Nigeria and her leaders

By

Max Siollun

"The trouble with Nigeria is simply and squarely a failure of leadership" says Chinua Achebe.

From Lagos, to Dallas, to London. Observe any conversation between a gathering of Nigerians and it will not take long to hear grumbling about the poor calibre of Nigeria's leaders. Every manner of invective is usually employed to appraise the governing style of Nigeria's leaders.

Nigerians in Diaspora in Europe and North America often claim (honestly in my opinion) that they would catch the first plane home if and when Nigeria gets a government that means business. This national obsession with good government shows that Nigerians are starving for principled leadership. This is why they welcome every new government, and each new Head of State is hailed as a messiah. This constant hope that a new leader will bring salvation is exemplified by the tirade of criticism levelled at Olusegun Obasanjo when in 1993, he dared to suggest that the winner of the June 12 1993 presidential election, Moshood Abiola, was "not the messiah". However, Nigerians have been let down so often by their leaders that it will take a very special character to wake them from the politically comatose state they are now in.

LEADERSHIP: THE PROBLEM

The argument that Nigeria's problems have been caused by inadequate leadership is true only up to a point. Due to their psyche being battered by years of misrule, and their hopes dashed time and time again, Nigerians have grown a passive and cynical indifference to bad governance. Cynically accepting their lot, Nigerians behave as if there is nothing they do can to free themselves from the shackles of bad governance. They ought to know better. We could learn a thing or two from events in South Africa over the past fourty years. Despite being repressed by an evil system, black South Africans rose up and defied the excesses of the Apartheid regime in South Africa. After an unrelenting campaign for equality, the regime they fought against has been dismantled and the black majority now control South Africa's destiny.

Nigerians themselves must accept some of the blame for the excesses of their leaders. Rather than blindly copying the behaviour of their leaders, Nigerians could, and should, have dictated the manner in which their leaders govern. Instead, Nigerians have enjoyed a sheep-like relationship with their governments. Blindly following the example (good or bad) of leading government figures seems to be a national trait. A few examples will illustrate this point. After Nigeria's first military coup in 1966, a young army Major announced on the airwaves that there would be a revolution and promised dire consequences for all those found to be taking part in corrupt practices. An expatriate working in Nigeria at the time declared that "It was a good time to be alive.......everyone worked hard at his own job, anxious to prove his allegiance to the spirit of the revolution". Seven months later, northern soldiers seized the reins of government and murdered their Igbo colleagues. Northern civilians copied the actions of their soldiers and killed Igbo civilians.

THE BAD EXAMPLE OF IBB

In 1985, Ibrahim Babangida took over as Nigeria's Head of State. His tactic of using money and corruption to solve every problem has destroyed the moral fabric of Nigerian society. Yet rather than speak out against the scandalous corruption of Babangida, Nigerians simply copied him and succeeded in bringing corruption to the doorstep of each and every Nigerian. Seeing the tremendous wealth that corruption amassed for Babangida, many Nigerians figured that they could also get rich quick by employing his methods. Thereby making bribery the de facto method of survival in Nigeria. It is because of Babangida that you must bribe an official to do a job which he/she is already paid to do anyway. Nigerians moan about the spectacular corruption that permeates every level of their society; oblivious to the fact that they contributed to the ethical destruction of their environment by asking for a "dash" at every opportunity.

Only twice in Nigerian history has there been mass uprisings at perceived unjust rule. Both occurred in the late 1960s. Firstly, northern mobs and soldiers rose up and murdered Igbos whom they felt were bent on monopolising the state's resources for themselves at the exclusion of their northern counterparts. The following year, Igbos themselves seceded and sought refuge in a self protective secession from what they felt was a northern dominated Nigeria. The solution to the problem lies with Nigeria's leaders. Rather than teaching bad habits to their people, they should seek to be beyond reproach and use their own good conduct to inject similar characteristics into the people whom they govern.

We briefly had a leader who threatened to put Nigeria on the straight and narrow in the mid-1970s. Murtala Muhammed was a man that possessed typically Nigerian traits; a forceful manner, a quick temper, and tough talk. Yet for six months, he was the darling of the Nigerian public. He managed to capture the idealism of Nigerians in a manner that has not been replicated in the 25 years since his death.

The fiery human rights lawyer Gani Fawehimni once remarked that "this country has never produced a leader whose basic interest is the welfare of the people, a leader strong enough, resolute enough to usher in a progressive Nigeria....we need a leader strong like Mao Zedong, resolute like John Kennedy, ruthless like Fidel Castro". Quite a tall order you may think. However, in a country with over 100 million citizens - many of who have been educated at the best academic establishments in the world, is it really improbable that a handful of those citizens have the interest of their country at heart? I do not agree entirely with Gani's assessment of our past leaders. Every one of them has possessed admirable traits - but most have declined to use those traits in a manner which would benefit Nigeria.

GOOD OLD JACK

The boyish smile and patent bonhomie of Gowon are factors that gained him the goodwill of foreign governments. The ability to gain the support of foreign governments is not one that should be taken lightly. Recent events in America and Afghanistan have shown that no nation is an island unto itself, and that events in one country inevitably carry consequences in another. Gowon's patience and dislike of force as a method of resolving conflict were perfect for the volatile scenario that existed in 1966. Gowon would probably have been viewed as our nation's greatest Head of State had he stepped down immediately after the civil war. Yet by clinging on for another five years, he allowed Nigerians to view him as something other than a war hero. His admirably conciliatory nature was viewed as indecision in peacetime Nigeria. He should have realised that his job was done after his victory over the Biafran forces. After the magnanimous manner in which he treated his defeated enemy, he could have become a respected statesmanlike figure. Instead he allowed the trappings of office to keep in State House for too long, and to be to paint him as just another military dictator.

BUHARI AND IDIAGBON

With the benefit of hindsight, the overthrow of Buhari and Idiagbon, and their replacement by Babangida was one of the worst things to happen to Nigeria. I wonder whether those who advocated their removal are not now cursing the pain and misfortune that their successor brought to them. It is rumoured that the winner of the annulled 1993 presidential election; Moshood Abiola, sponsored the coup that removed Buhari from power. Seven years after the coup he sponsored, the men Abiola helped get to power stopped his presidential ambition, and placed him in detention until he died. Even though perceived as repressive and high handed at the time, the policies of Buhari's era were mild in comparison to the mass arrests, torture, corruption and political assassinations that characterised the Babangida and Abacha regimes. It is ironic that Nigerians now regard the era of the taciturn Buhari and Idiagbon as a golden age for Nigerian discipline, and lament the corruption and indiscipline that has flourished since their removal.

THE KHALIFA

Even the reviled Sani Abacha possessed one characteristic (ruthlessness) which if harnessed properly, and targeted accurately, could have provided a strong antidote to the more criminally minded elements of our society (a "dark avenger" if you like). Unfortunately, rather than employing his ruthless streak against the evil men in our society, Abacha encouraged them, and instead directed his traits at the people who could have moved this country forward.

ETHNICITY

Nigerians only remember the ethnic origin or their leader when he fails to produce the goods. I am convinced that ordinary Nigerians could not care less what part of the country their Head of State comes from so long as he addresses their concerns. Two examples prove this point. When Murtala Muhammed was assassinated on Friday February 13th 1976, students at the University of Benin marched into the streets to lament the death of their hero and condemn the abortive military coup which led to his death. Murtala Muhammed was a Muslim from the ancient city of Kano (the city which Gani Fawehinmi has described as the "commercial centre of Hausa-Fulani power") in the far north. As far as I know, Benin is not a northern, or Muslim city. Yet its residents showed solidarity with a leader they admired, and paid no attention to his religion or state of origin.

A few weeks ago, the current President Olusegun Obasanjo paid a visit to Zamfara state. The women of the state defied an order by their own (northern) governor and flocked en masse to catch a glimpse of Nigeria's president. The implications of this seemingly innocuous incident should not be understated. These women discarded social and religious taboos to see a man whom many of their kinsmen regard as an infidel. It is simple actions such as these which convince me that so called ethnicism, "power shift", and a belief that political power is a "birthright" of one region are political ploys by corrupt and selfish politicians and are not matters which ordinary Nigerians concern themselves with.

THE WAY FORWARD

I hold the view, that a strong and selfless leader could unite Nigeria and unleash its frightening potential. I liken Nigeria to a world class athlete who possesses talent in abundance, but only employs that talent sporadically (did I hear someone say "Nwankwo Kanu"?!).

While we clamour for secession, and Sovereign National Conference, the simple truth is that Nigerians want to see their country become great, and want to be around when it happens. Despite the lacerating criticism they often direct at their own country, Nigerians are prone to open, chest thumping displays of patriotism. Even the most ardent Nigerian critic will suddenly turn into a proud flag waving patriot when the talented Nigerian soccer team take the field. When Nigeria plays football, Nigerians are suddenly conspicuous - anxious to show members of other countries that they hail from the same land as Kanu, George, West and Aghahowa (even if they are not from the same region/religion as these players).

Nigeria is a country permanently on the brink of greatness. We simply need a catalyst to unleash that potential for greatness. That catalyst is strong leadership. A mild leader who treats errant Nigerians with kid gloves will not succeed. What Nigeria needs is an incorruptible leader with a vision. It will take a strongman in the mold of Murtala or Idiagbon to turn Nigeria around. The rot of corruption and mismanagement has set in so deep that it will take a person with unbreakable spirit, endless stamina, and ruthless principle to transform Nigeria into the giant we all know it can be. You may think that such a creature does not exist in Nigeria.....but I am already waiting for him.

As Charles de Gaulle once said: "Men are of no importance, what counts is he who commands".