By VICTOR ALI
Yesterday marked Nigeria’s 64th anniversary as a sovereign and independent country, having been freed from colonialism foisted upon it by the British colonial masters several decades earlier. The events of October 1, 1960 confirmed Nigeria’s determination for self-rule. For many contemporary students of history and Nigerian politics, the narrative of modern Nigeria begins with the historic amalgamation of the Northern and Southern protectorates in 1914. While this is a significant event, the broader history extends beyond it. But that is a subject for another day.
Documented histories are replete with a myriad of travails marked by political turbulence, economic chaos, social dislocation and moral decadence that have plagued the Nigerian nation sixty-four years after independence. Barely six years into the journey of nationhood, precisely in January 1966, the military struck through a coup d’état, terminating the parliamentary government of Alhaji Tafawa Balewa, with Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe as president. This coup was a revenge act, arising from a series of undercurrents in the political landscape, ultimately leading to the thirty months of fratricidal civil war, otherwise known as the Nigeria-Biafra Civil War. The war, which began in 1967, ended in 1970, with then Head of State General Yakubu Gowon declaring that there was “no victor, no vanquished.”
It is imperative to note that General Gowon, in his wisdom, declared the 3Rs – Reconciliation, Reconstruction, Rehabilitation – to redirect the path toward the prosperity and development of the country after the self-destructive civil war. However, the rhetoric of unity in diversity has diminished, as tribal, regional and religious affiliations have become the predominant alternatives. Sixty-four years on, Nigeria is more divided than ever, echoing the sentiments of one of the nation’s founding fathers, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, who famously remarked, “Nigeria is a mere geographical entity.”
Despite several years of military interregnum, from General Aguiyi Ironsi and General Yakubu Gowon to General Murtala Muhammed and General Olusegun Obasanjo, Nigeria’s quest for what some political pundits have dubbed a “struggle for state identity” has continued, albeit marked by trial and error.
The period between 1970 and 1988 presented a golden opportunity for the political elite to showcase their capacity to fashion a workable and sustained solution that could have propelled Nigeria towards the Eldorado. If military rule was an aberration and democracy, symbolised by civil rule, is defined as government of the people, for the people and by the people, then that was the chance for Nigeria to redeem its image from the immediate post-independence missteps of 1960-1966.
Alas, the Alhaji Shehu Aliyu Shagari-led federal government of the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) squandered this opportunity. Megalomania, nepotism, and corruption took centre-stage in national life, with political elites largely insensitive to the plight of the populace. In fact, it could be said that they were leading in a vacuum without any genuine followership. The deteriorating state of governance reached such a precarious level that the military struck again at the end of December 1983, surprisingly to the applause of the civilian populace.
Thus began the years of the locust, starting with General Muhammadu Buhari (1983-1985) and abruptly culminating with General Abdulsalam Abubakar in 1999. During this period, a lot transpired in Nigeria. The draconian rule of the military came into full effect, but the most tense moment, akin to the situation that led to the 1967-1970 civil war, was the infamous annulment of the June 12, 1993, presidential elections overseen by General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida.
After several postponements and alterations to the transition to civil rule programme by the Babangida regime, Nigerians went to the polls to elect a president of their choice. The main contenders were Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola, popularly known as MKO Abiola, and Alhaji Bashir Tofa. In what was deemed a peaceful, free, fair and credible election, both nationally and internationally, Chief Abiola appeared set to win when the Babangida regime annulled the elections in their entirety.
The anxiety and tension that enveloped the nation due to this singular, nefarious act were palpable. Accusations and counter-accusations, primarily based on regional perspectives, were exchanged, and Nigeria was on the brink – borrowing a phrase from former United States Ambassador John Campbell’s book, ‘Nigeria on the Brink’. Under sustained pressure from both internal and external forces, the self-styled military president, General Babangida, “stepped aside” and installed a nebulous contraption known as the Interim National Government (ING), headed by Chief Ernest Shonekan.
It was only a matter of time before the military strongman, General Sani Abacha, ousted Chief Shonekan and seized power. General Abacha’s reign of terror was legendary. He suppressed dissent and opposition, including the imprisonment of the acclaimed winner of the June 12, 1993, presidential election, Chief M.K.O. Abiola. In what can only be described as ‘divine intervention’, General Abacha suddenly died while plotting to transition from military strongman to civilian president. The rest, as they say, is now history.
The ascendancy of General Abdulsalam Abubakar after General Abacha’s demise signalled a ray of hope as the transition to civil rule programme was hurriedly arranged and delivered on May 29, 1999. Now, with 25 years of uninterrupted democracy and 64 years as a sovereign nation, has the Nigerian political class learnt its lessons? What has independence provided for the people? With the much-touted self-determination, can Nigeria and Nigerians sincerely claim progress?
It is an established fact that Nigeria is immensely endowed with both human and mineral resources. In reality, Nigeria has yet to exploit half of its natural resources. Historically, agriculture served as the mainstay of the economy. Cotton, cocoa, palm oil and groundnuts were significant revenue earners in pre- and post-independence Nigeria. Regional governments depended heavily on these agricultural products for their earnings and regional development. Also, tin and columbite from the Plateau region were key revenue sources.
The discovery of crude oil in the Niger Delta region in the late 1950s, shortly before independence, dramatically altered the Nigerian economic narrative. The country suddenly became a mono-economy, heavily reliant on oil, which became the norm rather than the exception. The volatility of oil in the international market has consistently impacted nations that place heavy emphasis on this product for their revenue. Price instability has been a recurring issue, leading to budgetary distortions for many nations, Nigeria included.
As budgetary allocations are intended for planning and development purposes, such fluctuations inevitably affect strategic planning. Therefore, Nigeria’s overreliance on oil revenue has been the epicentre of the country’s stunted growth and development. At 64, the country ought to have diversified into areas where it has comparative advantages. Mining, for example, is one of the sectors that could yield enormous revenue; its near-complete neglect has facilitated the rise of illegal mining across the country.
At 64, Nigeria’s educational fortunes have also plummeted. Once known for its high standards in education in the early years of independence, the current state of affairs is lamentable. This decline is mirrored in other sectors, such as health, transportation and infrastructure. The decay in virtually all sectors of the socio-economy is stark and undeniable. What is to be done? Nigeria possesses all it needs to resolve these pressing issues. The political will is undoubtedly essential; no wonder, in his book ‘The Trouble with Nigeria’, the late literary icon Chinua Achebe remarked, “The trouble with Nigeria is simply and squarely the problem of leadership.”
For a country with a vast pool of human resources, unemployment has become a persistent menace that defies any proposed solutions. Hundreds of thousands of graduates emerge from various institutions without employment. While the era of white-collar jobs may be over, little has been done to provide vocational or technical training for these graduates to ensure they can fit into the economy.
The consequences of this are far-reaching. It is no wonder that armed robbery, banditry, kidnapping, internet fraud and other vices are on the rise. Similarly, drug trafficking and human trafficking are rampant, with many suspects being graduates of higher institutions. The activities of these miscreants are extensive and well-organised, overwhelming the security forces.
As Nigeria marks this anniversary, these questions remain: Is there any cause for celebration? Is Nigeria worthy of celebration? In my view, marking the anniversary is indeed worth celebrating. Despite its struggles as a nation, the fact that it survived a civil war and continues to endure various tensions and economic hardships while its people strive on is commendable. However, the endemic issues of the hydra-headed monster – corruption, nepotism, insecurity and national malaise – have placed the country at a crossroads. The acute hunger in the land amid abundance is unacceptable. While the majority wallow in abject poverty and want, a select few flaunt opulence through their extravagant lifestyles. The inequality currently experienced is unacceptable. At 64, Nigeria should have advanced beyond this level. At one point after independence, Nigeria was on par, if not ahead, of the Asian Tigers. As Nigeria marks this year’s Independence Day anniversary, the nation’s leaders must be focused with strategic thinking on the way forward.