#INDEPENDENCE: Happy 53rd Independence Day Celebration Nigeria but How Healthy Are You?
From Olawale Raheed, Kunle Oderemi, Dare Adekanmbi, Jude Ossai and Anthony Ukpong
MOST Nigerians usually shudder each time some institutions unfold some vital statistics about country. Such startling revelations do not come from some world leaders and international organizations alone.
Government agencies such as the Federal Office of Statistics, Bureau of Public Statistics, Central Bank of Nigeria [CBN] give astonishing figures on issues that bother on the Nigerian polity.
A couple of years ago, a British Prime Minister, David Cameron raised the alarm about the frightening rise in youth employment in Nigeria.
He contended that it portend grave danger for the stability of the country. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has also consistently warned on a similar issue and called for concerted efforts to avert the looming danger. Besides, a number of government agencies have added their voice to the call for more proactive measures by the political gladiators because of the dire consequences those socio-and economic disequilibrium pose for the Nigerian political system.
Recently, the former Catholic Archbishop of Nigeria, Cardinal Anthony Olubunmi Okogie, cautioned on how the ongoing horse trading by the political class ahead of the 2015 was heating up the polity. His warning came amidst the ceaseless war by some major figures in the ruling Peoples Democratic Party [PDP] over the next presidential race.
All these warnings are symptomatic that all is not well with the Nigerian state. They strongly drive home the often widely quoted a 2006 report by a United States of America [USA]-based intelligence agency about the possible disintegration of Nigeria in 2015. Entitled, Mapping the Global Future, the report claimed that the country could split along tribal and sectarian lines if some of the inherent challenges facing the nation was not properly managed and controlled. Though the US Ambassador to Nigeria, Terrence McCulley, has since denied that the US predicted that Nigeria might break up in 2015, the matter has refused to disappear from public discourse, especially in the political circle.
Again, while the issue attracted mixed reactions from Nigerian political leaders, it has since led to an unending debate over if the country could be categorised as a failed state. States with high levels of violence will not automatically be failed states.
Major issues
The inability of successive political leaders to address the national question, unresolved issue of revenue sharing and political power configuration have combined to push the nation to a state where her citizens doubt her continued survival into the nearest future. Faith in the nation is regularly badly shaking and even many patriotic agreed that the soul of the nation is threatened. That alleged structural detects has in the last few days aroused calls for a sovereign national conference to determine the structure of the federation. A conference seen as a solution is now another divisive subject with leaders raising questions of how to convoke and what powers such gathering should have.
From across the six zones, the rumbling is clearly felt in the capital, raising questions as to how healthy the nation is. Those holding the view of a nation about to crash see little hope in the Nigerian Project, while others believing it is not over for the country, pointed at a global crisis of governance with African Nations being the worst affected. To claim that the nation is healthy will attract reproach from many Nigerians.
Those pessimistic about the nation’ present and future listed alleged hopelessness of the leadership, its inability to meet the yearnings and aspirations of the people, uncontrollable level of corrupt enrichment, at all levels of government among others. Nigeria they felt is an artificial creation which has failed to transcend its artificiality.
To claim the nation is unhealthy at 53 years may also attract criticisms from those who believe the crisis of the moment cannot be a good index of measurement. The optimists pointed at expanded educational infrastructure, improving national infrastructure, cohesive national security system and Military respect for civil rule despite endemic political crisis, among others.
Between the optimists and pessimists is the truth about Nigeria, its past, present and future. Those disillusioned about the nation are scared of the alternatives of balkanisation, just as those comfortable with the status quo are secretly displeased and angered by the inability of the establishment to stabilise and run a truly competent government.
Several missteps were recorded; the most fatal of it all was the failure of the progressives to unite to form government after the 1959 elections.
The nation got it wrong as from independence, governance become ethnic based as nationalism receded to be replaced with ethnic criteria in decisions and administration. This was the foundation of the coup of 1966.
Major issues
A history of ethnic distrust is only one of the many serious problems facing the nation A key issue is a faulty federal structure which, while appearing federal is largely unitary. The details contained in the legislative list leaves no one in doubt that the centre is the controlling body with states as mere appendages. The superiority of the centre ensure that the bulk of national resources are domiciled at the center, thereby ensuring bitter fight among ethnic groups for the control of the centre. As the nation was built on ethnic fault lines, the unitary system enhances ethnic domination, depending on which tribe is controlling the center. The battle for central presidency is thus so tense and hot that the chord of national unity is often jeopardized. This has been a recurring decimal in our national history .The lopsided federal structure then generated associated crisis troubling the nation.
A key fall-out was the crisis of revenue sharing and allocations. The independence constitution had enshrined a derivation formula which worked so well in the First Republic. The abolition of that system created challenges such as struggle for resource control within the oil-producing communities. The subsequent militancy in Niger Delta and extensive environmental damages had since become a permanent facet of our national life. The situation was not helped by a constitutional gridlock. The constitution while containing many contradictions, also made it hard to get its provisions amended. The procedures were so complex while it was also susceptible to influence from forces against amendment. From 1999 to date, the National Assembly has not succeeded in effective fundamental changes to the constitution.
Other core issues include elite greed; unproductive consumptive corruption; policy somersaults in national development plans, over bloated bureaucracy, a weak private sector, zero ideological conviction among parties, and unsustainable pay package for elected officials.
There is also low level of patriotism among leaders and following and inability to elect leaders under a free and fair process.
Leadership question
Most Nigerians tend to blame the instability in the political system to failure of leadership. Their argument is that a principled, focused and resourceful leader was all that the country needs to rise from its current slumber. Some cite Singapore, a tiny island in Asia that has within 48 years become one of the leading industrialised entities under Lee Kuan Yew. But regrettably, Nigerian politicians seem to fancy the views espoused by a former Prime Minister of Britain, Winston Churchill. He had characterised a politician as one who has the “ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month, next year and the ability afterwards to explain why it never happened.” In other words, the political class has not only been long in making promises but completely short in fulfilling their promises.
Yet, they loot the public treasury with reckless abandon such that the country is believed to have been frisked of a staggering $400 billion since it gained independence in 1960. In fact, a fomer Minister of Foreogn Affairs, Professor Bolaji Akinyemi, put the figure at $500 billion, much of which he said was siphoned and freighted by Nigerian leaders. According to him, the difference of $100 billion was stolen between 1999 and 2013, a trend he said culminated in Nigeria occupying almost number one from the rear in the United Nations Human Capital Development Index (HCDI).
It is however incredible that despite the public outcry on the consequence of the criminal tendency on the future of the country, especially the polity, the need for sanity, accountability and responsibility by the leadership has gained little ground. One of those leaders that consistently cried out then is the renowned chartered accountant, Chief J.K. Randle, who in a essay entitled, Whither Nigerian Industries, in May 1984, warned on the consequence on the polity. He wrote, “The time has come to wipe the slate clean. We must recognize that our economy is fragile and our future is uncertain. The events of the last few years have been traumatic for the nation and painfully so, especially for our industries, many of which either collapsed or hovered in the brink.”
The prevailing trend of riches and rags had also consistently provoked many other senior citizens like Oxford university-trained Allison Ayida. He wondered how soon the country was whirling in a vicious circle of instability, when its peers had gone to the next level. “Nigeria was a symbol of integrity and sound monetary management 25 years ago. Today, when I look around the financial sector, it is in a shambles. In spite of the phenomenal growth in the banking sector, the economy is in ruins. It is the fascinating but sad story of the rise and fall of nations, but it happened too soon.” That was the way he painted the predicament of Nigeria in 1987. It is arguable if the country is conscious of what Napoleon Bonaparte said about China: “There lies a sleeping giant. Let her sleep. Because when she wakes she will move the world.” There is mass poverty in the land [Nigeria] today in the midst of abundant human and material resources.
Many are wont to blame military incursion into political power for the seamless problems facing the country, especially the general instability.
One of such leaders who labour such sentiments is Second Republic President, Shehu Shagari. He said the political class would have corrected itself if it had been given the chance to learn from its mistakes during his tenure. His words, “The first term was somewhat exprimental because as you know, we had been under military regime for a long time and the old system of government as rhey say, was history, so, we were practicing a new system and a new direction. And for anything new, we have to learn from experience, by practice, so, the first term was actively experimental and we were trying to make mistakes (and learn from them). And there was nobody who was experienced in that new administration.”
A similar advocacy almost dominated the tenure of former President Obasanjo who consistently stated that the country was still going thorugh a learning process. But others say Nigerians ought to have put part of the ugly past behind them if the majority of the political leaders that took over the mantle of leadership had been more purposeful, determined and focused since the withdrawal of the military to their barracks.
MOST Nigerians usually shudder each time some institutions unfold some vital statistics about country. Such startling revelations do not come from some world leaders and international organizations alone.
Government agencies such as the Federal Office of Statistics, Bureau of Public Statistics, Central Bank of Nigeria [CBN] give astonishing figures on issues that bother on the Nigerian polity.
A couple of years ago, a British Prime Minister, David Cameron raised the alarm about the frightening rise in youth employment in Nigeria.
He contended that it portend grave danger for the stability of the country. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has also consistently warned on a similar issue and called for concerted efforts to avert the looming danger. Besides, a number of government agencies have added their voice to the call for more proactive measures by the political gladiators because of the dire consequences those socio-and economic disequilibrium pose for the Nigerian political system.
Recently, the former Catholic Archbishop of Nigeria, Cardinal Anthony Olubunmi Okogie, cautioned on how the ongoing horse trading by the political class ahead of the 2015 was heating up the polity. His warning came amidst the ceaseless war by some major figures in the ruling Peoples Democratic Party [PDP] over the next presidential race.
All these warnings are symptomatic that all is not well with the Nigerian state. They strongly drive home the often widely quoted a 2006 report by a United States of America [USA]-based intelligence agency about the possible disintegration of Nigeria in 2015. Entitled, Mapping the Global Future, the report claimed that the country could split along tribal and sectarian lines if some of the inherent challenges facing the nation was not properly managed and controlled. Though the US Ambassador to Nigeria, Terrence McCulley, has since denied that the US predicted that Nigeria might break up in 2015, the matter has refused to disappear from public discourse, especially in the political circle.
Again, while the issue attracted mixed reactions from Nigerian political leaders, it has since led to an unending debate over if the country could be categorised as a failed state. States with high levels of violence will not automatically be failed states.
Major issues
The inability of successive political leaders to address the national question, unresolved issue of revenue sharing and political power configuration have combined to push the nation to a state where her citizens doubt her continued survival into the nearest future. Faith in the nation is regularly badly shaking and even many patriotic agreed that the soul of the nation is threatened. That alleged structural detects has in the last few days aroused calls for a sovereign national conference to determine the structure of the federation. A conference seen as a solution is now another divisive subject with leaders raising questions of how to convoke and what powers such gathering should have.
From across the six zones, the rumbling is clearly felt in the capital, raising questions as to how healthy the nation is. Those holding the view of a nation about to crash see little hope in the Nigerian Project, while others believing it is not over for the country, pointed at a global crisis of governance with African Nations being the worst affected. To claim that the nation is healthy will attract reproach from many Nigerians.
Those pessimistic about the nation’ present and future listed alleged hopelessness of the leadership, its inability to meet the yearnings and aspirations of the people, uncontrollable level of corrupt enrichment, at all levels of government among others. Nigeria they felt is an artificial creation which has failed to transcend its artificiality.
To claim the nation is unhealthy at 53 years may also attract criticisms from those who believe the crisis of the moment cannot be a good index of measurement. The optimists pointed at expanded educational infrastructure, improving national infrastructure, cohesive national security system and Military respect for civil rule despite endemic political crisis, among others.
Between the optimists and pessimists is the truth about Nigeria, its past, present and future. Those disillusioned about the nation are scared of the alternatives of balkanisation, just as those comfortable with the status quo are secretly displeased and angered by the inability of the establishment to stabilise and run a truly competent government.
Several missteps were recorded; the most fatal of it all was the failure of the progressives to unite to form government after the 1959 elections.
The nation got it wrong as from independence, governance become ethnic based as nationalism receded to be replaced with ethnic criteria in decisions and administration. This was the foundation of the coup of 1966.
Major issues
A history of ethnic distrust is only one of the many serious problems facing the nation A key issue is a faulty federal structure which, while appearing federal is largely unitary. The details contained in the legislative list leaves no one in doubt that the centre is the controlling body with states as mere appendages. The superiority of the centre ensure that the bulk of national resources are domiciled at the center, thereby ensuring bitter fight among ethnic groups for the control of the centre. As the nation was built on ethnic fault lines, the unitary system enhances ethnic domination, depending on which tribe is controlling the center. The battle for central presidency is thus so tense and hot that the chord of national unity is often jeopardized. This has been a recurring decimal in our national history .The lopsided federal structure then generated associated crisis troubling the nation.
A key fall-out was the crisis of revenue sharing and allocations. The independence constitution had enshrined a derivation formula which worked so well in the First Republic. The abolition of that system created challenges such as struggle for resource control within the oil-producing communities. The subsequent militancy in Niger Delta and extensive environmental damages had since become a permanent facet of our national life. The situation was not helped by a constitutional gridlock. The constitution while containing many contradictions, also made it hard to get its provisions amended. The procedures were so complex while it was also susceptible to influence from forces against amendment. From 1999 to date, the National Assembly has not succeeded in effective fundamental changes to the constitution.
Other core issues include elite greed; unproductive consumptive corruption; policy somersaults in national development plans, over bloated bureaucracy, a weak private sector, zero ideological conviction among parties, and unsustainable pay package for elected officials.
There is also low level of patriotism among leaders and following and inability to elect leaders under a free and fair process.
Leadership question
Most Nigerians tend to blame the instability in the political system to failure of leadership. Their argument is that a principled, focused and resourceful leader was all that the country needs to rise from its current slumber. Some cite Singapore, a tiny island in Asia that has within 48 years become one of the leading industrialised entities under Lee Kuan Yew. But regrettably, Nigerian politicians seem to fancy the views espoused by a former Prime Minister of Britain, Winston Churchill. He had characterised a politician as one who has the “ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month, next year and the ability afterwards to explain why it never happened.” In other words, the political class has not only been long in making promises but completely short in fulfilling their promises.
Yet, they loot the public treasury with reckless abandon such that the country is believed to have been frisked of a staggering $400 billion since it gained independence in 1960. In fact, a fomer Minister of Foreogn Affairs, Professor Bolaji Akinyemi, put the figure at $500 billion, much of which he said was siphoned and freighted by Nigerian leaders. According to him, the difference of $100 billion was stolen between 1999 and 2013, a trend he said culminated in Nigeria occupying almost number one from the rear in the United Nations Human Capital Development Index (HCDI).
It is however incredible that despite the public outcry on the consequence of the criminal tendency on the future of the country, especially the polity, the need for sanity, accountability and responsibility by the leadership has gained little ground. One of those leaders that consistently cried out then is the renowned chartered accountant, Chief J.K. Randle, who in a essay entitled, Whither Nigerian Industries, in May 1984, warned on the consequence on the polity. He wrote, “The time has come to wipe the slate clean. We must recognize that our economy is fragile and our future is uncertain. The events of the last few years have been traumatic for the nation and painfully so, especially for our industries, many of which either collapsed or hovered in the brink.”
The prevailing trend of riches and rags had also consistently provoked many other senior citizens like Oxford university-trained Allison Ayida. He wondered how soon the country was whirling in a vicious circle of instability, when its peers had gone to the next level. “Nigeria was a symbol of integrity and sound monetary management 25 years ago. Today, when I look around the financial sector, it is in a shambles. In spite of the phenomenal growth in the banking sector, the economy is in ruins. It is the fascinating but sad story of the rise and fall of nations, but it happened too soon.” That was the way he painted the predicament of Nigeria in 1987. It is arguable if the country is conscious of what Napoleon Bonaparte said about China: “There lies a sleeping giant. Let her sleep. Because when she wakes she will move the world.” There is mass poverty in the land [Nigeria] today in the midst of abundant human and material resources.
Many are wont to blame military incursion into political power for the seamless problems facing the country, especially the general instability.
One of such leaders who labour such sentiments is Second Republic President, Shehu Shagari. He said the political class would have corrected itself if it had been given the chance to learn from its mistakes during his tenure. His words, “The first term was somewhat exprimental because as you know, we had been under military regime for a long time and the old system of government as rhey say, was history, so, we were practicing a new system and a new direction. And for anything new, we have to learn from experience, by practice, so, the first term was actively experimental and we were trying to make mistakes (and learn from them). And there was nobody who was experienced in that new administration.”
A similar advocacy almost dominated the tenure of former President Obasanjo who consistently stated that the country was still going thorugh a learning process. But others say Nigerians ought to have put part of the ugly past behind them if the majority of the political leaders that took over the mantle of leadership had been more purposeful, determined and focused since the withdrawal of the military to their barracks.
Comments
Post a Comment
WE LUV COMMENTS