NIGERIA ON THE MARCH TO THE PROMISE LAND

NIGERIA ON THE MARCH TO THE PROMISE LAND: CANAAN STILL NOT IN SIGHT

Many Nigerians had expected a magical resolution to the plethora of problems plaguing the country with the "triumphant" entry of the may 1999 operator of government machinery. There seemed to be an avalanche and a diatribe of views and an acceptance on what necessarily must be done to put the country back on course in its near purest envisaged form canvassed by those in support for a just federation.

Many honest and patriotic Nigerians had skeptically pointed out that, the general elections of May 1999 was not in itself an attempt to ushering in democracy nor was it seen as a part of the solution to the teething problems besieging the country, but was seen rather as a ploy by a certain cabal, to keep the country the way it is structurally disfigured to further the perpetuate the advantages of some select few.

Prior to the coming to power of late Sani Abacha, the consensus of opinion then and till date was overwhelmingly in favor of the convening of a sovereign national conference to tackle and discuss the problems of the country. Acceptance to convene that elusive conference became tempting bait by successive government to remain or gain control over power at the center. What Abacha did particularly the generic contraption he constituted by the name of Constitutional conference is now history. In the same vein, the present day politicians and leaders have earlier canvassed the need for the almighty conference and the dream towards achieving resolutions to the country’s problem based on that need. But it is rather sad that upon assuming the reigns of power, the mere mention of sovereign national conference, ascribes to it’s advocates the devils mark tag of being" unpatriotic Nigerians". All too soon Nigerians are told of the unrealistic and unworkability of the "so called" conference. This different singsong has become the hall mark of Nigerian leadership and accounts for why there has been no real progress towards uniting the country or evolving a nationally accepted national goals, ideas and philosophy of the type of nation Nigerians desires.

Prior to the tragedy of June 1993, the various issues of national question was surmised and viewed basically along ethnic divide. It was convenient then to group the issues into eastern, western, northern and the more distinct minority questions. What constitute the question and what provides the answer is defined mainly from a relative understanding. But the events of June 12, 1999 elevated to a pedestal, a national consensus for solving the problems of the country. Although the core issues then centers on leadership and the military. The regional definition given to addressing the national question was reflected in the fierce advocacy and opposition for and against the conference itself.

Although, while several Nigerians acknowledged the existence of a problem with the country, there was no unanimity of what needs to be done and how

Given this scenario, some writers hold the views that Late M.K.O Abiola was the sacrificial "Passover" lamb to usher in a quick semi addressing of the issues in the question particularly, the western question whose agitation had always centered on rotational leadership. That the mere fact and salient understanding by all major politicians in allowing the western zone to produce the two presidential candidates for the may 1999 election, is a major break through in resolving the western question. It is to be clearly understood that, because of the way the federation is structured, leadership and resource allocation and control forms the core of the national question regardless of what definition that is given to it. But rotational leadership does not entirely solve the problem.

The quest for political power determines how resources are allocated. This unwholesome arrangement, is the tragedy of our times. It defiles all known political science theories of federalism, yet our leaders urge us to forge ahead with a mongrel type of government that lacks any conceptual definition or format. There exist divergent variation or angles to the myriad of problems with the country. It is fair to acknowledge and appreciate the fears and suspicion associated with the "Northern question" to wit: holding tenaciously to power at the center as the only safeguard and guarantee against being marginalized by the" more economically and educationally advanced south". If these fears are real or imaginary, then it is also fair to accord even more understanding to the "eastern question" whose cries are for a fair and just resource allocation and distribution, particularly when majority of these wealth or resources are produced by the eastern region.

If Nigeria must move ahead, there must be acknowledgement of the existence of these problems and solution proffered instead of allowing for divine solution or retaining the status quo. Thee Northern question appears to have been addressed, as substantiated by various steps taken by past leadership to provide these guarantees. First since independence, the country has been ruled by more military leaders and civilians from the northern region than the rest of the country, secondly, the north has produced more top rated military brass than the other regions combined, thirdly no non- northern had held the position of defense minister or that of the federal capital territory, it may have been a coincidence, Albeit, such coincidental occurrences follow a predictable pattern too close to ignore. All this shows some inherent justification to alley the fears of the north.

More than any other question, the non resolution of the eastern question gave rise to the pogrom of 1966 and the conditions have not significantly changed three decades after. The upsurge in agitation for rights to self determination by the Izons perhaps after it was started by late Adaka Boro are all indications that some thing is still not right .Our leaders have not really inquired why people are driven to seek succession if they are assured adequate guarantees and justice cum equity? Rather, brute force and campaign of calumny are mounted to quell such legitimate aspiration of a people for self actualization under the guise of preserving national unity, a unity that has still not been defined nor let alone negotiated.

A half measure solution to the various problems makes the problems of the country more dangerous like what half education does to the mind. It is in the light of the awareness of this that the 13% derivation further exacerbates the problems than it ought to solve .The people in the Niger delta and else where in the eastern part of the country demands and deserves an absolute derivation principles and formulae for sharing national resources .It is been done like that elsewhere and it beats common imagination why Nigeria would be different. Those who argue to the contrary have not stated publicly what they fear in granting the implementation of these formulae.

Because our leaders have not shown genuine intention backed up by deeds and policy towards tackling these problems with the country, it is not uncommon to observe how Nigerians act like strange bed fellows in same boat. As a result, there is the absence of a feeling of patriotism among Nigerians towards Nigeria. This is further accentuated by a high degree of intolerance, attachment to ethnic origin and mutual suspicion of one another is rampant. In most federations like Canada and even the U.S, any component unit that decides to disengaged from the union, is not coerced, but negotiated like the most recent and peaceful plebiscite in Quebec in Canada. The preeminence given to ethnic attachment, promoted to a glorification of the "every one for himself…Nigeria for us all" aphorism.

In synopsis, only Nigerians can solve the problems with the country. Nigerians should discard any thought of going back to the pre- 1960 arrangements vide introducing regional government, rather, it can only solve it’s problem if it is determined to honestly form a united and stable federation with a dream and well stated ideals on which the country is to be run. Its aspiration must be understood by all and that should form the Nigeria dreams. If Nigerians still clamor for separate ways nearly after forty years of independence, it is clearly an indication, that all is not well. Chinua Achebe aptly demonstrated the Nigerian leaders insincerity of purpose in his book, "Trouble with Nigeria", he listed as one of them that, instead of our leaders accepting the promotion of official government policy of tribalism, soft words like "catchment area, federal character, zoning system etc " are substituted in their stead and coined.

It is time for Nigerians to rewrite the entity called Nigeria, agitation for justice, equity etc cannot be wished away by prayers alone nor by wave of hand or more by simply ignoring and refusing to accept the existence of the problem or by continually blaming colonial heritage. It is time for Patriotic Nigerians to take the bull by the horn.

I salute you all in your struggle to emancipate our country from the forces of darkness in hope for the emergence of the glorious dawn. Happy New Year and hope for many years of changes.

Ejiofor, Ritchie Esq is a renowned commentator on national and international isues