|
KWENU: Our Culture, Our Future |
|
THE
IMPARTIAL OBSERVER
Hank Eso
Sunday 24 April 2011
The dolorous and violent aftermath of the recent presidential elections must give Nigerians pause. The evident disapprobation in some quarters with the electoral outcome cannot be ignored, wished away or attributed to pert discontents, bent on creating a rupture, where one was seemingly unnecessary. As to the orderliness, fairness, credibility and transparency of the electoral process, discernible and desirable as these values are, they were in this case as in the other instances, very subjective. True enough, if the comparative basis for these elections were to be the 2003 and 2007 undertakings, which were fraught with gross irregularities, then this endeavor was by many light years, more credible and therefore, acceptable. But there are still some “buts” and “ifs.”
First, there is the convenience factor. As welcome, convenient and reassuring as
it may be, the practice of foreign observers ascertaining the credibility and
validity of Nigerian elections --which are entirely our domestic affairs -- is
deeply troubling. It is not done in India and not in South Africa. It is
troubling because these foreigners have their motives, which are not entirely
altruistic. We know also, that when the same foreigners characterize of
elections as a “farce” or
“shambolic”, our leaders are quick to
deride them.
Be that as it may, on this occasion, the Nigerian people have presumably spoken.
So be it. But it would be an egregious mistake to move on to doing business as
usual without looking closely at events, and analyzing the seething anger in
some quarters that trigged the recent political violence. Moreover, it was
disconcerting and extremely sad to hear some Nigerians from the south, say
things like, “if the northerners want to
destroy their region, they should go ahead” or “we
have won, the north be damned.”
These are divisive and fighting words.
Lost in this crass triumphal disposition, is that the violence and protestations
in the north could easily be replicated any day in any part of Nigeria where the
masses feel disenfranchised. We will do well to recall the NADECO days under
Gen. Sani Abacha. That the protesters attacked offices of the ruling party,
homes and assets of traditional and political rulers and other elite should
serve as a disquieting signal. What
happened in the north could happen anywhere in the south.
The violent episode, even if considered the handiwork of callous and
unemployed youths and criminal gangs, is still disturbing as there are legions
of such youths in every nook and corner of the federation. The senseless and
unnecessary loss of close to 200 lives should not be taken for granted. These
facts aside, several deeply distressing issues were manifested.
First, Nigerians largely voted along ethnic and religious lines affirming the
nation’s long-standing problem of being divided by the twin-cracks of faith and
ethnicity. Such a divide would have been more evident had there been serious
Igbo or Yoruba contenders for the presidency. Still, the fault lines are
remarkable.
Second, national interest was again subjugated to personal and partisan
interests. This was a trait clearly exhibited by the winning and losing parties
and their key candidates. Whereas the leading presidential contenders sought to
strike ethnic-cum-faith balance on their political tickets -- Jonathan-Sambo;
Buhari-Bakere, Ribadu-Adeola
and Shekarau-Oyegun -- in the end, partisanship trumped everything else.
Third, the spate of post-electoral violence Nigeria experienced, though
troubling, was not entirely unexpected. The violence spoke to the lack of proper
and basic education, civic orientation, high unemployment and the deep-seated
distrust that continue to bedevil Nigerian politics. Those who sought to blame
the Buhari camp for the violence, took the easy way out, overlooking that he
also ran in 2003 and 2007 presidential elections and lost, but there were no
violence despite the polls being fraught with fraud.
Fourth, even though not so obvious, it is painfully clear that the matrix of
determining accomplishment in Nigeria now rests on a single pedestal: financial
wealth regardless of how it was acquired. Evidently lost, are the added-values
of integrity, leadership, service, natural talent, enterprise, nobility,
diligence, philanthropy, and many other forms of human accomplishment not
predicated on wealth and material well-being. It is thus understandable, why for
many, the need to be on the side of the winning party or the
any-government-in-power at any level has become an all-consuming national
enterprise
(See
“Politics
without a moral and defining edge”
and
“Nigeria’s shifting posts, faux and anti-truth politics”).
Finally, we must see the post-electoral violence in the north for what they
truly are. Beyond being symptomatic, they were essentially delayed reaction to
long-suppressed frustration and discontent over the past dozen years of PDP rule
that has almost turned Nigeria into a one-party state.
The political and economic disenfranchisement felt by the northern
masses, is equally shared by the masses in other parts of Nigeria.
Fundamentally, the north is not alone; look at the Niger Delta and look at the
south-east zone.
Yet political disenfranchisement in Nigeria, broad as it may seem, offers no
credible or justifiable grounds for resort to violence. Whereas political
violence may draw attention to the many vexatious challenges confronting
Nigeria, it is neither the answer nor the solution to them. Nigerian leaders and
elite should consider themselves lucky that the electoral violence has abated
and did not spread, considering the contagion effect of the restiveness in
several African countries over bad governance and warped elections.
Candidly, this is a time for attentive national introspection; not a moment of
crass and unbridled triumphalism, despite the temptation. The next four years
will present Nigerian leaders, especially President Goodluck Jonathan great
opportunities to move the nation forward, but equally so, many more challenges.
If Nigerian leaders fail to address the obvious and not-so-obvious
pitfalls of these elections, which resulted in the violence, they should prepare
for similar and even more dissembling violence in 2015, when the parameters of
who becomes the president would be more fluid and divisive, absent the
incumbency factor. Then, both southern and northern youths might protest for
different sectarian reasons.
For now, our congratulations go to President Goodluck Jonathan and VP Namadi
Sambo on their reelection and to INEC and Prof. Attahiru Jega for polls, so ably
conducted, notwithstanding the ugly violence that followed.
Likewise, Nigerians should congratulate Gen. Muhammadu Buhari and the
Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), not only for a good showing, but for
proving that it is possible to build a formidable and credible political
opposition within such a short period.
If only the CPC and Ribadu’s Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) had successfully
struck an alliance, the nation’s political landscape would have changed
remarkably and for the better. Certainly, a solid political alliance of the core
opposition parties would have yielded a closer and more keenly contested
presidential elections and perhaps, a runoff.
Such a close race would have assuaged many, even if in the end PDP wins.
Moreover, demystifying PDP’s invincibility would have been in the long term
national interest.
Nonetheless, reforming Nigerian politic is work-in-progress a process with
infinite possibilities, if the political will exist and national interest is
accorded priority. It is worth acknowledging, as I suspect some would argue that
even if Buhari’s CPC votes of 12,214,853 and Ribadu’s ACN votes of 2,079,151
were combined, it would not have topped Jonathan’s 22,495,187 votes.
This is a plausible argument, but we would never know, given that the
CPC-ACN alliance was stillborn, and therefore, swung undecided votes to PDP. It
is worth noting nevertheless, that the 57% win by PDP, seems awfully suspect and
too perfect an outcome. Did something untoward happen to avoid a runoff? In any
democracy, especially in nascent situations like ours, these are sensitive but
necessary questions that must be asked in the national interest.
As the dust settles and Nigerian political leaders reflect on the state of the
nation, they should acknowledge that the people continue to feel betrayed, under
served and underrepresented by their leaders. Such feelings run across the
board, nationally and transcend ethnic and religious divides.
The ruling national elite should also reflect on how in their
self-centered interest, they have failed the national population and failed to
put national interest at premium. So far, all their calculations, be it within
the ruling PDP, or the opposition CPC, CAN, ANPP, and other smaller parochial
parties, point to ensuring or beefing up personal interests. It would be folly
to think that the national population is oblivious of this.
Far more importantly, the national elite should be conscious and reflect on the
fact that there are power centers that do not wish to see the emergence of a
formidable and assertive Nigeria, as a key global player.
Political leader within these power centers suffer no amnesia of that
brief but shining moment in the late 70s when an assertive Nigeria upended their
various forays and meddling in African politics.
Absence such Nigerian leadership, they know that the AU is ineffectual
and that individually, they can dictate to most of their former African
colonies. The handling of the crises in Sudan, Libya and Cote d’Ivoire and the
one-dimensional use of the reaches of the International Criminal Court (ICC) are
very instructive.
Although not a member of the so-called BRICS configuration, Nigeria is still
touted for its great potentialities, especially as a member of the
“Next Eleven” emergent group.
This realization is not too distant from the visionary global ranking and
configuration of the Concert of Medium Powers (Lagos Forum) that Prof. Bolaji
Akinyemi, as Nigeria’s foreign Minister sought to put in place twenty-five years
ago. As a nation with vast oil and other natural resources, and a dynamic,
resource-rich and committed Diaspora, Nigeria retains the potential to actualize
the greatness and recognition it covets. Yet, its international standing can
only derive from the extrapolation of its domestic stability, peace and
security.
Here is my take:
Efficient and purposeful nation-building and political stability in any nation,
Nigeria included, will always rest on the tripod of trust and
accountability; good governance and equity and fair representation.
Past and present Nigerian leaders have always espoused these values, but
only so as precepts. However,
Nigerian leaders continue to believe, given the docility of Nigerians and
lack of patriotism, that they will always get away with minimalist forms of
governance. For Nigeria, the 2011
elections marked a watershed moment and the transcending of one of the many
obstacles confronting the nation. For now, the ghost of botched elections lies
buried. The coming months and years will be propitious for political action and
true national renaissance. Indeed, the time has come for Nigeria to force the
hands of history for its own good.
With
neither anger nor partiality, until next time, keep the law, stay impartial, and
observe closely. --------
Hank Eso
is a columnist for
Kwenu.com.
His observations on Nigerian, African and global politics and related issues,
has appeared in various print media, journals and internet-based sites. © Hank Eso, 24 April 2011.
Email:
hankeso@aol.com |
| Simply surprise yourself yonder |