 |
| founding fathers |
Before Thursday Jan. 1st 1914, the entity called Nigeria did not exist. In its place was hugely diverse number of tribes and communities, some of whom had territory that overlaps the borders of present Nigeria. The ‘Niger Area’ referred to as Nigeria today is a creation of the British colonialists. There was no Nigeria until 1914, because it was in 1914, that Sir Frederick Lugard (Governor-General of Nigeria 1914 – 1919) amalgamated the Northern protectorate, Southern protectorate and the Lagos Colony, to make up our present day Nigeria. The utmost reasons for this amalgamation are not far-fetched; it was mainly for easy administration of the vast colonial territories and also for economic reasons. For the weakness of some regions may be covered up by the strong ones.
1914, was when it all started; the forceful amalgamation of the sovereign regions with different cultures, languages and religion, to co-exist under one umbrella. Lord Lugard failed to understand that no two or three people can co-exist unless they agree to share common values like religion, history, culture, language, beliefs, aspirations, ethics, etc. The absence of all these nulli-secondus values in the formation of Nigeria have led to conflicts and instability in the Nigerian polity over the years, which invariably questions the existence of the state.
One major idea with the formation of Nigeria was that the British colonialists had an arrangement where they decided to use Nigeria as an experiment for a century (100 years) starting from 1914 according to the secret government document the
British left after independence. What was meant was that if at the end of the period of experimentation with the specimen Nigeria, it doesn’t work; the people have an option to go for another name and country. 2014, is the expiration of the 100 years stipulated for the amalgamation experiment. It is in this light that an African Intelligence Agency predicted in 2005 that Nigeria might cease to exist as a united country, or might become a “failed state”. 2014 is just some days away, and 2015 is two years from now, the clock is ticking for Nigeria.
Recalling an article written by Mr. Daniel Volman, Director of the African Security Research Project, that the Nigerian scenario was predicated upon a possible war in 2013. The 2013 war date, the article said, was a test of how America could respond to a crisis in Nigeria in the event that rival factions and rebels fight for control of the oil fields of the Niger Delta and the government was near collapse. Even with this, some Nigerians still think the disintegration of Nigeria is just an elusive prediction, even as the indicators for disintegration are very much glaring. No state can survive two civil wars; Nigeria already experienced one between 1967 – 1970 which almost led to the disintegration of the country, going through that experience again is not an option. So two things are involved, by 2014/2015, Nigeria would either break up or there would be a new Nigeria.
The major issues affecting the Nigerian state are corruption, lack of good governance, ethno-religious conflicts, political vituperations, electoral malpractices among others. All these highlighted problems can also be traced back to the way Nigeria was amalgamated and administered as a colony. According to Femi Falana (SAN), corruption is a product of colonialism. He stressed further that Nigerian elite sees how colonial masters exploited the citizens for their personal enrichment, so, when power was handed over to them, they just built on the foundation that has already been laid by the colonial masters, which is leadership for personal interest and corrupt leadership. Corruption, since then has become a culture that has been passed on from one generation to another.
You may want to argue that Nigerian ruling class at independence could have chosen not to inherit corruption as a system of rule. But, it is high time you recalled that those that really agitated for the independence of Nigeria are not the ones that assumed the post of leadership at independence, unlike the case in the United States of America, in which the Commander-in-Chief of the continental Army during the American Revolutionary War (1776 – 1781), one of the founding fathers, George Washington, was the first president of America, the second and the third president of America was John Adams and Thomas Jefferson respectively, who was part of the committee that drafted the declaration of independence, for the 13 states that initially formed United States. Which means the architects of America actually led the country and put all their dreams and visions to reality. But in the Nigerian case, the forerunners of the Nigerian nationalist movement, the likes of Herbert Macauley, Aivan Ikoku, Obafemi Awolowo, Nnamdi Azikwe and Ahmadu Bello negotiated Nigeria’s independence from Britain. But when the British was handing over, the election conducted was said to have been won by Northern People’s Congress (NPC), because of the large support from the northern population, and also with the help of rigging by the colonial masters. Ahmadu Bello who was the leader of the party, nominated Tafawa Balewa to represent the party as Nigerian first Prime Minister. This ascertain the fact raised in the observation by Ray Ekpu that no elected president of Nigeria was ever prepared for the job, that is, our leaders so far are caught unaware.
It may interest you to know that Tafawa Balewa was pushed by Ahmadu Bello to come to Lagos while he tended to shop in Kaduna. Shehu Shagari wanted to go to the Senate, but the NPN’s (National Party of Nigeria) kingmakers diverted him to Dodan Barracks. Olusegun Obasanjo was still in prison when the godfathers pulled him out from the dungeon and put the crown on his head amid a mild protest. Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, a two-term governor of Katsina State, was heading for Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, for a teaching job when OBJ halted and wheeled him to Aso Rock. Goodluck Jonathan was just adjusting his seat as the governor of Bayelsa state when OBJ called him to higher duties as Vice-President to Yar’Adua. As Yar’Adua’s health failed, luck smiled on Jonathan and he became what he wasn’t ready for – President. Ekpu’s point is that no one among the elected Presidents spent years dreaming, studying, working, researching and networking in readiness for the top job. Notwithstanding these shortcomings in the country’s past and present leaders, the country continues to lurch on politically.
Then, Nnamdi Azikwe had to form a coalition government at the centre and Obafemi Awolwo, led the opposition party. The feeling, however, that the NPC were favoured by the departing colonial master and were imposed over others, increased the antagonism of the other groups and intensified their desire to overthrow the imposition. The struggle became very intense and led to the destabilization of the first republic as well as the distrust within the ruling class.
The major problem that has intensified every other problem in Nigeria is the ethno-religious identification of the citizens. For a country like Nigeria, parading more than 600 ethnic nationalities and boasting of over 500 languages, it should not be a surprise that its politics is hostage to tribalism feeling, as most people identify with, and are loyal to their ethnic groups, rather than the country. This diverse nature of the Nigerian state is as a result of the 1914 experimentation on the territories that make up the country. Ethnicity is not the only means of division in Nigeria, as has religion as its counterpart. That is why Nigeria is usually regarded as deeply divided states with political issues that are vigorously or violently contested along the lines of the complex ethnic, religious and regional divisions in the country.
According to the 2003 Nigerian Demographic and Health Survey, 50.5% of the population is Muslim and 48.2% is Christian, only 1.3% is associated with other religions, that is why Nigeria is regarded as the Islamo-Christian nation in the world. And as Agbaje (1990) has correctly established, the colonial administration underwrote Islam in the Northern part of colonial Nigeria, and used it as the basis of political authority in local administration. And according to Mimiko (1995), religious antagonism in Nigeria reached its peak in 1989, when IBB made Nigeria a member of the Organization of Islamic Countries. This move was seen by Christians as a ploy to turn Nigeria into an Islamic state against the spirit and the letter of the constitution. And over the years, Christianity and Islam have created a history of conflict or violence. This includes a war of words motivated by conflicting beliefs.
A pattern of largely discernible ethnic suspicion and intrigues that has existed prior to independence in 1960, led to the military coup d’etat of 1966, the traumatic civil war between 1967 and 1970, mutual distrusts afterwards, the annulment of June 12 1993 presidential elections and the incessant ethno-religious skirmishes that are presently threatening the very fabric of our nascent democracy and national existence. The high point of the crisis in Nigeria seems to have been the civil war but since transition to civilian rule in 1999, there has been a rapid increase of conflicts in the country. In addition, the political elites have always sought to manipulate the multifaceted and multifarious identities (ethnic, regional, minority-majority, and religious divisions) especially during political competition and this has given rise to conflicts and instability in Nigeria.
In all, the reason for the incompatibility, division and distrust among Nigerians, is not as a result of a natural intolerance among the citizens, but the nature of amalgamation and administration of the country by its colonial masters. Since the geographical expression called Nigeria is just a 100 years experiment which is set to expire next year, then it is time for Sovereign National Conference for Nigerians to discuss whether we will remain as a country and under what conditions so as to pave way for a new Nigeria.
