Nigeria Content Online

Victor Ehikhamenor

Kadaria Ahmed

Olu Jacob

Stephen Davis

The international
community is closely watching Nigeria as the nation moves closer to
national elections. The international interest in free and fair
elections is not unexpected as Nigeria continues to embed democracy.
But the international community is becoming very concerned at the
emergence and spread of violence simultaneously in several regions of
the country. International travel warnings against travel to Nigeria
have been updated.

The recent
resurgence of violence in the North led by Boko Haram, a self professed
Al Qa’eda affiliate, coupled with killings and associated destruction
of property in the Middle Belt, have compounded a worrying development
of militia returning to the swamps of the Niger Delta.

In the Niger Delta,
gangs, undoubtedly well paid for their work, attacked a gathering of
supporters of Timi Alaibe outside his home in Opokuma community in
Baylesa State. Some of Alaibe’s supporters were murdered. Alaibe had
earlier narrowly missed death in an attempt on his life when his convoy
of vehicles was attacked on the road from Port Harcourt to Opokuma.
Ironically and almost unbelievably it is Alaibe that is the target of a
so-called arrest warrant over the incident, demonstrating that nothing,
no matter how ridiculous and repugnant is beyond those seeking to
derail Alaibe’s campaign.

It will be recalled
that Alaibe recently relinquished his appointment as President
Jonathan’s Adviser on the Niger Delta in order that he might contest
the elections. Alaibe missed out on the PDP ticket and is standing on a
Labour Party ticket for the governorship of Bayelsa State. As
presidential adviser Alaibe guided the amnesty process and
rehabilitation of the former militia but the process has begun to
falter since Alaibe’s departure.

Prior to the PDP
primaries that gave the nod to incumbent Bayelsa Governor Timi Sylva,
bombings disrupted the campaign of PDP Bayelsa governorship aspirant
Rufus-Spiff.

These very violent
election related acts compound a resurgence in Niger Delta violence as
the JTF launched operations to capture militants, led by John Togo, who
have spurned the amnesty and returned to the swamps to reinvigorate the
campaign previously led by MEND.

In the North, Boko
Haram is widening its activities and, like the gangs in the Niger Delta
some years ago, resorting to robbery to accumulate funds to purchase
weapons. MEND later began to rely on kidnapping as its major source of
funds. Boko Haram has until recently relied on funds from individual
patrons and sources outside Nigeria.

In the Middle Belt
there can be little doubt that the rising violence is connected with
events further north and designed to destabilise the government in
order to portray a federal government incapable of protecting its
citizens. Bombings, destruction of homes and places of worship are
heightening tension and testing the military’s ability to deploy and
maintain peace.

Escalating conflict
in each of the South, Middle Belt and the North regions is a scenario
that international analysts have long feared would plunge Nigeria into
disarray, result in a total breakdown in law and order and the collapse
of government.

Thus it was in this
context that the NSA, General Azazi (rtd.), addressed a range of groups
in London last week to provide a frank assessment of Nigeria’s security
situation.

Prior to the NSA’s
London meetings analysts were factoring in the possibility of a coup if
the situation further deteriorated. Azazi gave credible, frank
assessments that he was able to adequately defend when openly
questioned. As a former military commander and four star general
Azazi’s views on Nigeria’s security capabilities are more credible to
the international community than those of most Nigerian and foreign
politicians. Most people in the audiences revised their views to more
optimistic positions following Azazi’s addresses.

Christina
Katsouris, one of the most credible international oil analysts with
many years of experience commentating on Nigeria published her views on
the current situation in Nigeria in “Energy Compass” (www.
energyintel.com) “The most likely scenario is that Jonathan leads the
PDP to election victory, but with a smaller margin than secured by past
winners.” Katsouris was a little jaded about the Niger Delta where, she
said, “governors who have kept militants at bay with government cash
(may) prove unable to satisfy new gangs sprouting up to demand their
own handouts. This could promote a new round of attacks on the oil
sector and political instability, and further militarization in the
Niger Delta.” Overall, the NSA’s visit to London was well timed and
proved to inject factual, credible information into the market that can
have a significant effect on Nigeria’s ability to attract investment.
The challenge now before the government both federal and at state level
is to work together to ensure there is no escalation in conflict and
that existing flashpoints are dampened down to allow free and fair
elections; this of course means not only apprehending the gangs but
also their political godfathers and funders as in the recent case of
the arrest of one of the local financial backers of Boko Haram in
Maiduguri. No “Big Man” in Nigeria should believe he is immune from
apprehension.

It’s easy to affect
cynicism about revelations in the various leaks currently flooding
local and international media. We tell ourselves that there is nothing
being exposed that we didn’t really know already. Or we caution
ourselves this is only one diplomat’s view, not his or her government’s
official policy. And anyway, the documents are not authentic; they are
made up, or doctored.

In countries where
the population is used to being lied to by their rulers, the news that
our own late President Umaru Yar’Adua connived at deceiving the
Nigerian people about the state of his health – albeit with the alleged
good (but ultimately mistaken) intention of “avoiding unrest” – is not
really news. After all, compared to the monumental deceptions of the
Abacha era, when our own government was planting bombs and killing its
own soldiers in order to blame the National Democratic Coalition and
justify a crackdown on dissent, the Yar’Adua deception is relatively
small beer. Worse, its chief victim was Yar’Adua himself. That he was
ill could hardly be denied for ever, but one cannot help feeling deeply
sorry that he waited too long, dismissing the pleas of genuinely
well-meaning Nigerians that he should forget about the presidency and
go and take care of his failing health, until it was too late for him
to make any autonomous decision.

And if WikiLeaks
tells us that Governor Bukola Saraki of Kwara State was running the
Governors’ Forum show and strengthening (as he thought) his own
position for a run at the presidency, well, we kind of knew that too.

So when the
international Doha-based news channel, Al Jazeera, and the British
Guardian newspaper began leaking ‘The Palestine Papers’ on the ‘peace
talks’ between the Palestinian Authority and Israel, one might be
tempted to brush them off in the same way: faked, doctored or one-sided
etc.

Yet the side that
the leaks show exposes three major points about the issue at the heart
of the malaise in the Middle East: first, the extent to which the
Palestinian Authority was prepared to compromise on absolutely
everything – including Jerusalem, the right of the Palestinian people
to return to their ancestral homeland, and the right to its own armed
forces (for anything except ‘internal security’) – in its desperate
anxiety to declare success and establish a Palestinian State.

Second, the
stone-faced rejection of those concessions by Israel, raising hard
questions about whom exactly is the missing “partner for peace”. And
third, confirmation that those whom the Palestinian Authority considers
to be its real enemies are not in Israel, but a range of internal
rivals, starting with Hamas and running the whole gamut of discontented
citizens and even ostensible allies, such as the 2005 commander of the
al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, Hassan al-Malhoun. Although al-Mahoun was
eventually assassinated by Israel, lead Palestinian negotiator Saeb
Erekat’s admission (and complaint) to Israel that: “We have even killed
our own people to maintain order and the rule of law” shows how much
the Palestinian Authority’s focus had changed.

While the
spluttering and unconvincing denials of this level of complicity are
hardly surprising, the Authority’s 2009 report that its crackdown on
Hamas in the West Bank had resulted in 3,700 arrests appears to be
matched by facts on the ground.

Indeed, it is easy
to be cynical, and tell oneself that this is what must be expected,
that this is realpolitik, politics as the art of the possible rather
than politics as the dream of pie in the sky.

Yet against a
background of instant denials by the Palestinian Authority, one can’t
help wondering not only – if peace cannot be achieved on these terms,
on what terms can it be achieved – but what does this mean for those
caught in the middle, squeezed between uncompromising extremists on
both sides?

The Palestinian
Authority is desperately resiling from some of the concessions offered
in the face of the furious rejection expressed by its own people, but
does it seriously hope for better terms? If it does, what happens while
it waits for these to materialise? What hope for the beleaguered
inhabitants of Gaza, still under Israeli siege? What hope for the
thousands of Palestinians detained in Israeli jails, most languishing
without trial sustained only by the hope that perhaps they might be
released as arbitrarily as they were detained? What hope for ordinary
Palestinian men, women and children living out a rigidly constrained
existence under the daily humiliations of Israel’s overarching control?

Although most
attention is on Palestine, with little pressure on Israeli leaders to
explain just how much more blood they hope to wring from Palestinian
stone, one must also wonder what hope for ordinary Israelis such as
those who fled repressive regimes in the former Soviet Union with
dreams of freedom, or the racist segregation of apartheid South Africa.
It may be easier for Israeli citizens to push the effects of
occupation, intransigence and the absence of peace to the back of their
minds. But they are still there.

And however cynical
I might tell myself I am about the ‘Pali-Leaks’, in reality I can’t
help thinking that the deep depression about Palestine that settles
down on me as the revelations, reactions and retractions keep on
coming, must be magnified a thousand times in the actual arena of the
stalemate.

The manner in which the crisis in Cote d’Ivoire is
resolved or not resolved, will determine whether Africa embarks on a
major democratic regression. If the continent allows a third African
president to lose an election and continue in power, we would be saying
goodbye to any president losing an election and accepting alternation
of power. The Ivorien crisis is therefore a battle for deepening
African democracy.

According to Laurent Gbagbo, another name for God
is time. He is referring to his capacity over time to convince African
leaders not to fight him so that when their turn comes, they have a
precedent that would support their authoritarian penchants. In early
January, Africa and the international community were unambiguous that
they would forcefully remove Gbagbo if he refuses to hand over to the
winner of the presidential elections, Alassane Ouattara. And then the
flip-flopping started.

First, the Ghanaian president, John Atta Mills
expressed his reservation about the use of force. He was followed
Liberia’s Ellen Johnson and then Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni who
now openly opposes recognition of Mr. Ouattara until a thorough
investigation of the November elections is conducted.

Jacob Zuma, the South African leader has
questioned why we should support only one side thereby suggesting he is
for the Zimbabwe/Kenya style power sharing arrangement. Of course the
problem of power sharing is that if it continues, all incumbents in
Africa would be convinced that they could negotiate retaining power
after losing elections.

The change of heart that is emerging among some
African leaders is due to taking Gbagbo’s threat seriously. He has
openly affirmed that the millions of Africans who live in the country
would be targets of any attempt to remove him by force. He is not only
talking, he is also acting. According to the recent Human Rights Watch
report, Gbagbo’s security forces in Cote d’Ivoire have carried out
torture, rape, forced disappearances and extra-judicial killings during
the political crisis between the country’s incumbent president and the
internationally recognized winner of November’s presidential vote. They
detail how security forces and militiamen loyal to incumbent president
Laurent Gbagbo are imposing a reign of terror against supporters of the
United Nations-certified winner of Cote d’Ivoire’s presidential
election, Alassane Ouattara. According to Corinne Dufka, the Human
Rights Watch senior researcher for West Africa:

“Of course, we went into our investigation looking
at the potential for attacks by supporters on both sides of the
political divide. What we found was that the vast majority of them
involving security forces and militia have targeted Ouattara
supporters, northern Ivoriens, as well as West African immigrants,”

Gbagbo’s message to the world is that either he is
left to rule forever or he will massacre people. As was the case in the
preparation of the Rwandan massacre, he has been using radio and
television to spread hate speech to prepare for the massacre. Already,
killings, rapes and forced disappearances are increasing by the day. If
the world allows Gbagbo to maintain the checkpoints in Abidjan used for
committing these atrocities, then a very sad page is being turned in
Africa.

I believe that if Gbagbo is allowed to continue
with his delays and tactics of intimidation, the legitimate winner of
the elections who also has armed forces at his disposal would be
obliged to confront Gbagbo’s forces both to defend those being attacked
and to reclaim his mandate. This would open the route to a long drawn
out civil war, which would be a terrible outcome. Gbagbo is stubborn
and the use of force is clearly inevitable. In this case, the best
option is to engage in a surgical operation to remove him as quickly as
possible. As Gbagbo has been boasting, his closest allies are delays
and equivocation.

ECOWAS must maintain its resolve to use all
possible means, including force, to enforce the principles of the
ECOWAS Supplementary Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance and the
African Union Charter on Democracy, Elections and Good Governance as
quickly as possible.

The elections in Cote d’Ivoire are part of the
long and painstaking attempts to save the country from the ravages of
civil war. It’s a country that was not too long ago one of the shining
stars of stability and prosperity in the West African region. The
prosperity was based on encouraging African immigration. Today, 40% of
the country’s population are descendants of immigrants. To prevent a
long drawn out civil war between the Gbagbo-controlled Southern army
and the Forces Nouvelles (New Forces) controlled by the Northerners,
the third force from ECOWAS must intervene quickly to return the
country to peace and prosperity. Let’s go back to referring to Cote
d’Ivoire as the country that is the model of the ‘African miracle.’

Barack Obama is noticeably greyer than he was some
24 months ago on the campaign trail. You can put it down to the weight
of the office, but his greyness has become a hot topic following a
picture taken of Obama during the state dinner in honour of visiting
Chinese president, Hu Jintao, where Obama’s hair, so his country people
say, appeared to be darker in photos taken in the evening than it had
been in a photo taken the same morning.

The question agitating the minds of some who have no serious issues to worry about was: Had Obama dyed his hair?

But knowing the wonderful ways of airbrushing and
Photoshop the question could just as easily be had someone done the
dying for him? In different pictures of the same dinner with his wife
standing at his side, Mr. Obama’s hair appears as flecked with grey as
we have come to know it.

Ordinarily it would not matter; vanity is
universal and non-gender specific and it is not listed among the seven
deadly sins, which are: wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy and
gluttony. But these days the emphasis that is laid on appearance and
creating the right perception, (who cares about reality?) shows how
skewed certain values have become in the socially narcissistic world we
are building.

It is quite insidious this enthronement of the “me” culture:

It comes through in rap music where for many
artists the subject is the self, the language is the extolling of the
self, and the tone is the affirmation of the self:

It absolutely pervades the corridors of the social
networking site, Facebook, where members can constantly update their
profile pictures and dictate just how they want to be seen, in other
words you become the sole filter of the me you present to the circle of
friends you interact with and ultimately you can create and manipulate
the brand of you that you wish people to see:

It has become the be all and end all of fashion;
you have to get the look, the clothes, make up, hair, accessories and
all; because that creates the right impression, that will ultimately
determine how you will be treated by others. This is the underlying
premise of the programmes that flood the Style Network on Television
channels all over this continent that our daughters feast their eyes on
everyday. This is underlined by fake ‘reality’ shows of so called
celebrities ostensibly living their vacuous lives in front of a camera,
scripting their experiences for ‘entertainment’. In the final analysis,
what is real about a reality show? Is it not just another brand of
entertainment?

The Nigerian government decided it was going to do
the same kind of put up job for the country. It was going to rebrand
Nigeria, like some cheap commercial item. The fact that citizens were
so infuriated by the idea is the biggest affirmation of our genuineness
and authenticity as a people.

Tony Blair became prime minister of the UK with a
full head of hair in 1997 and with Bill Clinton and Al Gore, the trio’s
lustrous locks signalled the advent of a new energy in the leadership
of the Western world. By the time Blair left office, the hairline was
receding and you could see through the thinning. The bloom was gone;
the reputation had taken a battering from the disaster of the
non-existent weapons of mass destruction and the painful untidy mess
that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had engendered. Tony Blair is
revisiting those decisions he made over people’s lives in the enquiries
that are being conducted now into how he led his country into that war.

For all his 84 years there is not a strand of grey
in Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe’s jet-black curls, or for that
matter Italian leader Papa Silvio Berlusconi’s slicked back locks.
These two examples can clearly be attributed to vanity, and there is no
sin in that. But it does make you wonder that in spite of the fact that
Nigerian cultures generally extol age and hold in reverence the
evidence of wisdom and longevity written in the features of those who
have acquired it, few of our leaders leave office looking as if the
weight of leadership left a mark on them.

Thirty-nine years and 1 day after Colonel
Acheampong sent Dr. Kofi Abrefa Busia into exile from Ghana by staging
a military coup on January 13, 1972, former President Zine el-Abidene
Ben Ali of Tunisia and his family fled Tunisia. Mr. Ali had been
overthrown by a wave of mass civilian demonstrations, which led to
General Rachid Ammar and the Tunisian military withdrawing its support
for the continued existence of his regime.

I visited Tunis for the first time in November
2010. This centre of the “Jasmine Revolution” had impressed me as a
modern modest metropolis and, judging by attire, a city of liberated
womenfolk. I had also been struck, though, by the ubiquitous presence
of policemen.

Yes, the fear was palpable in tiny gestures-my
taxi driver who would tap down my hands when I would point at the
American Embassy or even the street leading up to the presidential
palace. Tunis seemed one of the cleaner and more orderly cities in
Africa, seemingly under perpetual construction. In fact, the 2010
Ibrahim Index of African Governance ranked Tunisia as the 8th best
governed state in Africa, one spot behind Ghana, one spot ahead of
Egypt and twenty-eight spots ahead of Nigeria.

How could its regime be overthrown so swiftly?
Does Mr. Ali’s loss of power herald an outbreak of fruit and flower
named revolutions in Africa, akin to those of Eastern Europe?

The Ibrahim Index calculates the overall quality
of a country’s institutions for governing the daily lives of its
residents by comparing their records in four spheres of life: safety
and the rule of law; participation and human rights; sustainable
economic opportunity; and human development. The ideal African country
evidences its human development by possessing a well educated and
healthy population, is blessed with a competitive economic landscape in
which private businesses grow with minimal administrative hassle, has
an electoral system in which its citizens are able to organise to
change their rulers with minimal surveillance, and individuals do not
have to fear for their safety or suffer unequal treatment by the courts
or governmental agencies.

Tunisia scored 35th for participation and human
rights, compared to Cote d’Ivoire’s 46th , Egypt’s 39th, Nigeria’s
33rd, Ghana’s 6th, and South Africa’s 3rd standing. It ranked 15th in
the category of safety and rule of law, compared to a rank of 6th for
Ghana, 7th for South Africa, 11th for Egypt, 38th for Nigeria, and 48th
for Cote d’Ivoire.

Sustainable economy opportunity is a strong
category for Tunisia. It has the 5th best economic opportunity in
Africa, versus 6th for Egypt, 7th for South Africa, 12th for Ghana,
33rd for Nigeria, and 38th for Cote d’Ivoire. Best of all is its
ranking in the field of human development. The Mo Ibrahim Foundation
places Tunisia as the 3rd best African country in the realm of human
development, one position ahead of Mauritius, three and five positions
ahead, respectively, of South Africa and Egypt, nine spots ahead of
Ghana in 12th position, with Nigeria clocking in for the 32nd rank and
Cote d’Ivoire, once again, sauntering to the 38th spot.

The juxtaposition of a low score for political
participation and high scores for economic opportunity and human
development is a warning to those who believe that human beings are
content with a fine education, good jobs and not much else. It is a
slow burning catalyst for political upheaval. Yet, the Ibrahim Index
provides heartening news for despots.

Toughness, backed by unflinching military support,
can smother popular uprisings and unrest in the short run. Indeed, it
can defy democracy itself. Cote d’Ivoire rejected its former president
in democratic elections in November 2010, a few weeks before Muhammad
Bouzid immolated himself in a petrol fuelled blaze in Sidi Bouzid. Mr.
Laurent Gbagbo remains in power; Mr. Ali is in asylum.

Why?

The Ivorien military stands ready to kill its own
citizens; the Tunisian army refused to shoot its own people. Beyond a
year, it seems that despots can remain in power only by stamping the
lives of their subjects with poverty and misery. Many African leaders
seem to have discovered this path to political eternity. Ordinary
Africans must resist rolling down that path.

What are the lessons of Tunis? Somehow, prosperity
and political freedom must grow in tandem, not one ahead of the other.
Egyptian peace is fragile. Nigeria should become more peaceful and
prosperous if its politics becomes cleaner and cheaper. Which Nigerian
leader best embodies a clean and cheap politics?

Barely a week after the Presidential Advisory
Committee, headed by Theophilus Danjuma, submitted a report advising
the president – in a rare instance of ‘speaking truth to power’ – to
prune the federal bureaucracy, Mr. Jonathan announced the appointment
of new special advisers. This is the kind of irony one expects to
encounter in satirical novels about clownish African despots obsessed
with the perverse pleasure to be had from seeking counsel for the
express purpose of defying it.

Mr. Jonathan’s actions speak of a man who, being
as busy as we assume he is, has not had the time to read the Advisory
Committee’s report; or who has, for reasons best known to him,
willfully chosen to disregard it.

While we recognise that as president, the buck
stops on his table, and that it is his decision to take or reject any
advice offered him, this action of his raises questions about his
commitment to the prudent management of Nigeria’s resources. In spite
of his assurances to the contrary, all we keep seeing from Mr. Jonathan
is a more-of-the-same brand of leadership; an unwillingness to break
away from a debilitating status quo.

One of the legacies of the Yar’Adua government, in
which Mr. Jonathan faithfully served, for almost three years, as vice
president – was the consistent depletion of the Excess Crude Account,
set up by former president, Olusegun Obasanjo as a savings account of
sorts for oil windfalls accruing to Nigeria.

Even if the initial blame should go to Mr.
Yar’Adua, it is clear today that Mr. Jonathan deserves to share a chunk
of it. From Mr. Jonathan’s actions since becoming president almost a
year ago – regular unaccounted-for withdrawals from the account, the
most recent being $1bn in the days leading up to the PDP presidential
primary – mean his complicity in the questionable management of the
country’s oil wealth is evident.

Today, the ECA has dwindled to a few hundred
million dollars, from $20 billion in 2007. The question on the minds of
most observers is: where have the billions gone? Add to this the
several billion dollars in oil windfall earnings over the last few
years (last year alone – for much of which Mr. Jonathan was in power –
the Financial Times estimates the country earned $16bn). The Finance
Minister of course always has answers and excuses – oil production
expenditure, deficit financing, infrastructure projects, and so on –
most of which succeed only in raising fresh questions. For example, why
does Nigeria keep incurring ever-increasing levels of budget deficit?

Why are billions of dollars being sunk into power
plant projects that refuse to make a dent in the country’s dismal
electricity situation? Since Nigeria still continues to generate the
same amount of electricity as it did before the NIPP intervention
(indeed the same as in 1999, when Mr. Obasanjo first made a promise to
banish power failure within six months), we are forced to conclude that
Nigeria’s billions have simply gone into purchasing more darkness.

Mr. Jonathan has not shown any commitment or
concern for fiscal discipline. From his $150 million presidential jets,
to the lavish 50th independence anniversary celebrations, to his
ever-expanding cabinet, the picture that is emerging is not of a
president who is aware that national wealth is not limitless, and that
living and spending for the present without thought for the future is a
sure recipe for disaster. Include a rapacious National Assembly in the
picture, and the extent of the looming catastrophe becomes even clearer.

At a time when responsible governments around the
world are cutting down on spending, Nigeria’s government continues to
bask in its country’s status as an “oil-rich” nation in a world
addicted to oil, piling up debt and deficit without regard for the
future. In the 2011 budget, the State House is proposing to spend N21
billion, including more than N600 million ($4 million) on the purchase
of computers, scanners and photocopying machines alone, and another
N500 million on the purchase of “canteen / kitchen equipment.” These
are just two examples.

The fiscal recklessness is mind boggling, as are
the lame excuses constantly being issued by the government. We are
compelled to wonder if the government is seeing the same figures and
scenarios that everyone else is seeing.

It is time to put a stop to the foolishness. This
country is spending far more than it can afford to spend. To worsen it
we are spending on all the wrong things. Mr. Jonathan and his
bureaucrats should make an effort to read Atiku Abubakar’s letter to
him regarding the 2011 budget. What we want is not a spirited defence
but instead a reversal of course. The president should also read the
recommendations of the PAC – ten specific steps that include the need
to urgently cut the budget deficit and recurrent expenditure.

At this time, the last thing Nigeria needs is a
government more concerned about theoretical economic indices, the
reception of its international bond and the assessment of rating
agencies, than about the economic catastrophe that surely awaits if
Nigeria continues in the direction in which it is currently headed.