7.0 magnitude earthquake that ravaged Haiti on January 12, 2010 has brought to the fore concerns about the continued habitation of people on the dangerous Haitian tip of the Hispaniola Island in the Caribbean Sea. Though, two countries share the Island, namely: Dominican Republic and Haiti, the Haitian part appears to be more exposed and most vulnerable. That explains why Haitians regularly nurse wounds suffered from one natural disaster or the other. And, of course, that largely explains why the country is the poorest in the Western Hemisphere.

How can Haiti be rich when almost on annual basis one disaster or the other occurs to wipe out whatever the people have acquired? When the rate of removal is greater than the rate of accumulation, there is no way an average Haitian would have anything left. That is a natural principle. But that is the unfortunate fate that has befallen Haiti and its people over the ages. But some element of rationality needs to be applied by the global community together with the Haitians to find a way out.

According to reports, the devastating temblor rattled the Haitian capital Port-au-Prince at about 16.53 local time on the fateful day and left the city almost levelled. The damage was staggering because the quake epicenter was situated about 25 km (16 miles) west of the city at a depth of 13 km (8.1 miles). The U.S. Geological Survey recorded at least 33 aftershocks with some magnitudes 5.0. One aftershock measuring 6.1 rocked the city amid the ruins and humanitarian action. Estimates put the figure of those affected at three million. The Haitian Interior Minister, Paul Antoine estimated the casualty figure at between 100,000 and 200,000 lives. Thousands of the dead were buried in mass graves. Experts say, the quakes was the strongest to hit Haiti since 1770, when a magnitude 8.1 tremor rocked Hispaniola and generated a tsunami that claimed 1,790 lives.

The earthquake caused widespread damage to Port-au-Prince and its environs. Some important landmarks in the city were destroyed. The magnificent Presidential Palace was damaged and so was the National Assembly building, the City’s Cathedral and the main jail. Among the casualty were Monsignor Joseph Serge Miot, the Archbishop of Port-au-Prince, the Justice Minister and the Head of the United Nations (UN) Mission in Haiti, Hedi Annabi. The damage to infrastructure was tremendous. The city’s communication system, electricity, the airport, the land and sea transportation system were damaged, which hampered the search and rescue operation.

Many countries have in the wake of the disaster rallied to provide succour. Aid has poured in from different countries including the United States, Cuba, Venezuela, among many others. But this is not the first time that the world is rallying in support of Haiti in disaster. And this may not be the last time. That puts the difficult question of what should be done to save Haiti once and for all. Otherwise how long would it take before another disaster devastates Haiti and the world would be put on its toes?

The history of man on earth is a history of migration and human settlement. From time immemorial, humankind has been on the move. Humans have always migrated from one part of the earth to the other. The push factors include all the uncomfortable factors in the environment while the pull factors are the attractions beckoning at a new location. From ancient times, what determines where men chose to settle is hospitability. That is the ability of a place to provide man with what he needs to live a comfortable life. The ancestors of man were very discernible in choosing where to settle down.

For instance, before men settled in any place, they would ensure that it had food, water, secure from human and natural disasters, among other things. In all this, survival is the key word. The ancients never made the mistake of settling in places where their offspring and descendants would be wiped out by known or unknown forces. Once there was an indication that a settlement was under threat in any way, that settlement was quickly abandoned and the men moved en masse to a new and more comfortable location.

Not all parts of the earth should be inhabited. There are many uninhabited parts of the earth. Equally, there are many uninhabited islands around the world. Places like the tundra areas of North America and Eurasia, the mountainous regions, the Amazon jungle are largely uninhabited. Among the major reasons why such islands are not inhabited is their harsh condition.

Against the backdrop of the enduring principle of migration, the question arises as to the rationale for a human settlement in a place like Haiti with its notoriety for frequent occurrence of natural disasters. With a long history of devastating earthquakes, disastrous tsunamis, damaging hurricanes, etc, why did the first Haitians settle in such a highly vulnerable place against all odds? What were the attractions? What made the endangered people not to vacate the island en masse?

Hispaniola, the Caribbean island shared by Haiti and the Dominican Republic is seismically active. The island has a long history of destructive earthquakes. As far back as 1751, the French historian, Moreu de Saint-Mery described a destructive earthquake that leveled buildings in Haiti. The 1770 Port-au-Prince earthquake literally caused the whole city to collapse. In May 1842, another earthquake struck that destroyed most parts of Haiti and the Dominican Republic.

The most recent natural disasters that have raged include an unnamed storm that killed more than 2000 people in 1935. In 1946, the largest recorded 8.1 magnitude earthquake rocked both Haiti and the Dominican Republic killing 1,790 people. In 1954, Hurricane Hazel left a swath of destruction after killing over 100 people. The 1963 Hurricane Flora claimed over 8000 lives, making it one of the most deadly hurricanes ever. In 1994, Hurricane Gordon claimed more than 1000 lives. Hurricane George killed more than 400 people in 1998 and Tropical Storm Jeanne caused a major deluge that aggravated landslides and severe flooding that left 2,500 people dead. The litany of deaths, destruction and anguish in Haiti is unending. As it were, the country is literally under siege by terrestrial and subterranean forces. There are few countries that have suffered the onslaught of blind natural forces like Haiti.

Haiti is a historical consequence of the trans Atlantic slave trade. The ancestors of the red Indians (Native Americans) who occupied the Americas migrated from Asia probably across the frozen Bering Strait bordering Alaska into America. That was some 30,000 years ago. They occupied the mainland while most of the islands were uninhabited. The trans Atlantic slave trade opened new frontiers in the American hemisphere thereby leading to the discovery of the Caribbean islands including Haiti.

The quest for sugarcane wealth, which was then a lucrative commodity, made the European slave dealers to import slaves from Africa into Haiti and the other islands. The British first occupied Haiti but later ceded it to the French. The harsh condition on the island killed many of the slaves but the French imported more. There were series of events that led to one revolt after another until in 1804, when Toussaint L’Ouverture, a self-educated former slave led the revolt that earned Haiti its independence. That was how Haiti became the first Black Country to gain independence.

From the foregoing, it is clear that the people of Haiti were not on the vulnerable island by choice but by the greed of European slave dealers. Being slaves at the time, who were struggling to get freedom, they had little or no choice to leave the island even in the midst of disaster. The people were forced to live in Haiti, arguably, against their will. They were in a way tied without opportunity to decide for themselves. It is difficult at this time to think of relocating the entire country of over eight million people to a safer territory. That, absolutely, is what might be good for Haiti. But where do you relocate the people? That is the critical question.

We live in a troubled world. In this age of terrorism, anxiety pervades the world. The 9/11 incident in New York that shook the entire world, the Hurricane Katrina, the Asian tsunami, wars and severe economic crises, among others have shaken even the most stable nations. Practically, no day passes without news of heart-breaking incidents in one part of the world or the other. Despite all the available technology, the modern man is stressed and vulnerable. When all this are added to unpredictable natural disasters, it is clear that the people of Haiti are definitely biting more than they can chew. The United Nations, the U.S., the European Union should think of how to save Haiti from further natural disasters

by Simon Kolawole

Honour has a new admirer. Morality has a new sweat heart. His name is Chief Olusegun Obasanjo. Speaking at an event in Abuja on Thursday, Obasanjo released his most direct salvos against President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua since the ex-president honourably imposed the Katsina man as his successor in 2007 via elections that were globally considered to be too low for zero, even by Nigerian standards. Listen to Obasanjo: “If you take up an assignment, a job – elected, appointed, whatever it is – and then your health starts to fail and you will not be able to deliver to satisfy yourself and to satisfy the people you are supposed to serve, then there is a path of honour and the path of morality… and if you don’t do that, then you don’t know anything.”

Reacting to an accusation that he deliberately imposed a “sick man” as President to punish Nigerians for rejecting his third term project, Obasanjo launched into self-defence and self-justification in an unforgettable way, revealing all about the President’s kidney ailment and making every effort to reassure us yet again that everything he did while in office was in the best interest of Nigeria. Hear him again: “When in the year 2006, the idea came up as to succession, I was convinced in my mind that a Southerner succeeding me would not augur well for Nigeria… (by the way, that was a nice message for a predominantly Northern audience). Now, I was looking for [a person] who has three important qualities. One, he has enough intellectual capacity to run the affairs of Nigeria. Two, he has sufficient personal integrity to run the affairs of Nigeria. Three, he is sufficiently broad-minded enough – politically, religiously, socially, whatever to manage the affairs of Nigeria.”

Did you notice the fact that, in Obasanjo’s moral thinking, succession had nothing to do with the choice of the voters? He alone decided it was not good for a Southerner to succeed him; he alone listed the criteria of who would succeed him; and he alone decided who would succeed him – no matter how Nigerians decided to vote. We always said our votes never mattered, and the man of honour has confirmed our suspicion again. He was telling us, in other words, that he had pre-determined presidential election results. He’s an honourable man. He insisted he did not pick Yar’Adua as President so that he would not perform, maintaining: “How can I put so much into this country both in peace and in war and I will begin to run it down? If you have fear of God, you will not make that statement.” Those were the words of Obasanjo, the man who fears God.

Let me tell you something about Obasanjo and honour and morality. He is, typically, trying to extricate himself from the Yar’Adua impasse just to win public applause. When Obasanjo started plotting the third term project in 2004 with his political reform conference, he denied nursing any such ambition. Billions of naira went down the drain at the conference which achieved virtually nothing. As his constitutional term limit drew near in 2006, he adopted every tactic in the book to amend the constitution and get a third term. But he kept denying it. He manipulated the polity, unleashed EFCC on his political opponents and did everything he could to perpetuate himself in power. Lawmakers were being offered (or given) N50 million each to vote for third term. He has now indirectly admitted he did not start thinking of succession until 2006 – after the failure of the third term project. And Obasanjo is an honourable man.

While on a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) campaign tour in 2007, Obasanjo openly said he would send EFCC after Dr. Olusegun Mimiko who was contesting for governorship in Ondo State against his party. Mimiko, on the ticket of the Labour Party, won the election, but INEC denied him his victory until the courts saved him. Adams Oshiomhole’s victory at the Edo polls was initially denied him, no thanks to Obasanjo. Rotimi Amaechi’s candidacy in Rivers State was truncated, no thanks to Obasanjo’s K-leg, although the Supreme Court eventually served justice hot and fresh. Obasanjo plotted and plotted against Dr Chris Ngige as governor of Anambra State to such a ridiculous extent that Ngige was kidnapped by Chris Uba, Obasanjo’s sidekick. Political thugs set the state of fire, burning the Government House in Awka, the state capital.

Obasanjo revealed, in an open letter, that Uba and Ngige were arguing in his presence at Aso Rock. “Uba told Ngige, ‘You know you did not win the election?’ Ngige said, ‘Yes.’ Uba said, ‘Chris, you know Peter Obi won that election? You know what we did to write the results in your favour’,” Obasanjo wrote in a letter to the then chairman of the PDP, Chief Audu Ogbeh. “I then told both of them to get out of my presence.” Obasanjo withdrew Ngige’s security, just to appease Uba, and claimed that Ngige was no longer a governor having resigned under duress. He eventually made Uba a member of the PDP Board of Trustees. He got Ngige expelled from the PDP. Lamidi Adedibu unleashed terror on Ibadan and orchestrated the removal of Rashidi Ladoja as governor of Oyo State for failing to deliver public funds to him. Obasanjo watched in conspiracy and applauded it all. And Obasanjo is an honourable man.

When Obasanjo came to power in 1999, he told us the refineries were not working because Gen. Sani Abacha was awarding fuel import contracts to his cronies and family members. During the entire eight years of Obasanjo, we were still importing fuel. The refineries were still down. Fuel import contracts were in trillions of naira. Who got the import contracts? Abacha’s cronies again? Obasanjo’s regime oversaw one of the most non-transparent eras at the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). Up till today, every attempt to probe the finances of NNPC has been frustrated.

Even the probe of the power sector, with all the billions of dollars that were pumped into it in Obasanjo’s eight years, has been politically frustrated. And Obasanjo is an honourable man.

He is a clever man, no matter your opinion of him. In the days of President Shehu Shagari, Obasanjo kept quiet until he saw a golden opportunity. When the economy began to crumble under the impact of a global economic meltdown, Obasanjo gauged the mood of the public and unleashed a ferocious attack on Shagari. He was applauded. In the days of Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, Obasanjo always carefully chose the moment. Anytime Nigerians were disenchanted with the government, Obasanjo always issued virulent statements to “align” with the people. Obasanjo likes to be seen as a fighter for the masses.

But for the eight years he was in government, he could not tolerate dissenting voices. People who criticised his government were labelled homosexuals, godless and corrupt. Now that he knows that the public mood is against Yar’Adua’s failure to allow Vice-President Goodluck Jonathan act in his absence, Obasanjo has “aligned” with the public again, preaching honour and morality. Good old Obasanjo.

But can Nigerians be deceived? You may say that we should separate the message from the messenger.

That would be a convenient argument. But anybody who knows Obasanjo very well will surely predict that the man is up to some mischief. He, no doubt, wants to extricate himself from the Yar’Adua debacle. He, no doubt, wants to wash off his hands like the Pontius Pilate, two-and-a-half years after imposing Yar’Adua as President. Let’s just hope that this is all there is to Obasanjo’s public statements of last week. Let’s hope he does not have anything up his sleeve again. Remember, Obasanjo is an honourable man.

And Four Other Things…

Maduekwe at it Again

I got a call late into the night on Thursday, but I was fast asleep. It was from a senior colleague of mine. He said he was in distress. “I was watching an interview Foreign Affairs Minister, Chief Ojo Maduekwe, granted the BBC. I was thoroughly distressed,” he said. Thank God I did not watch it. One of Maduekwe’s most memorable answers, I was told, was when he was asked how he had been managing our foreign affairs. The Minister replied: “The important thing is to understand the President’s policies, his vision, his goals and once that is understood, and he believes that this Foreign Minister knows what those visions are… he expects the Foreign Minister to know what to do.” Lord have mercy!

Death on the Plateau

Two weeks ago, I wrote on religious crisis in Nigeria while commenting on the blacklisting of the country by the US. I wrote: “The religious conflicts that we experience in Nigeria are usually sparked off by an incident at a particular point in time, given that the atmosphere is permanently tense and polluted with hate, mistrust and resentment.” I was not surprised at all that the recent clashes between Muslims and Christians in Jos, Plateau State, was caused by a “minor” argument over encroachment on a plot of land. Even a little argument over somebody spitting on the road can spark off an orgy of killings. These tensions are permanently there. A little spark sets the city on fire. And Jos will never have peace until the political leaders stop taking sides. The Fulani always defend the Fulani, the Berom always defend the Berom. No conflict can ever be resolved that way. The time for home truth has come, no matter whose ox is gored.

Better Future ahead?

I was very, very delighted that the election in the Etsako constituency of the Edo House of Assembly held peacefully yesterday. The reports as at last night showed that there was no violence. Six persons were arrested for impersonation, which is not a terrible figure. I am saying all this because I was really afraid there was going to be bloodshed. Both the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Action Congress (AC) had been talking tough before the election. The withdrawal of the military Joint Task Force (JTF) from the area was seen as a precursor to the rigging of the election by the PDP. I also got reports that parties had stockpiled arms. That there was no major incident is very encouraging. I wish this would be a sign of good things ahead for the electoral system.

Tenure Tinkering

The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has now set the term limit for bank CEOs at a maximum of two five-year terms. I have my reservations on the policy, especially how it caught up with CEOs who had served in different banks and whose previous tenures were to be added together in line with the new policy. I agree totally that nobody should be CEO for life, but I still think there is some deficiency in the policy. I believe it should not have taken effect from dozens of years ago. But if it can be demonstrated that this will help in instilling the principles of corporate governance in the banking industry, we cannot argue against it. Let’s just wait and see.

By Sonala Olumhense

EVERY Nigeria ought to read “Obama’s election and the needed change,” in The Guardian of October 6, 2008. It is painful to read, but it was Aristotle, remember, who taught that “We cannot learn without pain.”

The article was penned by Olusegun Obasanjo. This is a man that had two chances to serve his country, two chances to institutionalise lasting reforms, two chances to set the best of Nigeria to work for Nigeria, two chances to be a respected statesman.

Two chances, 20 years apart. What did he do? He served himself, violated human and political rights, and left his country poorer. In the end, his biggest achievement was not in setting Nigeria alight with change, but in superintending duplicity in government and unscrupulousness in politics.

This week, he watched a 47-year old black American win a historic election in the United States. How did he react? He drafted a rambling, self-serving sermon for a newspaper. For a man who claims not to read Nigerian newspapers, he deprived himself of any rest in order to get his words into a Nigerian newspaper.

He wrote: “The feeling of change that Senator Obama engendered through his campaign for the White House represents a significant theme of change we have all aspired and fought for in different areas, regions, cultures and historical times,” he said, pompously. “The desire for change has never been the question nor has it ever been in question. It is the extent, the range, the tone, the quantity, the quantum and the sustenance of change that has always been the question.”

I beg your pardon?

Obasanjo is the antithesis of change. He hates to see younger people, particularly if they disagree with him. He hates to see women, if they are not doing his bidding. He hates to hear an idea that is different from his. He hates to see Nigeria move forward. He hates to see change, if, by that word, we mean something that is different from what he wants.

Notice how he says that “It is the extent, the range, the tone, the quantity, the quantum and the sustenance of change that has always been the question.”

It is of this kind of obfuscation that Obasanjo is made. Change is for the better.

He came into office in 1999 through widely-rigged elections. In 2003, as he swore that the Peoples’ Democratic Party would rule for ages, he brought rigging out of smoke filled rooms into the open and attempted to make it respectable. That is change? For the better.

In 2007, having failed to manipulate the law to enable him remain in office, he sabotaged even his own party and handpicked the presidential candidate of his party. How is that change?

In office, the entire world saw Obasanjo as he ruled, not like democrat, but like a tyrant. Everybody knows about his disdain for the rule of law: remember how he gladly accepted illegal donations to the 2003 elections donations and the Obasanjo Presidential Library. Andy Uba, the presidential aide, used the presidential jet to launder money; Obasanjo accepted gifts from the proceeds.

Change? In office, Obasanjo found no conflicts setting up private institutions to compete with those of the federal government. He put his Bells University over the University of Ibadan, and his private secondary schools ahead of his governments?

Change? At Transcorp, he helped himself to millions of shares. In his cabinet, he was his own Minister for Petroleum, and he treated Petroleum Trust Development Fund (PTDF) as though it was his private trust fund for the benefit of his favoured. From PTDF accounts at Equatorial Trust Bank and Trans-International Bank (TIB), this man who wants Obama to remember him bought expensive cars for women, and buses for his private school.

Change? While Obasanjo was in office, Nigeria was able to recover billions of US dollars that had been looted by his jailor, Sani Abacha. But Obasanjo never accounted for a penny. He claimed a war against corruption but he personally took the menace of graft to new highs. Under him, in his own party, men like James Ibori and Peter Odili and Lucky Igbinedion flourished not only as the new faces of conspicuous corruption, but because they were having so much fun they never remembered to govern. Like Obasanjo, their hero, it was power without accountability. Obasanjo ran the PDP as though the mission was to ruin Nigeria.

Reform? In 2004, and with great fanfare, Obasanjo launched a phantom economic reform programme he called the National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS). This one-pill cure, he said, would reform the government and its institutions; develop the private sector; implement a social charter for the people; and re-orientate the people with an enduring African value system.

He boasted that NEEDS would create one million jobs within nine months, and a total of seven million by the time he left office in 2007. It would raise Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product from 4.6 per cent in 2003 to 7 per cent in 2007; lower inflation from 11 per cent in 2003 to 9 per cent in 2007, and raise electricity generation from 4,000 megawatts in 2004 to 10,000 in 2007.

The NEEDS cheap trick disappeared within months and Obasanjo never mentioned it again. Before our eyes, it became the most spectacular economic policy bust Nigeria had ever seen. And while Obasanjo enriched himself, poverty and unemployment grew, and grew and grew. It got so embarrassing that he asked the civil service for a re-definition of poverty; he did not want to hear that “nonsense” about 70 per cent of Nigerians living on less than one dollar per day. He said he did not know any family that did not know what it would eat.

Change? If Obama’s mantra was “Yes We Can,” Obasanjo’s was “Yes You’re Nothing.” He was the only wise animal in the jungle. For him, you were doubly stupid if you happened to be younger. Even Chinua Achebe, Nigeria’s internationally-revered writer, was insulted by Obasanjo in 2004 when he objected to the offer of a National Award. Spokesman Femi Fani-Kayode had a few choice words for Prof. Achebe from the president: “If you feel that your country does not deserve to honour you, then we believe you certainly do not deserve your country.”

In Nigeria, Obama would never have made it past the eye of the needle of Temperance Farms. This does not mean there are no younger people known to Obasanjo. Bu they have to be people willing to prostrate 24 hours a day, shut their mouths, and run errands. They have to be people without an independent thought in their heads; if they were men, they also had to lack life in their lions.

Obasanjo is speaking of change? This is a man whose hero was the late Lamidi Adedibu, a man who had ballot boxes in his Ibadan home weeks before the 2003 election. Instead of ensuring prosecution, Obasanjo told the nation to leave the man alone. This explains why he speaks about “the extent, the range, the tone, the quantity, the quantum… of change.” Little wonder Obasanjo’s annual list of National Honorees was loaded with the Adedibus of Nigeria. Obasanjo’s was not a Nigeria capable of acknowledging talent, let alone genius. His response to excellence was to destroy it because of his deep-seated complex. A people cannot thrive under a temperamental, arrogant and self-centred leadership, and Obasanjo is proof. A people cannot thrive in a desert of standards or scruples or principles. A people cannot rise when they are offered double standards, two faces and forked tongues.

What Obasanjo should have penned is an apology to a nation that he has denied truth, oxygen and manure for an entire generation while he enthroned mediocrity. And if Obasanjo wants to know who Obama really is, Obama is Obasanjo on trial. But if Obasanjo wants forgiveness, he will not find it in Chicago or in Washington DC. His reputation traveled too far ahead of history, and the presidential jet.

By Reuben Abati

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s prayer at the Annual Trust Awards that God should punish him if indeed he deliberately chose as his successor a sick man so he would not be able to perform and possibly outshine him, has drawn quite a number of Amens from the public with the outrightly cynical insisting that God is already inflicting punishment on the former President. The reference to God often drives up sentiments among Nigerians and in an overtly religious society such as ours, every appeal to God is intended to have a special effect. It is a psychological fact that pastors rely on so well, and which Obasanjo often deploys in seasons of doubt. It is possible to be emotional in responding to his latest intrusion into the public space. But more benefit could be derived from looking at the facts of the case, and why Obasanjo has chosen now to speak up on the subject of the President’s ill-health, and what message(s) he could possibly be sending across to the public and certain stakeholders. Obasanjo not only ditched President Yar’çdua publicly, he also advised him to resign if his health has failed him. The wily OBJ talked about the path of honour and the path of morality.

In Yar’çdua’s case both are obviously currently conflicted. The Obasanjo that spoke at the Daily Trust event tried to project himself as a patriot who is more interested in national progress. Now that we know where Obasanjo stands in this matter, when next Professor Wole Soyinka, Pastor Tunde Bakare, Femi Falana and others want to embark on another “Enough is Enough. To Save Nigeria” street march, they should remember to invite him along! But is Obasanjo now one of the progressives? Or he is merely playing to the gallery? Or he is trying to absolve himself of blame? Some of his friends have praised him for lending his voice to the calls for Yar’Adua’s resignation.

There is nothing original in him position though. He is waking up to the truth, more than two years late. Is this not the same Obasanjo who only a fortnight ago pointedly refused to comment on the President’s health? If it was not safe for him to pass a comment then, why is it now safe for him to do so? Or was he waiting for the right platform? Telling Yar’çdua to get out at an event in his own backyard, seems a clever way of loading a statement with appropriate weight. Or could it be that Obasanjo already knows something that is not yet public knowledge and which puts him in a safe position to fulminate? For a man who has been to jail and back, simply because he was critical of a sitting Head of State, and who himself does not suffer fools gladly when he wielded power, Obasanjo must be sure that it is only safe to step on a dead cobra’s tail. So what are we dealing with? Opportunism? An attempt at self-ingratiation? Rather than applause, Obasanjo’s statement, arguably his most poignant public statement, since he left office in May 2007 should invite more questions. President Yar’çdua’s ill-health has set an invidious power game in motion and OBJ is trying to get on top of it. But not so fast, sir.

According to the former President, at the time he decided to support President Yar’çdua’s candidacy, he was looking for three qualities: intellectual capacity, integrity and broad-mindedness. In 2007, Candidate Yar’çdua was not the only man in the PDP Presidential race who could boast of these three qualities. That was a fact. Another fact: Obasanjo and his agents had made up their mind that it was Yar’çdua that they wanted. He even told Nigerians at the time that he knew those who would not succeed him. One by one, those who showed interest in the race were arm-twisted, or frightened, out of it. Long before the PDP Presidential primaries, it was common knowledge that both the PDP Presidential ticket and the Presidency had been willed by the man in power to the then Governor of Katsina state.

Yar’çdua was a reluctant candidate, the most reluctant of all the candidates. Obasanjo also wanted Yar’çdua in order to spite Abubakar Atiku, his Vice President with whom he had serious problems. Atiku is a product of the General Shehu Yar’çdua political dynasty, and the leader of the late General’s wing of the PDP; the once powerful People’s Democratic Movement (PDM). In 2002/3, Atiku had made the mistake of boasting that it was he and the PDM machinery that he inherited that brought Obasanjo to power. At the PDP Presidential primaries in 2003, Atiku and his PDM supporters almost humiliated Obasanjo. He was forced to eat the humble pie. What better way to divide and demolish the PDM in 2007, than to hand over power to the junior brother of the founder of the PDM? Handing over power to Yar’çdua was a cold-hearted, Machiavellian move on Obasanjo’s part. With due respect, it had nothing to do with all that rhetoric about intellectual capacity, integrity and broad-mindedness. How much of these three, now presented by OBJ as if they are divine imperatives, did we get from the eight years of the Obasanjo administration?

To all intents and purposes, former President Obasanjo wanted Umaru Yar’çdua as president because that was what would serve his own political interests then. Eye-witnesses to that campaign process will recall that it was President Obasanjo that did most of the campaigning. At several rallies, the man who wanted to be President was not allowed to speak. Obasanjo did all the talking, and subsequently, he would raise Yar’Adua’s hand. At a point, there were comments about the need for Obasanjo to allow the PDP candidate to speak to Nigerians. The first time we heard of the seven-point agenda was on inauguration day! Yar’çdua became President without Nigerians really knowing him. Now, Obasanjo says don’t blame me. He gave me a medical record which said he was in good shape. Obasanjo was Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. A Presidential aspirant gave him a sheet of paper certifying himself fit and he Obasanjo did not deem it necessary to entertain doubts!

The subtext of the Obasanjo comment is that Nigerians not he, made President Yar’çdua president. Nigeria ’s big men are very good at revising history. In the light of available evidence, it seems to me that even if OBJ had full knowledge of the risk factors in making a man who had had a kidney transplant President, he would still have chosen Yar’Adua. If the man was so fit, why was Obasanjo the one selling him to Nigerians, instead of allowing him to do more of the talking? So grateful was the Yar’çdua family after the Presidential elections and the inauguration of Yar’çdua as President that three women from the Yar’çdua household including the brand new President’s mother, and his late brother’s wife went to Ota specially to thank Obasanjo. They did not issue a statement thanking Nigerians. They went to Ota! And now, Obasanjo ditches the same Yar’Adua.

The timing of his latest politics is suspicious but his outburst is understandable. The Atiku threat no longer exists. The PDM is in disarray. Atiku who wanted to replace Obasanjo and in the process became an issue in Nigerian Presidential politics has since gone to Obasanjo’s home to pay homage. All the other candidates, North and South in the PDP who wanted to be President have been driven into their shells, with some of them still battling with the EFCC yoke that was slung around their necks. But Yar’Adua on whose behalf all that effort was made has shown no gratitude to former President Obasanjo. The Yar’Adua government began at the centre with a systematic assault on the Obasanjo legacy. Obasanjo and his spin-doctors used to boast that the dividends of democracy that Nigerians wanted so badly would fructify in the fullness of time on the altar of sustainability.

If they thought Yar’çdua would sustain Obasanjo’s reform agenda and programmes, they made a mistake. These were the first set of pillars that the new government pulled down. Many Obasanjo boys who had worked tirelessly on the Yar’çdua-must-be-President agenda suddenly found themselves being treated as persona non grata. They have been chased out of government, into exile, or into EFCC detention centres. Under Obasanjo, there was something that assumed a political shape called Corporate Nigeria, the jet-riding set that donated money to political causes and strolled into the Presidential Villa at will. They owned the biggest businesses in town and they didn’t hide the fact of their closeness to the President. More than two years later, the Yar’çdua government has successfully castrated this group.

The 24-hour gate passes to Presidential Villa that they used to brandish have been withdrawn! Some of them have lost their banks and are now struggling to stay out of jail. Even those who thought they knew Yar’Adua ( “he was my senior in secondary school”; “I know him”) have all been shocked: if they thought they would prosper politically under him, the man gave them poisoned gifts. Obasanjo himself has not been spared. Yar’çdua and his team have not treated him as the Godfather of the administration. His position as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the PDP has been rendered almost useless. He has been turned into a laughing stock in the company of those he once said would never be President. Ordinary Nigerians may regard President Yar’çdua as a weak leader because of his illness, but his power-politics has been very strong and he may have made great strides in that direction that could affect Nigeria in more fundamental ways than we may realise. But Obasanjo is smart. He is choosing his own time to strike back. But why strike a man when he is weak? Whatever may be Obasanjo’s shortcomings, his voice still carries weight in Nigerian politics. By coming out against Yar’Adua, he will be setting off a chain of reactions that should be closely watched. What will be the Katsina response to the bomb from Ota? And why has Obasanjo suddenly become freshly voluble at the time when Vice President Goodluck Jonathan is said to be taking charge gradually at the Presidency?

It is a game of musical chairs, not yet an end game. Two or three newspapers have suggested that President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua may show up in Nigeria next week, looking healthy and strong enough to carry on. Should that happen, it will be not necessarily a miracle, but a political masterstroke. Some people may have to leave town. For there could be serious reprisals from the Yar’çdua end which may not have demonstrated a capacity to keep promises, but remarkable adroitness in teaching ambitious men and women bitter lessons about the game of power. Even if the man does not return next week, with INEC poised to announce the time-table for the 2011 elections in March, the professional political class will see the need to engage in further mischief.

By Reuben Abati

“HALLELUYAH oh. Somebody shout halle-lu-yah o. Ha-le-ha-le-hale… I praise the Lord o…ha-le. “Somebody, e yin oluwa logo hale…”

“What’s the matter with you?”: You don drink?”

“Yes o. I am drunk with joy. Halle-hale-halle…, “halleluyah, halle…”

“I have been telling you. Take it easy with the bottle. What a man eats is his path to the grave”.

“Hey. Professor. Spare me the lecture. I am not drunk. I am just happy that our missing President has been found. Lost and found President Yar’Adua. Halle lu yah o”.

“The missing President”.

“For over 50 days this country was without a President but now, we have found him. He is alive… He is ali-ve… Yar-Adua is – ali-ve-. A a-men I say: He is – a li-ve. Yar’Adua is ali-ve. Oh, oh, oh, he is alive. A a-men”.

“I am not as enthusiastic as you are”

“A nation that prays, stays together. Obviously, God has answered our prayers… It is good to pray”.

“Are you sure?”

“Oh yes. What do you mean I am sure? The President spoke on BBC. He told Nigerians that he is alive and well, and that as soon as his doctors say he is fit enough, he will return home. In the meantime, he wished the Super Eagles well in the Nations Cup in Angola”.

“He is well. After 50 days! And he doesn’t think he should talk to us through a Nigerian medium. He had to choose the BBC. We have been praying for him and Nigeria, and then, he finds his voice, he thinks the BBC is the best platform. What contempt!”

“A man is ill. He recovers. It doesn’t matter which platform he speaks from. I think we should be happy that the President is alive and that he has been found”.

“Of all things, he had to talk about the Super Eagles and the Nations Cup. Useless Super Eagles and Coach Amodu who if I have my way should be sent to Cabinda. The President didn’t apologise to Nigerians. He didn’t wish us a happy New Year. He didn’t say something to inspire us. In fact, I don’t believe it was him that spoke. I dare say the BBC must be embarrassed conducting such a shoddy interview”.

“Shoddy?”

“Yes. Shoddy. The local media would have done a better job. At least, the reporter could have asked one or two intelligent questions. The BBC using its platform to conduct what was obviously a stage-managed interview does little credit to its own reputation?”

“Hey man. Dogs should not eat dogs. Don’t get carried away.”

“Let us tell the truth and let the devil be ashamed.”

“I see you have been listening to Lagbaja. I know where that line is coming from”.

“You know I don’t even believe that it was President Yar’Adua that spoke to the BBC. The BBC should be careful not to be seen to be part of a conspiracy of deceit. Besides, the President spoke in Hausa language. I object to that Hausa bit. He is President of Nigeria, not President of the Hausa-Fulani”.

“Oh come on. When a man is ill, and he recovers, I don’t care what language comes out of his mouth. In any case, the man also spoke in English”.

“All of this is political”.

“You are a doubting Thomas”.

“Yes. I am. To convince us that the President is alive and well, let his spin doctors put him on NTA Television. With a 3-D scan of the President”.

“Channels, please. Or AIT. I don’t trust NTA”.

“After 50 days of absence, if the President is well enough, we expect him to show up on national television and address all Nigerians. And I don’t expect him to talk about the Super Eagles in Angola. There are more important issues. Is he handing over to his Vice President, for example? Will Goodluck Jonathan now be in charge? Or the country will remain without a leader?”

“The court has settled that, I think”

“The court has not settled anything. If you are talking about the Federal High Court ruling which says the Vice President can take over, I am sorry, it looks like that judgement merely states a principle. It is not executorial. There are no clear-out orders”.

“The Attorney-General of the Federation says there are. The Vice President can now sign anything and act as President”.

“Only in a delegated capacity. The President has not delegated anything to him, so, we are still in the clouds”.

“But a man of courage will hold on to that same ruling and act courageously. The ruling is in one sense about the character of the Vice President. Will he seize the day? Will he step up to the big moment. He has a chance now to stand up. This is all that he needs”.

“You are asking Vice President Goodluck Jonathan to become a suicide bomber? Is that what you are saying?”

“You are speaking in tongues. I don’t get it. I am saying there is a court ruling which offers both Jonathan and all Nigerians a window of opportunity”.

“And I am saying the court ruling has only worsened the situation. Judges should be careful what they say at moments like this”.

“Don’t blame the Judge. The law is a social modulator. The court has ruled. Will Jonathan step forward?”

“My own take is that nothing is that straight-forward in Nigerian politics. Vice President Jonathan will not like to be seen to be ambitious. You know the man is a lucky Deputy. Any man wey the man deputise, something must do am. Alami go jail. Yar’Adua go hospital.”

“That’s mumbo-jumbo. No be Jonathan fault. The matter is simple. Let the President return home. We get hospital for Nigeria too.”

“On doctor’s advice?”

“No. We can no longer wait for that. You know some newspapers have been insisting that the man is clinically dead”.

“But a man that is clinically dead cannot speak Hausa and English on BBC”.

“Suppose it was an actor that spoke…”

“No. It was Yar’Adua”.

“Fine. Let him appear on NTA, then”.

“All of this is just so tiresome. The whole world is laughing at us. How can the President of Nigeria be a missing President?”

“Nothing ever works in Nigeria”.

“At least we now know where our President is. In Haiti, their President is homeless. He now sleeps on the streets. We should thank God here. Now that the President has spoken, naturally every government official would wish to go to Saudi Arabia to greet him. Traditional rulers too”.

“No. That should be discouraged. Whoever wants to see the President should await his arrival. Nobody should turn the President’s ill-health into an opportunity to make quick bucks”.

“Too late. I understand members of the House of Representatives are already on their way to Saudi Arabia. Seven of them. They have all collected their tickets”.

“Jonathan should stop them”.

“The lawmakers claim they are performing their oversight function. They need to go to Saudi Arabia to oversee the President”.

“They shouldn’t bother. The President himself should come home. When Saudi Princes fall sick, they go to America for medical treatment. What is our President doing in Saudi Arabia?”

“No. You are wrong. Why is our President not in a Nigerian hospital. That is the question?”

“He should answer that question himself. And not through BBC. It has to be a Nigerian channel. And in English not Hausa”.

“May be you have a point. English is Nigeria’s official language, not Hausa. The crisis has just begun.”

“Don’t misunderstand me though. I am not saying that this is a North-South debacle. No. That is not my view, I just want the President back home, if that is possible. And I ask: who will come home first- Yar’Adua or the Super Eagles?”

“It is even more than that. If the country continues to drift, what do you think will happen? I am praying for Goodluck Jonathan”

“What?”

“Where do you think all this will lead to?”

“A greater future for Nigeria. I can see God’s hand in it all”.

“No. I don’t see God’s hands. I see failure of leadership. I see selfishness. That is what I see”.

“You probably have a point. Today is January 15″.

“No. No. No. Don’t go that way”.

“What way?”

“What I think you are thinking”.

“I am not even thinking. I am just saying that the only way forward is forward”.

“Better”.

“You should be careful. These are difficult times. Watch what you say. You could step on the wrong toes.”

“Okay I wish the President quick recovery, and all the people that drove the rabbit out of the hole, American Chronicle, London Telegraph and their local conspirators a happy 2010.”

“That your mouth will get you into trouble soon.”

“Wetin I talk now?”

by Ijeoma Nwogwugwu

Ever since the United States listed 14 countries, including Nigeria, which it perceives as either “sponsors of terrorism” or “countries of interest”, a lot has been said and written locally and overseas in reaction to the development. Of particular interest are those reactions from the Nigerian citizenry and officials in government. The general consensus was that the US acted out of political expediency by hastily including Nigeria on a watch list that would subject its citizens to profiling and intensive security screening each time they travel to the US and possibly other parts of the world.

For many of these commentators, one isolated incident involving the alleged botched attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to blow up an American airplane on Christmas day was insufficient to have warranted Nigeria’s inclusion on the list. Attempts have further been made to show that the young Farouk is not a made in Nigeria product and was radicalized in the United Kingdom where he mingled with radical elements in mosques and other similar associations where they met. The most curious arguments put up in defense of Nigeria are that Nigerians by their very nature are not “suicidal” and are happy-go-lucky people with an innate love for life and living.

I am inclined to disagree with this line of argument for a number of reasons. First, it would be rather simplistic to think that the US government included Nigeria on a sub-list of “countries of interest” just because Farouk Abdulmutallab was misguided into attempting to blow up the Detroit-bound Delta Airline plane. This country has a history of sectarian violence linked to religious tensions and resentment which the state has not been able to contain for decades. Indeed, more Nigerians have been maimed and killed in religious-related clashes in northern Nigeria than in all of the countries along the West African coast with an equal representation of Muslims and Christians dispersed between the south and the north of those countries put together.

Starting from the Maitatsine riots in the 1980s when members of that sect led by one Muhammadu Marwa shot their way to notoriety, killed thousands and proclaimed their brand of Islam to be superior to every other one, including Christianity, to the Boko Haram crisis last year, the Nigerian state has never been able to curb the mounting threat of sectarian violence in our midst. Yet, aside from the extra-judicial killing of Mohammed Yusuf and his cohorts a few months ago, none of the religious zealots who preach hate and jihaddism against the “infidels” has been arrested and tried by the state for their involvement in the riots. Instead, the norm has been to set up dozens of commission of inquiries after which no action is ever taken even when some of the people behind the clashes were known.

Even after the 9/11 attack on American soil, a few misguided young Muslims poured out into the streets celebrating the destruction of the World Trade Centre, the Pentagon and the plane that went down in northern Pennsylvania. To add salt and pepper to the wound, shortly after the attack, more than a few families named their new born sons, Osama, signifying their endorsement of the mastermind behind the plot to extinguish the “Great Satan” as the US is known by such extremists.

As recently as 2006, religious clashes were also triggered after a group of Muslims converged in Maiduguri to protest the drawing of an offensive cartoon by a Danish newspaper. According to Newswatch magazine which in October 2009 chronicled the history of sectarian violence in the country, that incident led to the destruction of property belonging to non-Muslims, and the attack and death of more than 50 Christians including Michael Gajere, who was identified as the Catholic priest in charge of St. Rita’s Catholic Church. The Maiduguri incident led to reprisal attacks in Onitsha by Igbos. Incensed by the sight of their kith and kin that were brought home for burial, some Igbos went in search of Muslims in the commercial town, and ended up killing more than 30 of them.

Realistically, listing all the cases of religious-related clashes would require more space than this page would permit. But the point being made is that Nigeria in the last three decades has shown more than a passing inclination for religious extremism, and by extension is the prefect breeding ground for elements willing to sacrifice their lives to further their cause. That in my estimation is not a good portrayal of happy-go-lucky people. Rather, it is one that portrays intolerance and a propensity for violence in the name of God.

Besides, it would be erroneous not to classify the trigger for most of the clashes linked to religion in the north, as acts of terror. The Oxford Dictionary of English defines the word terror as “extreme fear” while to instill terror is “the use of extreme fear to intimidate people, especially for political reasons”.

Terrorism, on the other hand, is defined as the “use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims”, while the verb to terrorize means to “create and maintain a state of extreme fear and distress in (someone)”. Going by these very basic definitions, I do not see how the sustained acts of religious violence in northern Nigeria over the last three decades do not constitute acts of terror. Terrorism is not merely limited to the bombing of US targets and like interests. It is the act of instilling extreme fear through violent means and through whatever form, including the use of machetes, swords, horsewhips, sticks and stones that can inflict grievous harm.

When an overzealous man or groups of people rise up in arms against their fellow human beings and decide to kill them for the simple reason that they have divergent religious beliefs, that constitutes an act of terrorism. It is an incontrovertible fact that thousands of non-Muslims from the south have been forced to flee the north for fear of being killed. They were terrorized into relocating to their homes and communities in the south. The same is applicable to the kidnappings of oil workers and innocent citizens in the Niger Delta as well as the destruction and bombing of oil facilities. No matter how justified or aggrieved the perpetrators of such dastardly acts feel, they are nothing more than terrorists trying to instill extreme fear for political capital. Extremism in all its forms can never be justified in a plural state, particularly in a government that talks about law and order.

Moreover, we would be making a big mistake if we think that Al Qaeda has not possibly established a foothold in the Nigeria. Since 9/11, Al Qaeda has grown into an amorphous organisation with franchises all over the Middle East, and certain parts of Asia and Africa. Today, Al Qaeda has simply become an “idea” that binds Islamic extremists who believe in the same cause and press home their message by replicating acts of terror on America, western interests and their allies. The recurring philosophy among its adherents is “the enemy of my friend is my enemy”. It is for these reason experts on terror and the spread of Islamic extremism all acknowledge that the Al Qaeda band of terrorists started and led by Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan has no relationship with Al Qaeda in the Middle East, Al Qaeda in Somalia or Al Qaeda in Indonesia.

If we must be honest with ourselves, Nigeria is only a secular state in name. For all intents and purpose, it should be renamed the “Chrislamic Republic of Nigeria”. Religious extremism is as pervasive in the south as it is in the northern part of the country. Nigerian Christians do not have to wait for a replay of the Branch Davidian Christian religious sect that barricade itself in a ranch in Waco, Texas for 51 days until it was raided by the FBI and resulted in the death of 54 adults and 21 children, before realising they are heading along the same extremist path.

As a people, we have lost all sense of rational thought and logic, and attribute everything to a higher being. The most embarrassing aspect of our over-religiosity has been made more glaring in recent weeks by our refusal to invoke the 1999 Constitution, preferring instead to pray for an incapacitated president whom we don’t even know if he’s alive or dead. My common refrain to this sickening prevarication is “what’s God got to do with it?”

In my candid opinion, that we have been listed by the US as a country of interest should be a wake up call for all of us. We would be running away from the truth by pointing at the United Kingdom and other countries whose citizens have been caught in the past for terrorist acts. We forget that America and the UK have sustained a “special relationship” across the Atlantic that is centuries old. America sees the UK as its foremost ally in Europe and would therefore never do anything to jeopardize that bond, certainly not because of a Richard Reid, the British shoe bomber. Even where religious elements begin to grow and fester in those countries, they clamp down on them decisively and deport foreigners back to their countries of origin. They most certainly do not pander to meaningless sentiments like we do in Nigeria.

Instead of burying our heads in the sand, we should see our listing as an opportunity for the Nigerian state to uphold its secular constitution as supreme and take decisive security measures to discourage and contain extremism, be it Christian or Muslim.