 |
According to him, politicians of the First Republic did better because of their understanding of democracy. He blamed the military for what is happening today, saying the intervention of soldiers in politics worsened things.
The senator said that the military introduced what he called three Ms: Money, Muscle and Mischief into politics.
Where were you at Independence and what were your expectations of the new nation just emerging from the crust of childhood?
Well, I was in Ibadan at independence. I was a young man trying to grow up, trying to find his way. When independence came, we were all very excited. We had the opportunity of knowing the mindset of the nationalists that fought for our independence. Though young, we knew what they stood for. Nnamdi Azikiwe, Obafemi Awolowo, Sultan of Sokoto, Aminu Kano, S. J Ikoku, Anthony Enahoro, name them. We knew them all. Some of them were great mentors and people we wanted to be like. In 1960, we thought education would be free, with life more abundant, poverty would disappear, there would be equality of gender and that there would be a great nation. We looked up to the sheer size of Nigeria to confer greatness on the country. Cocoa business was booming. Oil had not become this dominant in our economy. We saw a promising future.
People leaving secondary school were employed on salary of 14 pounds, 10 shillings exactly, which is like N39 today. And they were envied then. The civil service was an enviable bureaucracy. Some white were still around then. Nigerians from Edo, old Western Region, Delta… were all here. We felt like one people, such that when the like of me got to England in 1963, I got angry when they referred to us as tribes because my fellow Nigerians were not tribes. But 51 years later, tribalism has become a dominant force. Nigerians are more conscious about their tribes. There were people from Delta and Edo, who were civil servants in Ibadan. Enahoro was a great man from that part of the country. He was a minister, he was loved, and he was respected. At least, the Yoruba, Igbo thing was not that pronounced. We were just a growing nation that had wonderful promises. Three years after independence, I was in England. And when the whites referred to me as a tribal man, I was angry. I used to say Scots were also tribes, Scots, Irish, English, they were tribes. They said they were nationals of Britain but I said “you are out of your mind. All these Nigerians also are Nigerians from Nigerian nation.”
We had a promising nation and promising future, where poverty was to be banned. We hoped that access to knowledge would be free and easily accessible. Eddie Okonta is not a Yoruba name. He was the main musician at Paradise Club, now Femi Johnson Building, Glass House. It was a club. We were there every weekend to listen to his songs. And he would sing in Igbo; he would sing in Yoruba. Central Hotel, Adamasingba was there then. We were bunch of jolly good fellows. Great future. But what we have today is a far cry from what is expected.
As regards tribalism. How united and cohesive do you think we are now?
Not cohesive at all. There are several ways of looking at it. Where there is scarcity of goods and services, you’ll have to invent criteria to deprive some people those benefits. Even in a small family, nuclear family, you’ll say it’s not for big ones but smaller ones, so that you’ll be the one to benefit. Tribalism has become a tool for accessing opportunities and now we call it tribalism. If you and I were competing on one thing now and there’s only one item, I would insist on a criterion so that I’ll be the one to benefit. But when we realise that a lot of us, in our day-to-day living, have wonderful friends, wonderful partners, even spouses from other tribes of the nation, you’ll know that it’s not a realistic variable. It’s not worth fighting about. It’s a device for depriving other people.
We fought a civil war in this country and thereafter several efforts were made to reunite the country, but today we have Boko Haram, Niger Delta militancy, and even zoning in our polity.
Let me remind you. Zik led the opposition in Yoruba land. He led the NCNC; he led us. Tribalism wasn’t an issue. Now it has become an instrument people use to enthrone their access to opportunities and dethrone the access of other people. So, it’s not even real. How can you dislike a man because he is not from your tribe? We even talk of religion.
What and who do we blame for this?
We blame our leaders, the foundation. Herbert Macaulay was the leader of the NCNC and Zik was his deputy. When he died, Zik took over. In fact, it won’t happen these days. There would be meanings read into where his successor should come from. Some would argue that he should be a particular height and he should be a particular colour. Tribe is one handy weapon; religion is another. But if opportunities were sufficient to go round, there would be less tribalism. We got jobs in England where we were foreigners. How can you not get a job in your own country because of your tribe? I once worked for British Transport as a booking office clerk. I worked for the British Ministry of Health as a clerical officer. They would invite you all for a test. Whites would fail and they would go home. And in any case, they too would have social benefits because they were unemployed. The whites would probably prefer to stay out of job and they would still develop the state. They would say, “give the black man job, let him work and contribute his own quota to the development of the state. In other words, if you had social benefits for the unemployed here, then there would be less fight for employment and on stupid ground like tribalism. It could work with contrast, where in Britain, the blacks would get job. No one is favouring them because they are blacks. It’s just that if you are unemployed, you’ll live on the state. The man who’s working will contribute to your sustenance. So, let the blacks work to sustain the whites. It was not a conscious policy, I’m just saying where you have a dwindling supply of anything, these logicalities will creep in.
You earlier said something about bureaucracy. How would you describe our present day bureaucracy? Is it enviable?
Enviable? Well, in a democracy, people have access to their ministers. People’s petitions are attended to. If I want to see Obama now, even as a Nigerian, I can write to the White House in America. Because of the distance, it might take some time but I would see Obama. Harrow woods at 11 wrote to the British Prime Minister saying he wanted to see him. He saw him. He even said I would come and live here one of these days and he became Prime Minister years later. This fact of his life was brought out when he became Prime Minister.
One of the worst experiences I’ve heard people have is in the Ministry of Petroleum Resources. The minister is supposed to be serving the nation in a democracy, but you can’t see her. Even when you have the privilege of having her phone number, you call and she doesn’t pick her calls. You send her text messages and she doesn’t reply. What kind of democracy are we running? And that’s an example of our bureaucracy. Apart from a few other ministers you call, they pick their calls. They might even call you back if they miss your call. But a few bad ones are also there and they should not be part of democracy. But these are the ministers that the society is glorifying and even giving awards. I think the president of this nation, at his point in time, is also not a bad example. You write him today, he acknowledge the receipt of your letter. That’s the much I know about Goodluck. I’m not saying he is performing well, but I’m saying the instance of having access to people is important in governance and in a democracy especially.
A lot of our ministers think they are too big for you to have access to them. The public must have access to them in a democracy. Right now, it is lacking. In those days, bureaucracy was not like that. If you wrote to a minister in the Western regional government, he would see you. The generation of politicians before now appreciated access to themselves by the people, a lot more than today’s politicians.
Let’s talk about the politics of the first republic. It collapsed after the intervention of the military in 1966. How justified was that intervention and the implication of the subsequent fates of the nation?
Looking back, one would not think it was justifiable because law and order had broken down almost completely. And coup was very fashionable. A leader who doesn’t govern the way he should govern only force can overthrow them. And the revolutionary vanguard then was military: an organized group that had arms at their disposal. They were already organised by the state. Arms were available to them; there were uniforms. So, coup was the only ready-made answer for those people who were leading us. That was what brought about the collapse of one regime to the other and then the first republic.
However, the original nationalists had ideas of what kind of countries they wanted to see. The leaders of the process were highly educated people. Nnamdi Azikiwe was trained in America and knew what democracy ought to be like. He had been a black movement leader in America. He had listened to the blacks in America. He had listened to a couple of great American presidents. Awo was trained in England. He had studied and appreciated democratic process. Some people were resisting them, and before you knew it, that era had broken down completely. There was Operation wetie. They were burning houses and cars; they would put corpses behind your house and arrest you and get you locked up. They would put bicycle behind your house and say you stole the bicycle. They were the complainant, and the ones to ensure that the jury sentenced you to prison and all that.
There was also issue of corruption?
Yes, it was growing. That was the beginning of it all. I still will put that down to the ignorance to the rules of democracy and how it should work. And so, over time the system broke down. In 1966 too, the military struck. And so to say how justifiable, according to the historical process, we had to go through that phase. The only way not to go through that phase was one, for us to have understood the meaning of democracy, enthrone its values, live by its values, concede to your basic rights, as a citizen and you do the same to me. The should be mutual concession of right to each other. And then rule of law and social justice. They were missing.
If the ideals of the revolutionaries then were to effect a positive change, would you say their heirs, both military and civilians have learnt any lesson to be able to work towards the ideal society Nigerians should have?
They were not really revolutionaries. They were an armed gang. But the leaders of the process were far more conscious than those who hijacked the process from them. Listen to the broadcast of Nzeogwu in 1966. He talked about the breakdown of law and order; he talked about the kind of society that we wanted. The ideas were wonderful but the thing was hijacked by those who didn’t have those ideas and then the country suffered the more for it. And they were sidelined. Aguiyi Ironsi emerged from nowhere. The Gowon came; most of them didn’t have an idea of what democracy should be. Some of them, in spite of their short knowledge of democracy, still tried to do their best. Gowon was not known to be a violent person, but over his head, Nigeria almost disintegrated. Ojukwu came. Biafra came, and all that; they were now applying the science of muddling through. They were just managing. There were clear ideas of what kind of Nigeria we wanted in the first instance. If they had left the Ziks and the Awos a bit longer, maybe they would have found their bearing and we would have gone democratic, for they had some ideas of what it should look. We even had Aminu Kano; he was a great democrat.
In terms of where we should be, can you compare the military rulers and civilian rulers that we had in the second republic, aborted third republic and what we have now?
I just spoke about the first republican leaders. There was nationalism in the nation at that time. The second republic did manifest the worst understanding of democracy. Tribalism was openly enthroned; the might is right rulership took total control of the country. If I can slap you and get away with it, I would not hesitate to slap you for no good reason. If you slap me and have the power to put me in jail, you’ll put me in jail. So, might is right took total control in second republic. And then came the demise of that republic. I don’t want to mention individual names and contributions, but as a generation, they actually put the country on the wrong. That was the NPN, NPP, UPN era. Might was totally right. The Federal Government could do no wrong. Where it was clear they were wrong, they said they did no wrong. And that explains why it ended on the 31st of December, 1983. And of course, people jubilated not knowing that the military government would be no better. In fact, it was worse, but because it was an armed group, they didn’t challenge them. They had monopoly of arms. And so we had to be protesting on silence.
The only benefit I think he country got from the military intervention was the WAI (War Against Indiscipline) culture, which was also enthroned by force. We were also not conversant with democratic rules of respecting the right of other people. We easily succumbed to force. I remember that before then that I used to fly from Lagos to Kaduna. Although you had your ticket with seat numbers allocated, once the whistle is blown for you to board, there would be scramble and “agbada” would be flying. And even when you got to the aircraft, you’ll still be pushing yourself to queue. You had a ticket, you had a seat number. But when the WAI culture came, you had to learn to queue. And that has come to stay today. Nobody runs to catch an aircraft anymore. That was the singular gain I saw in the Buhari-Idiagbon military regime. But outside of that, there was still so much indiscipline in the country. Even at that period, some soldiers were known to be embezzling public funds. And if you can’t be disciplined about public funds, the ability to queue is not the height of discipline. But that was brought about by the military by force. We have to learn to acquire the consciousness of respecting the rights of others and not to run and push people and all that.
Greater days would have come over time and we would have learnt to operate democratic values and norms and begin to live like real democrats and then begin to make progress. However, the military interregnum leapt to destroy all cultures; they promoted inter-tribal consciousness; everybody began to say I’m Igbo, I’m Yoruba, I’m Fulani. Subsequent upon that is the civil war, where they were said to be killing Igbo in the North and Igbo fled back to their terrain, their home states. All these snowballed into a full blown civil war. Everybody went back home. Igbo went back home. Deltans and Edos also went back home. At that time, the Igbo were the worst victims, so they said, “let’s have a nation of our own” and they announced the creation of Biafra.
I often can’t talk about subjects like this without dragging imperialism into it. Six million pounds was due from British-Dutch Shell at the time as oil royalty. And Nigerian government in Lagos, led by Gowon, turned to the British and said, “where is our 6 million pounds oil royalty?” If you look at one pound as two Naira, that means N12 million was due. But the British-Dutch company, Shell, refused to pay Nigerian government in Lagos with which they had signed an agreement. And Ojukwu thought that was an advantage for him. “I control the oil area, pay me in Biafra. The British Dutch also said, No, we signed with Lagos; we didn’t sign with you. They turned round to Lagos and said, “but you don’t come to the oil area of the country.” So, they kept their N12 million. Nigerian government’s N12 million was kept with this company. In an attempt to show the dramatic manner that the Nigerian government, led by Gowon, also controlled the oil producing area of the country, they declared what they called ‘Police Action.’ It wasn’t meant to be a civil war. It was meant to be police action. The thing later became a full blown civil war and lasted 30 months.
Now, let me tell you what happened in the course of 30 months. Nigeria was spending the same amount of money, N12 million a month to buy arms from Europe to prosecute the war. They were still holding on to the N12 million. And we were spending N12 million per month for the 30 months in question, more or less, to prove that we controlled the oil areas of the country. And while they did that, they sent food to Biafra. Red Cross, all these humanitarian organisations were concerned about the plight of people dying in Nigeria. It was like feed them ready for our guns to kill them later. You cannot like the prejudice of those dirty games they played with people. And it was 30 months of death to prove that they were the bonafide owner of N12 million. France was on the side of Nigeria’s disintegration at that time; the French who had never won any war in history as such. In Algeria, they failed. They were the colonial masters of Algeria. They were pushed out by force by the Algerian state. The same country was in support of Nigeria to disintegrate. Was it not the same country America and Britain joined to invade Libya and Nigeria is saying “well done.” We were the first to recognize the transitional regime in Libya. That singular event marked us out as an ungrateful people. Apart from other consequences, once our president announced that we are supporting transitional regime in Libya, they began to kill Nigerians, like chickens. But these days when you talk about imperialism, people tend to think there is no imperialism. Imperialism is at home.
What would be your assessment of military’s control of the economy?
They ran it aground. Soldiers stole money and became the wealthy class of the country. And they taught us more about corruption. They didn’t care about anybody. I remember I wrote an article before the Idiagbon-Buhari regime was overthrown. I think it was in The Punch where I had highlighted out some of these things. I got more than 50 phone calls. If it were the time of GSM, I would have had more than 1,000 phone calls. I also wrote an article in The Punch, entitled, Power for Sale, in 1979 or thereabout. The military had acquired so much money. They had so much money to determine the outcome of any election in Nigeria. It was the beginning of the enthronement of what I now call the three M regime – Money, Muscle and Mischief. That regime began to determine who got what in Nigerian politics. And so with the new leadership, which emerged it became “Money, Muscle and Mischief regime;” that regime could never have produced anything worthwhile.
Taking a look at the state of the nation at 51 years, some say we are supposed to have had some accomplishments. Does an average Nigerian have what he should in terms of good things of life?
Far from it. The national cake is not being shared equitably; it’s not being shared fairly. Majority of our population are unemployed. Even those who are employed are not paid commensurate wage and we don’t have social benefits; we don’t have all these benefits; you don’t have employment benefit and so, the little you have, you must strive. Meanwhile, the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. In that kind of climate, there is no way you can say we are happy people. It’s not possible. There are no laws, no vibrant values to check the excesses of some people and as long as such people are allowed to excessive wealth, it would be at the expense of those who are suffering. So, we need some kind of social order. We need some kind of re-definition of our values and the purpose of governance and government. The government has an obligation to provide the wherewithal for all citizens. Basic minimum for everybody must be there, but right now we don’t have it.
I even tried pushing a bill through the National Assembly in 1999 and 2003 in that respect. The bill was called Social Security Bill. It was meant for NYSC members to graduate into a process. The NYSC income for them was meant to continue after graduation from NYSC until the society can provide them with job. Most of my contemporary politicians don’t understand it and it died a natural death after second reading. Some of them will call me and say, “you think we are in Europe?”
Recently, President Jonathan said he was no Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, lion or tiger. What do you have to say?
It is wrong. It is an extension of what he said about Obama praising him and we are criticizing him. He is our president, not Obama’s president, for God’s sake. We are not asking for a Pharaoh; we are not asking for a Nebuchadnezzar; we are not asking for a lion; we are not asking for a general. We are asking for a president that would define our national interest very well and act on the basis of the perceived interest. We are not asking for tyranny. We are in a democracy. This is the more reason he should listen to us as a democrat. I still feel there’s hope. He is highly educated. He is not a victim of dominant nationality politics: Igbo, Hausa, Yoruba. He’s not a victim of that. He is a minority man. He needs to govern objectively and listen to our criticism. We have a right to criticize him. It is for growth.
still in need of some information? search this site:
LOVE THE ARTICLE ABOVE?
Receive Updates: subscribe to Imo Herald in a reader or sign up for Free Email Updates
No comments:
Post a Comment