AWOLOWO AND ACHEBE'S TALE OF FATASY

Written by Femi Fani Koyade

I am a historian and I have always believed that if we want to talk history we must be dispassionate, objective and factual. We must take the emotion out of it and we must always tell the truth. The worst thing that anyone can do is to try to re-write history and indulge in historical revisionism. This is especially so when the person is a revered figure and a literary icon.

Sadly, it is in the light of such historical revisionism that I view Professor Chinua Achebe’s assertion that Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the late and much loved Leader of the Yoruba, was responsible for the genocide that the Igbos suffered during the civil war. This claim is not only false but it is also, frankly speaking, utterly absurd.Not only is Professor Achebe indulging in perfidy, not only is he being utterly dishonest and disingenuous but he is also turning history upside down and indulging in what I would describe as ethnic chauvinism.

I am one of those that has always had tremendous sympathy for the Igbo cause during the civil war. I am also an admirer of Colonel Emeka Odumegwu Ojukwu who stood up for his people when it mattered the most and when they were being slaughtered by rampaging mobs in the northern part of our country.At least 100,000 Igbos were killed in those northern pogroms which took place before the civil war and which indeed led directly to it. This was not only an outrage but it was also a tragedy of monumental proportions.Yet we must not allow our emotion or our sympathy for the suffering of the Igbo at the hands of northern mobs before the war started to becloud our sense of reasoning, as regards what actually happened during the prosecution of the war itself.

It is important to set the record straight and not to be selective in our application and recollection of the facts when considering what actually led to the starvation of hundreds of thousands of Igbo women, children and civilians during that war. And, unlike others, I do not deny the fact that hundreds of thousands were starved to death as a consequence of the blockade that was imposed on Biafra by the Nigerian Federal Government.To deny that this actually happened would be a lie. It is a historical fact. Again I do not deny the fact that Awolowo publicly defended the blockade and indeed told the world that it was perfectly legitimate for any government to impose such a blockade on the territory of their enemies in times of war. Awolowo said it, this is a matter of historical record and he was quoted in a number of British newspapers as having said so at the time.

Yet he spoke nothing but the truth. And whether anyone likes to hear it or not, he was absolutely right in what he said. Let me give you an example. During the Second World War a blockade was imposed on Germany, Japan and Italy by the Allied Forces and this was very effective. It weakened the Axis powers considerably and this was one of the reasons why the war ended at the time that it did. If there had been no blockade, the Second World War would have gone on for considerably longer.In the case of the Nigerian civil war though the story did not stop at the fact that a blockade was imposed by the Federal Government which led to the suffering, starvation, pain, death and hardship of the civilian Igbo population or that Awolowo defended it. That is only half the story.

There was a lot more to it and the fact that Achebe and most of our Igbo brothers and sisters always conveniently forget to mention the other half of the story is something that causes some of us from outside Igboland considerable concern and never ceases to amaze us.The bitter truth is that if anyone is to be blamed for the hundreds of thousands of Igbos that died from starvation during the civil war, it was not Chief Awolowo or even General Yakubu Gowon but, rather it was Colonel Emeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu himself. I say this because it is a matter of public record and a historical fact that the Federal Government of Nigeria made a very generous offer to Ojukwu and the Biafrans to open a road corridor for food to be ferried to the Igbos and to lessen the suffering of their civilian population.

This was as a consequence of a deal that was brokered by the international community who were concerned about the suffering of the Igbo civilian population and the death and hardship that the blockade was causing to them.Unfortunately Ojukwu turned this down flatly and instead insisted that food should be flown into Biafra by air in the dead of the night. This was unacceptable to the Federal Government because it meant that the Biafrans could, and indeed would, have used such night flights to smuggle badly needed arms and ammunition into their country for usage by their soldiers. That was where the problem came from and that was the issue.

Apart from that, Ojukwu found it expedient and convenient to allow his people to starve to death and to broadcast it on television screens all over the world in order to attract sympathy for the Igbo cause and for propaganda purposes. And this worked beautifully for him.

Ambassador Ralph Uweche, who was the Special Envoy to France for the Biafran Government during the civil war and who is the leader of Ohaeneze, the leading igbo political and socio-cultural organisation today, attested to this in his excellent book titled ”Reflections On The Nigerian Civil War”. That book was factual and honest and I would urge people like Achebe to go and read it well. The self-serving role of Ojukwu and many of the Biafran intelligentsia and elites and their insensitivity to the suffering of their own people during the course of the war was well enunciated in that book. The fact of the matter is that the starvation and suffering of hundreds of thousands of igbo men, women and children during the civil war was seen and used as a convenient tool of propaganda by Ojukwu and that is precisely why he rejected the offer of a food corridor by the Nigerian Government.

When those that belong to the post civil war generation of the igbo are wondering who was responsible for the genocide and mass starvation of their forefathers during the war they must firstly look within themselves and point their fingers at their own past leaders and certainly not Awolowo or Gowon. The person that was solely responsible for that suffering, for that starvation and for those slow and painful deaths was none other than Colonel Emeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu, the leader of Biafra, himself.

I have written many good things about Ojukwu on many occasions in the past and I stand by every word that I have ever said or written about him. In my view he was a man of courage and immense fortitude, he stood against the mass murder of his people in the north and he brought them home and created a safe haven for them in the east. For him, and indeed the whole of Biafra, the war was an attempt to exercise their legitimate right of self-determination and leave Nigeria due to the atrocities that they had been subjected to in the north. I cannot blame him or his people for that and frankly I have always admired his stand.

However he was not infallible and he also made some terrible mistakes, just as all great leaders do from time to time. The fact that he rejected the Nigerian Federal Government’s offer of a food corridor was one of those terrible mistakes and this cost him and his people dearly. Professor Chinua Achebe surely ought to have reflected that in his book as well. When it comes to the Nigerian civil war there were no villains or angels. During that brutal conflict no less than two million Nigerians and Biafrans died and the Yoruba who, unlike others, did not ever discriminate or attack any non-Yorubas that lived in their in their territory before the civil war or carry out any coups or attempted coups, suffered at every point as well. For example prominent Yoruba sons and daughters were killed on the night of the first Igbo coup of January 1966 and again in the northern ”revenge” coup of July 1966.

Many of our people were also killed in the north before the outbreak of the civil war and again in the mid-west and the east during the course and prosecution of the war itself. It was indeed the predominantly Yoruba Third Marine Commando, under the command of General Benjamin Adekunle (the ”Black Scorpion”) and later General Olusegun Obasanjo, that not only liberated the mid-west and drove the Biafrans out of there but they also marched into Igboland itself, occupied it, defeated the Biafran Army in battle, captured all their major towns and forced the Igbo to surrender. Third Marine Commando was made up of Yoruba soldiers and I can say without any fear of contradiction that we the Yoruba therefore paid a terrible and heavy price as well during the war because many of our boys were killed on the war front by the Biafrans.

The sacrifice of these proud sons of the South-West that died in battle to keep Nigeria one must not be belittled, mocked or ignored. Clearly it was not only the Igbo that suffered during the civil war. Neither does it auger well for the unity of our nation for Achebe and the Igbo intelligentsia that are hailing his self-serving book to caste aspersions on the character, role and noble intentions of the late and revered Leader of the Yoruba, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, during the civil war. The man may have made one or two mistakes in the past like every other great leader and of course there was a deep and bitter political division in Yorubaland itself just before the civil war started and throughout the early ’60?s. Yet by no stretch of the imagination can Awolowo be described as an Igbo-hating genocidal maniac and he most certainly did not delight in the starvation of millions of Igbo men, women and children as Achebe has tried to suggest.

My advice to this respected author is that he should leave Chief Awolowo alone and allow him to continue to rest in peace. This subtle attempt to denigrate the Yoruba and their past leaders, to place a question mark on their noble and selfless role in the war and to belittle their efforts and sacrifice to keep Nigeria together as one will always be vigorously resisted by those of us that have the good fortune of still being alive and who are aware of the facts. We will not remain silent and allow anyone, no matter how respected or revered, to re-write history.

Simply put by writing this book and making some of these baseless and nonsensical assertions, Achebe was simply indulging in the greatest mendacity of Nigerian modern history and his crude distortion of the facts has no basis in reality or rationality. We must not mistake fiction and story telling for historical fact. The two are completely different. The truth is that Professor Chinua Achebe owes the Awolowo family and the Yoruba people a big apology for his tale of pure

 

Read More

FEDERALISM: THEORY AND HYPOTHESIS

 

shall adopt the theory of federalism in generating our hypothesis. There is neither an accepted theory of federalism, nor any agreement as to its real nature (Ray, 2006:150). This implies that the term is still shrouded in controversy largely because of contrasting conceptualization. However, commendable attempts have been made by different scholars to demystify the concept. Ray (ibid), distinguishes between a federal principle, a federal constitution and a federal government. By the federal principle, he means ‘the method of dividing powers so that the general and regional governments are each within a sphere, coordinate and independent.’ A federal constitution is one in which the federal principle is predominant. A federal government is that which embodies predominantly a division of powers between general and regional authorities each of which, in its own sphere, is coordinate with others and independent of them. The explanation given to the federal recipe above gives a clear picture of what a federation looks like.

From an operational perspective, Ojo (2002) points out that federalism is reputed to be an effective political and constitutional design for managing complex governmental problems usually associated with ethnic and cultural diversity. Mazrui (1971) asserts that federalism is an institutionalization of compromise relationship. It is not only democratic, complete with the institutionalization of most essential ingredients; it is also creative and flexible enough to incorporate several accommodation formulas.

 

Despite the optimism regarding the ability of federalism to resolve problems of diversity and disparity in the interests of harmony and unity, Jinadu (1979) opines that there is the problem of how to design the federation in such a way as to prevent an ethnic group or a combination of ethnic groups, or one state or a combination of states, from perpetually dominating and imposing their will on other ethnic groups and also contestations over land the issue of indigene- settlers as witnessed in Jos.

 

One cannot discuss federalism in Nigeria outside its implication for the country’s ethnic diversity (Agbu, 2004:3). From a socio-economic perspective, believes that the contestation over federalism in Nigeria has manifested itself not only in the quest for federally generated revenue but also access and control over political power as the country is still searching for unity in diversity.

 

 

CORRELATIONAL HYPOTHESIS

1.     Chaos and crisis weaken the security  of a federal state

2.     Federal principle, constitution and government are design to manage the complex national  problems of human society

3.     Ethnic  diversity makes a combination of ethnic groups or one state or a combination of states dominating and imposing their will on other ethnic groups and also a contestations over land

4.     Unity in diversity  is made to promote harmony and peace among ethnic groups      

                                                                                                    

DIRECTIONAL HYPOTHESIS

1. The contestation over land just as the issue of indigene-settlers as        witnessed in Jos  resulted to crisis and human lives, properties and lands  were vanish

2. The principle of federal character based on ethnic and religious consideration enthrones mediocrity

3. The more ethnic diversity and the less unity in diversity

 

CAUSAL HYPOTHESIS

1. Nigerians in quest for federally generated revenue and control over political power led to conflict among ethnic groups

2. Federalism resolves problems of diversity and disparity in the interest of harmony and unity

3. Nigeria federalism promote diversity which causes inter communal conflict among Nigerians   

                                                                                                      

 

 

DIRECTIONAL HYPOTHESIS IN OPERATIONAL FORM

 

Directional Form

1. The contestation over land just as the issue of indigene-settlers as witnessed in Jos  resulted to crisis and human lives, properties and lands  were vanish

Operational Form

“As natives try to dominate one another over land just as witnessed in Jos, the issue of indigene-settlers often escalate crisis, lives, properties and lands were vanish”

Directional form

2. The principle of federal character based on ethnic and religious consideration enthrones mediocrity

Operational form

          “Equity, fairness and justice in the distribution of national   wealth  to various religious and ethnic groups in a federal state makes the      whole citizen to participate in the political systems”

Directional form

3. The more ethnic diversity and the less unity in diversity

Operational form

          “The more marginalization and injustice in budget allocation,                   the higher ethnic diversity and chaos will arise in the federal          state”                                       

 

             

 

 

 

Read More

THE SOCIAL MOVEMENT COMMONLY CALLED BOKO HARAM: THE WAY/OUT

 

Written By Prof.M M YUSIF(B.U.K POL.SCI.)

That phenomenon called Boko Haram! What is it? What is its identity? As of now no one can say. It is still on process of formation.

Let us assume is not a religious movement! Not of foreign invaders or tribalists sent to cause chaos in Northern Nigeria. Neither a state terrorist organization.

Unfortunately, educated Nigerians have dissolved into street opinion about the subject and the solution. So, we are not making progress to understand and keep on talking about what could be the many dimensions of the way out.

I think, if there is any identity one could give to this phenomenon, it is youth upheaval in the urban centres, simply, urban youth violence.

Nevertheless, like the street talks, the intellectuals located in centres of learning and research are hardly aware that this kind of urban youth violence is a global phenomenon.

Many decades ago, precisely in the 1930s, a period of economic breakdown in the USA, produced distress and confusion in the daily lives of millions of people. This resulted in deepening contradiction in the elite and violence by the urban youth, which became known as unemployed movement, in order to streamline it within the framework of the law of United States of America. In Europe, even recently the youth had taken over some major streets, in some major cities, as a result of the Euro-Zone financial crisis.

In the twenty-first century, there is a resurgence of this global phenomenon in developing countries. In Latin America, liberalization and democratization of the society produced this trend. In Asia it is less, because Nationalist market Economy provided a shock-absorber.

In Urban centres in Africa is very common but is expressed in different form of violence.

Take the case of Nairobi in Kenya and Cairo in Egypt. In Nairobi, this has created a posture of confusion among the elites and in order to manage power, they adjust to maintain power.

There has been youth urban violence, in Northern Nigeria too! Because it is in the North, not in the South of Nigeria, it is being interpreted with sentiment. People do not mind to examine the structure of injustice, the greediness of the elites, elites response to youth problem, etc. in the two regions.

However, from whatever, perspective one takes it, this kind of violence may end up in positive or negative social change which will affect the whole of Nigeria as a nation or even not as a nation.

In many places where this occurred, the changes have become positive. But it depends how they are managed. How?

1. Recognize the movement as a social force which could be used for development of the society.
2. Let it be a social organization which, could talk and write on its demands
3. Let it be or make it to be an open organization, whose activities are governed by legal provisions in the country.
4. It should become an organization to talk openly with any group or any group including the state to negotiate with it.
5. People should not be arrested and killed for whatever reason without facing the law.
6. In case violence persists the law is already there to deal with the case accordingly.

Read More

NANS: A MANY SIDED COIN!

In sequels to my article tittle “FAILED UNIONISM AND THE STATE”.  On a trip to Kebbi state for NANS ZONE A CONVENTION, on which I observed the politics of NANS, how dirty and selfish. Base on Interest, Stakeholders and Godfathers. Cmr. DANJA has trust on me, therefore he pledged my support for another trip to sokoto state for his inauguration as NANS FIN-SEC ZONE A. To also attend the preconvention. I feel honored by him and upon my exams schedules. I grace the occasion and the trip.

Nigerian student movement is as relevant as any other group in the Nigerian society for it development. They have an historical responsibility in political, economic and social activities of the country. As the banning of National Union of Nigerian Students (NUNS) in 1978, student regroups into National Association of Nigerian Student (NANS). Then student unionism was full of patriotism and selfless services for student and by all students, but NANS of today is NANS OF NON-STUDENT! MONEY MAKING! As I observed in kebbi and sokoto state, NANS has different set of groups, clicks and teams as leaders of NANS representing student but representing their pocket as well as their interest. Immediately after the election in 2010 which gave Muh’d Dauda (kafun) the mandate as NANS elected president, his second and third run-up regroup and set their own government as NANS executives and senators, which are addressed as “TORONTOS” or “FRACTIONAL LEADERS”.

They have a full back up and support from some politicians and even state and federal government. They executive programs and workshops.  In other zones same story, Baraya who to some extent can said won the ballot as NANS FIN-SEC. with two vote in  Kebbi state, was not a genuine student from any university OF Nigeria, but he was been  influence by so-called stakeholders of NANS ZONE A. therefore my friend was been advice to join the fractional click of Kole by his A.S.G. after a series of meetings and consultations from elders, he agreed to do so. They were fully inaugurated including his zonal coordinator. Sponsored and empowered by sokoto state government. Indeed we are fully hospitalized by president kole leadership and other comrade especially Dan sajjad his A.S.G. we were lodge in a comfortable hotel and ate three good squeal meals without my kobo.

Congratulation cmr.Danja! since you have the good will and zeal to protects and fight for student right at national level. But my afraid is just clashes in a program with other click and chaos that may arise as after june 12 MKO Abiola, he trevel abroad as Nigerian president and he was arrested and detained for treason which led to his death. May Allah protect and guide you and us throughout your tenure and also help you to accompanist your vision for Nigerian student.

Diary would remember and hope to meet with Alh.Isa Muh’d the former ambassador to Nigeria to Libya, we went to his house in the morning the following day after the NANS senate meeting, on which he welcomed us with keen integrity! He gist us stories of the past system of government and education in compare today and how even student are so united those days. Indeed we learn a lot from his experience in Nigerian politics.

Read More

RELIGION AND POLITICS IN NIGERIA

ABSTRACTS

The need for political stability in Nigeria cannot be overemphasized. Indeed, all segments of the Nigerian society are interested in the political future of the nation. However, this interest is approached from various dimensions. A major interest in the Nigerian polity is the relationship between religion and politics. The Nigerian society is religiously pluralized and this significantly influences political decisions and policies of the nation. On the other hand, there are people who hold the strong opinion that this relationship should not be stressed and that religion and politics should be allowed to operate separately without one interfering with the other. Those who hold this view argued essentially from the position that religion mixed politics is mostly like to imbibe various vices associated with politics. Also politics may not be properly and dispassionately played if mixed with religion. The objectives of this paper is to reexamine the age old controversy on the   relationship that should obtain between religion  and politics in particular. It seeks to bring into focus, the Nigerian situation. This has to do with how particularly the often vexed questions, politicization of religion in Nigeria. The paper will therefore attempt to suggest workable formula for a complementary relationship between religious and politics for a stable, united and progressive Nigeria.

KEY CONCEPTS: Religion, Politics, Pluralism

RELIGION:  A unified system of belief and practices which unite into one moral community all those who adhere to them (Aderibigbe and Aiyegboyin, 1997: 7) Durkheim draws his popular dictum of relationship between the sacred and the profane. He traces religious origin to socio-political associations with their set of rules and regulations.

POLITICS:  The struggle for power which itself is the authority to determine or formulate and execute decisions and policies, which must be accepted by the society……it is the struggle for power of governance, especially executive authority (Onyekpe 1998: 16) according to this argument, the struggle for or the acquisition of power and the reaction of the society to it, depend greatly on the level of political development of the country.

PLURALISM: Implies the existence of many groups of people, whether tribal, ethnic, political or religious.  Therefore, a religious pluralistic society will refer to an environment where there are many religious beliefs, concepts or ideologies.

INTRODUCTION

In recent decades, religion has become an important factor both in public debates and as a means of political mobilization in Nigeria. Today, Muslim and Christian communities and organizations in Nigeria are publicly questioning the legitimacy of secular post-colonial state. One reason for the importance of this topic is that religions often make strong claims on people’s allegiance, and universal religions make claims on all the people rather than just a particular community. For example, Islam has traditionally held that all people owe obedience to Allah’s will. Thus, it is probably inevitable that religious commitment will sometimes come into conflict with the demand of politics. But religious beliefs and practices also potentially support politics in many ways. The extent and form of this support is as important to political thinkers as is the possibility for conflict.

LITERATURE REVIEW

There are wide and varied opinion and perspectives about the relationship between religion and politics in Nigeria. Scholars, researchers, and thinkers came up with different positions about politics and religion, some of these perspectives are;

v According to Adiola  Aderonmu (2006); one of the most disturbing issues in the unification of Nigeria is religion

v Ake, C., Jega, A. and Jinaid (1995,2002,2001) argues, the close interaction between Nigeria state, and religious and faith based organization reflects the widespread perception that Nigeria is not a secular state

v Also, Ozegwu, Kuka, M and Jibril; the existence of several religious in Nigeria was viewed to accentuate regional and ethnic distinctions.

v On the other hand, the political engagement of religious groups and their provision of services in areas where the state has failed to deliver present an ideological and practical challenge to the state. (Corten and Marshal Frutani, 2001:Soares and Otayek, 2007)

v Religious politics do not affect the state in a coherent or uniform way, instead having a complex and even contradictory impact on the state and institutions( Love, 2006; Philpott, 2007)

v S.O. Abogunrin, opines that religion and politics are two inseparable institutions in the human social psyche and structure. He equally asserts that earthly governments are mere agents of God’s theocratic governance of physical and spiritual world ( Abogurin, 1984: 118)

v R.D. Abubakar, suggest that Islam is a way of life, which dictates the political ideology and practice in any Islamic society. He points that, the ideals of Islam is a good guide to political conducts, but the practices of such ideas are usually influenced by the socio-cultural institutions in the society, including politics.

v From another dimension, Religion and politics are entangling in an unholy matrimony in Nigeria. We have to sue for divorce if Nigeria is to be united in purpose and destiny. (Eppele, A.,Okungbowa,S.,Kenneth Cauthen ,2001, 2011, 2006, and 1984)

v In the same vein; Nigeria will not be a modern nation until called a spate, a spate, by separating religion and politics (Asiwaju, T. and Fashewun, F. cited in the tribune 2001)

v Also, according to Pius Oyediran (2011) the removal of religion from politics will create less room for national or federal tension

v According to UNDP report,(1999) that 50.4% of Nigerians are muslims 48.2% are catholic, 31.5% are protestant, and 40.7% belongs to other Christians denomination. While igbos in the east and Ijwas in the south are 98% Christians catholic

RELIGION AND POLITICS IN NIGERIA: THE INTER PLAY

After a cross examination and re-examination of various literature and evidences gathered and the one just presented by my colleague, we came to realize that there is a serious clear manifestation of the interplay between religions and politics in Nigerian political arena. Therefore, by way of establishing our arguments, we employ some yardsticks or tools in analysing the area interplay between religion and politics;

v Appointment and placement

v Election and electioneering process ( voting behavior)

v National politics

v Indigene and settlers factors

v Resource distribution

CONCLUSION

This paper is concluded with the assertion that the over roll effect or influence of religion on Nigerian politics has been much more negative than positive. This is because, it has resulted in so many catastrophic crises with so many attendant consequences ( Tourekaza Toure 2005). Such crises include the intractable  jos crisis, the miss world crisis, the Lagos and Shagamu crises and many more

In spite of the foregoing negative assertion, religion has equally been serving as a stabilizing force in Nigeria, especially if drawn from the two dominant religions in Nigeria, that is Islam and Christianity and the role played by the two dominate religious bodies, that is the supreme council for Islamic affairs (SCIA) and the Christian Association of Nigeria(CAN).

Read More