Following the arrest of some Nigerians demonstrating for
the resuscitation of sovereign state of Biafra, Britain is
back at its pastime of trying to steal the show with its claim
of what it called its civil war time record of preserving the
sanctity of Nigeria’s national borders. Certainly with its
latest action, Britain is still exhibiting the mentality of the
1885 Berlin Conference of land grabbers in Africa.
Unfortunately, Britain’s civil war time record of
purportedly preserving Nigeria’s national border was
discredited at that time and even now.
Obviously, only for its self-serving economic and political
interests, Britain will ever muddle Nigeria’s political
problems to further relics of its political past. Otherwise,
why did Britain not preserve the sanctity of the national
borders of the federation of Malaysia and Singapore? On
the contrary, Britain granted independence to the two
countries as separate nations. Similarly, why did Britain
not preserve the sanctity of the national border of the
federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland? Remarkably,
Britain carved out three separate independent countries,
namely northern Rhodesia (today’s Zimbabwe)’ southern
Rhodesia (today’s Zambia) and Nyasaland (now known as
Malawi). Britain’s record of experimenting with federal
form of government in its colonial territories collapsed all
over. West Indies federation broke into sovereign Jamaica
and Trinidad-Tobago. Even the federation of small islands,
like St. Kitts-Anguilla broke into separate independent
nations and are today, all members of Commonwealth and
United Nations.
In flaunting its so-called record of preserving Nigerian
national border, Britain is engaging in diplomatic fraud.
After Nigeria’s civil war, what was Britain’s record on
preservation of national borders in Africa and other parts
of the world? Was Britain not a major party to the
enunciation of the United Nation’s principle of self-
determination for citizens all over the world? Did Britain
not spearhead the break-up of Sudan into two
independent nations of Northern Sudan and Southern
Sudan through United Nation’s principle of self-
determination? Did Britain not support the break-up of
erstwhile Ethiopia into the current two independent
nations of Ethiopia and Eritrea through the United Nations
principle of self-determination? What therefore, is peculiar
in Nigeria to make its good or bad prospects a matter of
life or death for Britain? Whether Nigeria will or should
break up or not will and should be the mutual agreement
of its various peoples but surely NOT in any way a choice
for Britain. This intruder should, therefore, shut up and
keep off.
By the way, Britain was delighted at the break-up of its
powerful rival, Soviet Union into more than 20 separate
independent republics, the most outstanding of which is
today’s Russia. Noticeably, Britain, the self-proclaimed
armed guard of national borders of nations like Nigeria,
was laughably helpless when Russia invaded Ukraine to
enforce the secession of Crimea, which is now a Russian
protectorate. Ukraine was formerly a part of the defunct
Soviet Union.
There is a wrong message about Biafra. At the mere
mention of that entity, the mind goes straight to the
unsuccessful attempt of the defunct eastern region of
Nigeria to secede. We do not seem to have learnt any
lesson from the war, an arrogance, which, therefore,
exhibits contempt and threat of government might to crush
any protest, which even if genuine, is instantly perceived
as an attempt to repeat the war exercise. Hopefully, we will
not go that way again. And the lesson of the war is that
government at the state and federal levels must look into
community complaints and provide remedy instead of
throwing its weight of federal/state might about.
Rather surreptitiously, Biafra is no longer identifiable with
only secession of South East from Nigeria. Instead, Biafra
has become a figure of expression of whatever grievances
of groups or sections all over the country. During his
tenure as elected president, Olusegun Obasanjo said he
was serving Nigeria and not Yorubaland. Accordingly, for
eight years, South West was not developed. None of Lagos-
Ibadan expressway, Sagamu-Benin expressway, Lagos
Abeokuta road or Ibadan-Ife road was touched. South
westerners went Biafran and publicly expressed their
determination to walk out of the Nigerian federation if
their political demands at national conference organised
by ex-President Goodluck Jonathan were not met. And only
recently, some south westerners led by former military
governor of Oyo State, General Adeyinka Adebayo,
threatened to reconsider their continued stay in the
Nigerian federation if kidnapping and menace of cattle
rearers were not checked in South West. That was not a
threat to the sanctity of Nigeria’s national borders?
At a critical stage of the constitutional crisis on succeeding
ailing the late President Umar Yar’Adua, Ijaw leader Edwin
Clark went on record that “…..we will secede if our son
(Goodluck Jonathan) is not sworn in as President.”
The North under President Jonathan, lamented loss of
political power and demanded return of the presidency to
the North, failing which Tanko Yakasai went Biafran by
threatening to make Nigeria ungovernable. Has Nigeria
been governable since then? An acceptable form of
secession threat? During the same Jonathan national
political conference, a delegate/emir from Adamawa State
threatened to break away with his kingdom to rejoin his
ethnic group in Cameroon.
Neither is Nigeria the only country facing prospects of
disintegration. Britain is not more secure. But the
difference is that instead of threat or actual use of force,
dialogue and remedy are provided for seeming group or
community grievances. United Nations’ principle of self-
determination applies all over the world, contrary to the
bogey of sanctity of national borders with which Britain is
terrorising Nigerians. When Britain was threatened with
disintegration, the response of the central authorities in
London, even if in panic, was to grant substantial political
autonomy to Wales and Scotland. Even then, Scotland
insisted on complete independence from Britain and two
years ago, only narrowly lost a referendum to that effect.
Scotland unilaterally organised its referendum instead of
waiting for Britain’s grace. In any case, the leader of
Scottish government, Nicola Sturgeon, only a few weeks
ago, defied the British government with assurances that
the struggle for Britain’s disintegration leading to
Scotland’s independence was not yet over. Why did Britain
not arrogantly proclaim the sanctity of its national borders
or arrest the Scottish leader, Nicola Sturgeon?
However, there is this caution for both sides of the Biafra
controversy. None of the agitators or demonstrators is up
to 50 years and all don’t have the faintest idea of the
agonies of the war, which broke out 48 years ago. No
Nigerian over 50 years would dream of another war. In a
war, only eventual survivors are sure of their survival.
Otherwise, as long as the war continues, nobody is sure of
the other’s survival. Even sometimes, enemies on one side
will develop sympathy for the plight of enemies on the
other side. That is at a most humane stage of a war.
Otherwise, in a war, orphans will emerge if they are lucky.
Otherwise, they would have perished with mums and dads.
Widows and widowers are inevitable products of war and
burdens on remnant families. War, you don’t wish it for
your enemy. Your elimination may even be necessary for
the survival of your war front comrade. There is never any
witness to that sad fact. War? Think it over. Major Roberts
was an army officer in mufti, on a visit to Apapa wharf, a
high security area early in the war. Argument ensued but
was not quick enough to justify his presence in the area.
Within seconds, he was shot dead. That was the standing
instruction. The deceased officer did not die in action and
was felled by who would pass for one of his boys. Casino
cinema, Yaba was some 200 kilometres to the nearest war
front in Benin, Edo State. Yet there was fatal bombing by
agents of the enemy, leaving victims among the innocent
cinema enthusiasts.
Restless potential prosecutors of another civil war must
face the fact that unlike last time, there are observers,
international observers to, from their home countries,
enforce rules of civilised engagements. These days, you
may not escape charges for crimes against humanity. And
to perfect such criminal charges, satellite television will
beam over all military operations. Also note that national
borders of countries are no longer considered sacrosanct
or inviolate to offer a basis for denying subjects their right
to self-determination. Are countries not, therefore, not
rendered vulnerable to balkanisation? Which country will,
therefore, be safe from disintegration? The simple
response is that even the so-called Balkans of old have
self-balkanised. Yugoslavia, yesteryear beacon against
disintegration, since broke up into various new
independent nations of Serbia, Montenegro and Croatia,
among others. Evwn Czechoslovakia of old also broke into
Czech and Slovak. Heavens did not fall as all the new
countries enjoy mutual respect.
Instead of arrests and trials of Biafran protesters, Nigeria
can learn from Britain by removing possible areas of
grievances of the protesting Biafrans. a major cause of
their grievances is unequal access to development. This is
not to say that President Muhammadu Buhari, or only his
administration is responsible for the causes of the
agitation of the Biafrans. South easterners were most
profound in supporting Obasanjo, even when South West
rejected him. For eight years, nothing was done on the
poor infrastructure, specifically roads in South East.
Jonathan was in power for six years with the solid support
of South East. The massive support for Jonathan from that
area yielded no slight improvement in the state of their
roads. And, of course, the promised second Niger Bridge is
still being awaited. Former Vice President Alex Ekwueme
was in power for four years and South East leaders
quarrelled among themselves on which government –
federal or state – was to construct or reconstruct particular
roads because such roads were not federal roads. Looking
back today, what would it have mattered if the Federal
Government of that time constructed even local
government roads in South East?
On the other hand, whether federal or state roads,
Obasanjo did not touch a single road in South West
throughout his tenure of eight years, for which he is much
detested. South easterners are, therefore, partly
responsible for lack of access to road development. They
had opportunities to utilise their votes against those
responsible for infrastructural decay in South East. Instead,
for no purpose, they voted for their oppressors. Yet, that
does not mean the infrastructural decay in South East
should not be redressed. To leave the situation
unredressed is to provide ammunition for intensifying the
capability of the protesters. On the other hand, massive
rehabilitation of roads in South East will enable Federal
Government to easily outflank the Biafran protesters. We
must face the fact that any part of Nigeria – South West,
North West, North East or North – with state of
infrastructural degradation as in South East will always
breed Biafran agitators.
On his part, Senator Shehu Sani sounded unusually cheap
when he falsely accused south easterners who did not
support Buhari for the presidency as sponsors of the
Biafran agitators. These Biafrans demonstrated against
former President Obasanjo, the late President Yar’Adua
and ex-President Jonathan during their respective tenure.
Were the Biafran agitators also sponsored by those who
were against the presidency of these former leaders?
Nigerian government must not swallow the bait of the
British government on a nebulous sanctity of our national
borders. The government should not be tempted to engage
in forceful clampdown on the demonstrators, which will
only generate political tension and turn the boys into
heroes. Areas of grievances of the protesters should be
looked into and redressed, especially the roads.
Fortunately, the Senate Adhoc Committee on Works
headed by Barnabas Gemade has just completed an
inspection tour of roads throughout the South East. The
report of the findings on the scale of erosion in South East,
as shown on television, will shock President Buhari.
No comments:
Post a Comment