Aba Massacre: Nigeria Needs Peace Not Another Insurgency

 By Lawrence Chinedu Nwobu

It needs perhaps to be made clear to Buhari and members of Nigeria’s army and Police; that the most fundamental purpose of government is the protection of life and property. Indeed, the evolution of the state itself was premised on  the surrender of the overwhelming freedoms and rights man held in a state of nature—where each man was the law unto himself and only the fittest survived as was elaborately analysed in Thomas Hobbes Leviathan. With the surrender of those natural rights to the state/an organised overarching authority, the state took over the hitherto individual responsibility to protect lives and property which inevitably became its most important responsibility having been the raison d’être  for which it came into existence in the first place.

While there are many rights and benefits that a state can offer its citizens, none of those rights can be enjoyed except the right to life is first secured from whence it becomes possible to enjoy other rights. The trade-off between man in his desire to maintain his unfettered natural rights in a state of nature and the surrender of those rights to a state authority was thus primarily anchored on the unassailable logic and necessity for the state to provide security and protect lives and property as a fundamental function of the state. But when the same state and its security agents now turn its guns and kill the same defenceless citizens it is trained and paid to protect and for which it owes its very existence then something must be very wrong and the legitimacy of the state comes into question.  That is exactly what happened in Aba on the 9^th of February (bloody Tuesday) when the Nigerian army shot and massacred  in cold blood scores of unarmed IPOB pro-Biafra members while they were holding prayers in a school premises in Aba.

Such cowardly killing of unarmed civilians and citizens, whom the state primarily exists to protect, more so in an administration that championed the idea of change, is an act of monumental savagery and an abhorrent assault on human dignity and the social contract from which the state earned its existence. Not even mad dogs deserve to be killed like that. Most importantly, it is a crime against humanity as recognised by the Nigerian constitution, the United Nations charter, the African charter on human and people’s rights and all statutes of law—for even in war, there are rules of engagement that expressly forbid the killing of civilians, combatants or soldiers who have surrendered and prisoners of war in general. It beggars belief that Nigeria is not at war, yet the   army is killing defenceless civilians; an act that would be considered a crime even by the brutish standards of war. The Aba massacre and the general mishandling of the Biafra issue is just another demonstration that no lessons have been learnt from Nigeria’s bloodied history and the ongoing Boko Haram terrorist insurgency.

Lest we forget, the pogrom in the 60’s led to the needless civil war that lasted almost 3 years. The incessant killing of peaceful Niger-Delta agitators  and execution of Ken Saro Wiwa and the Ogoni 9 in trumped up charges led to the rise of the movement for the emancipation of the Niger-Delta (MEND) that engaged the security services in deadly conflict until Yar’Adua’s administration negotiated for a peaceful resolution through an amnesty programme. In the same vein,  the extra-judicial killing of Boko Haram members and in particular the extra-judicial execution of their leader  Mohammed Yusuf in 2009 led to the evolution of Boko Haram into a terrorist insurgency  that is now classified the deadliest  in the world; far ahead of Al Qaeda and ISIS. If therefore, any lessons can be learnt from history, it is that every violent encounter in Nigeria most often comes with a violent consequence that far supersedes that which originated it. Thus the recent massacre of Shiites in Zaria and the brutal massacre of unarmed IPOB members while they were holding prayers in Aba have the potential to ignite new insurgencies that the already fragile Nigerian state and weakened security forces cannot cope with.

In spite of the obvious risks and the lessons of history, Buhari’s antagonistic approach to  dealing with long standing issues of nationhood that are better resolved through dialogue which democracy thankfully affords—indicates he is more intent on creating new theatres of conflict. Yet, an insurgency in the East and elsewhere adding to the already gruelling Boko Haram imbroglio and widening embers of discord across the nation  is  one that is certainly guaranteed the Nigerian army cannot  win given the nature of insurgency itself and the dynamics  of the present times.  Besides too much blood has been shed already for Nigeria’s sake and it’s time to negotiate a permanent peace so that the nation can develop, reach its potentials and particularly for an administration that promised change show that issues can be resolved peacefully in our clime. As I am writing the British PM David Cameron has fixed June 23^rd for a referendum on its membership of the European Union. This came after exhaustive negotiations with the EU. In 2014 Scotland held a referendum on self rule from the United Kingdom.

The world over; civilised peoples deal with issues of grievances, dissent and self determination in a peaceful and democratic manner— through negotiations and if need be through referendums as recognised by international law, this is after all the 21^st century. It is only in Africa with leaders like Buhari that every issue leads to bloodletting, willy-nilly reinforcing the stereotype of Africa as a primitive continent of endless conflicts. The Nigerian army and Police already have a sordid history of human rights violations, which informed the ban on weapons sales by the United States and European Union countries. Paradoxically, Buhari had campaigned on change and the expectation was that his administration would end all forms of human rights violations by the security services. But rather than ending it, his administration has made it worse with more than 1000 innocent civilians killed and wounded by the army and police in just 9 months of his administration. In so doing, he has shown himself not to be a peacemaker but an antagonist one that is determined to widen the zones of conflict and ethno-religious divisions in Nigeria.

But this is a road that will lead nowhere but to destruction and other unintended consequences. More than anything else Nigeria needs peace, not another insurgency—and it’s not too late for Buhari to vindicate his much vaunted change ideal; by reigning in the security services, punish the erring ones and become a peacemaker rather than a warmonger for the good of the country.
–
Lawrence Chinedu Nwobu
Email: lawrencenwobu@gmail.com

Again, Buhari rejects devaluation of naira

President Muhammadu Buhari has again ruled out the possibility of his government devaluing the naira.

The president said Saturday that the priority of his administration was to ensure national food security before export of food products.

The president said this while contributing to a Presidential Panel Roundtable on Investment and Growth Opportunities at the opening session of the Africa 2016: Business for Africa, Egypt and the World at Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt.

President Buhari said for Nigeria, being a mono-economy dependent on oil, and with a teeming unemployed youth population, the way out of the current slump in the global oil market, is for the administration to focus on agriculture and solid minerals development.

“The land is there and we need machinery inputs, fertilizer and insecticides,” he said.

Reiterating his opposition to the devaluation of the naira, President Buhari said Nigeria cannot compete with developed countries which produce to compete among themselves, and can afford to devalue their local currencies.

“Developed countries are competing among themselves and when they devalue they compete better and manufacture and export more. But we are not competing and exporting but importing everything including toothpicks. So, why should we devalue our currency?” the president asked.

“We want to be more productive and self-sufficient in food and other basic things such as clothing. For our government, we like to encourage local production and efficiency.”

He added that those who have developed taste for foreign luxury goods should continue to pay for them rather pressure government to devalue the naira.

President Buhari, who expressed optimism that Nigeria would get out of its current economic downturn, noted that another major problem militating against economic revival is the huge resources deployed towards fighting insurgency and international terrorism.

He, however, commended the support being received from the international community in the administration’s fight against terrorism as well as cooperation in tracing looted funds stashed away in foreign countries.

Responding to a question on his performance since he assumed office, the president said that his administration had been quite focused on three fundamental issues of securing the country, reviving the economy and stamping out corruption.

“The message on corruption has been driven home vividly and Nigerians are very acceptable to the message,” he said, adding that those accused of stealing public funds are cooperating by voluntarily providing useful information while investigations and prosecutions are ongoing.

In his opening address at the Forum, the Egyptian President, Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi, said Africa needs to concentrate on transforming into knowledge societies using innovation and research. The Presidents of Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Sudan and the Prime Minister of Ethiopia also participated at the Roundtable.

In his opening message, the President of the African Development Bank (ADB), Akinwumi Adesina, said that “Africa must think big, act big and develop big.”

Before departing Egypt, President Buhari and his Egyptian host, had a bilateral discussion on security, military cooperation, agriculture and solid minerals development.

Buhari rejects S/Arabia’s invitation to join Islamic Coalition against Terror

Buhari, who is on a week-long visit to Saudi Arabia and Qatar, told his host ‎and ruler of Saudi Arabia. King Salman Bin Abdul-Aziz, ‎that rather than joining the coalition, Nigeria would support the coalition.

‎He spoke at a bilateral meeting between Nigeria and Saudi Arabia in Riyadh hosted by the ruler, King Salman Bin Abdul-Aziz.

The president, who made his first pronouncement on the invitation to join the coalition of Islamic states against terror spearheaded by the Saudis, congratulated the Kingdom on forming the coalition.

He said: "Even if we are not a part of it, we support you.

“I must thank the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for the recent creation of a coalition to address the menace of international terrorism.

"Nigeria will support your efforts in keeping peace and stopping the spread of terror in your region. 

“This is in consonance with our own commitment and on-going efforts in seeking to stamp out Boko Haram terrorists from the West African sub-region and Lake Chad Basin Commission (LCBC)."

Written by ThisDay

MOSOP Condemns Military Invasion Of Ogoni Communities

Press Statement

The apex organisation of the Ogoni people, MOSOP, is outraged and condemns in strong terms the invasion of Ogoni communities by the Nigerian military and demand from government the immediate withdrawal of the invading soldiers.

Reports available to MOSOP have shown that rather than end the condemnable campaign, the military has this morning (23/2/2016) extended the violence to Bori, shooting indiscriminately and advancing into adjoining communities including Zaakpon. The shooting, which is on-going had saddeningly seen to the cold blooded murder of innocent persons, infliction of serious gunshot injuries on others, paralysis of activities in the Ogoni capital and its environs as well as arbitrary arrests thereby forcing natives and residents to flee to safety.

The soldiers had on February 22 violently invaded Yeghe community in Gokana local government area of Ogoni, Rivers State occasioning the killing of three (3) innocent natives including Saturday Gbarazia, inflicted severe gunshot injuries on other victims, whose health conditions are said to be very critical; destroyed properties and made arbitrary arrests.

Similarly, the military aided by one notorious Isaac Obe had raided Alode in Eleme local government area on Friday, 19th February, 2016 occasioning torture and arbitrary arrest of victims, destruction of properties belonging to Messrs. Ndo Chizor, John Saloka and others.

We consider as extremely disappointing and unfortunate these unprovoked military violence against our people, which betrays repressively sinister motive and reminiscent of our sad past. We find it difficult to rationalise the wisdom in this military campaign, cruelly motivated by hidden and evil intent. No matter what may be adduced to have informed this appalling military approach, violence in our view, cannot provide the necessary solution to civil issues but dialogue.

Insofar as we are concerned, we are not in a military state neither are we in a state of war that should warrant such degree of military violence. It is shocking and smacks of hate and callousness that in a democratic dispensation, which requires proper civil conduct on the part of all including the military, such level of military hardware including tanks will be deployed to purely harmless civilian communities in a matter that has not been well substantiated.

The military must therefore tread causciously and maintain its independence and professionalism as well as resist attempts by desperate politicians to drag them into the murky waters of politics including being used to commit human rights abuses.

Facts abound that Ogoni had made enormous sacrifices including paying the supreme price for the rebirth and sustenance of the current democracy. We have thus expected that we would be treated fairly and not turning our communities into theatres of violence and killing fields.

It appears to us that this devious campaign may be aimed at creating an unconducive atmosphere in the area to frustrate the planned Ogoni environmental remediation and restoration project billed to commence in the first quarter of this year.

We are therefore passionately calling on all men of goodwill including the international community to prevail on Abuja to withdraw soldiers from Ogoni and stop further violence against our people.

For obvious reasons, we would be protesting the unprovoked violation of the inalienable rights of our people including the right to life to the United Nations, the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation and Nigeria’s National Human Rights Commission.

At this crucial moment, we call on the Ogoni people to remain calm and resist the temptation to take laws into their hands. We will continue to monitor the situation and report appropriately.

Signed:
Fegalo Nsuke
Publicity Secretary, MOSOP
23 February, 2016

The slaughter of kings

Sam Omatseye·

Thank God for democracy. Thank God for kings. It is a contradiction that works well here. No matter how avidly we proclaim our republican virtues, we are, at heart, all royalists.

The earlier we admit this to ourselves the better it is for us to make our so-called republic worth the while. Recently, a ranking of Yoruba monarchs stirred a little unease in some quarters. The Alake of Egbaland, Oba Adedotun Gbadebo, unveiled the hierarchy from his own point of view. He said the Ooni of Ife was numero uno, followed by the Alafin of Oyo and Oba of Benin respectively.

In a brilliant but characteristically unwieldy rebuttal, Odia Ofeimun harks back home and anoints the Oba of Benin on the prime spot. Ofeimun begins by disavowing any fidelity to kings, and apes the chic fashion of calling oneself a republican.

I am not interested in the hierarchy. But neither am I happy with the slaughter of kings. By the way, that phrase comes from the Bible where Abraham makes mincemeat of pagan kings.

Since the British slaughtered our kings metaphorically to make Nigeria a colony, we have pretended to have outgrown them. But the wise among us know better. So, they engage the royals. We can recall the recent spat between Oyo State Governor, Abiola Ajimobi and the Olubadan-in-council over the elevation of the irritant Ladoja and other chiefs without regards to due process.

It was billed as a standoff of two antipodal worlds. Modern versus ancient, republican versus royalist, bureaucratic versus traditional, the past versus the future, indigenous versus foreign.

But the cards lay in the governor’s hands. The law gives him the power. He held his grounds.

But some elders pitched in and they both etched peace and ended the furore. That was principally because the governor understood the intricacy of traditional mores. The matter was resolved with the understanding that their elevations held as long as they provided documents of their medical and security screening.

Gov. Ajimobi showed a hand of cultural nuance and maturity rather than a modern radical in power. He did not act like President Kongi in Soyinka’s bleak play Kongi’s Harvest, who places the king under lock and key.

But not long after, Ibadan tells us another story. The Olubadan dies and a transition beckons. But not to worry. There will be no night of long knives dripping with intrigues and backstabbing. No dark horses emerging, no permutations, no politicking, no underhand manoeuvres. Forget the tale of bribery from a chief. The rules shun the stealth of filthy lucre.

Ibadan has a smooth transition. The successor is known and he will step right on the throne of the fathers once all rites are fulfilled. Yet Ibadan history is rooted in the republican principle. Founded on a highland, it gathered migrants from the wars bursting all over Yorubaland. The new citizens made themselves a new society with kings not based on the old ways. It was a town of generals. The men who rose were not of the royal blood line. They were swordsmen who shed blood for the new land. The Ogunmolas and Latosas earned their epaulets by gallantry.

But the society has not ended up a democracy, but a feudal redoubt. That’s the irony. It is like Igboland, where kings are nothing, but it blends republican ethos with social rules that invoke a feudal milieu. In Ibadan, it is a sort of gerontocracy, where the oldest becomes king. It works and our politicians have called for a politics where rules work, not chaos. Not the power of the strong man. In Ibadan, they teach us the supremacy of the rule of law.

Unlike our politics where a transition leads to fear and trembling, and where in some kingdoms heads roll, Ibadan is easy. The departed Olubadan embodied the full persona of Nigerian power, and Gov. Ajimobi serenaded him as a soldier, politician, bureaucrat, king.

All of that is in us. We may say we are no royalists. But we show it everyday. We bow to the elder. In Urhoboland, the younger says migwo, (I am on my knees) to the older person. The Onyisi syndrome is alive and well in Igboland. The Yoruba still gleefully prostrate. In weddings, a 30-year-old suitor prostrates to a two-year-old in-law, at least in theory. The baba gan refrain riffs through the culture.Ranka dede, a northern term of obsequious subordination, only became temporarily antiquated in the last election cycle when Buhari’s fans chanted Sai Baba.

The top of all obeisance lies in the throne. It is the apex court of genuflection. It is only the king that cannot bow, a taboo that Soyinka hints at with revulsion in Kongi’s Harvest.

In my first visit to the United Kingdom, a hotel hand was cross at me for ruffling a British currency note with the picture of the queen. Oliver Cromwell who presided over the killing of Charles 1 was not bold enough to decree a farewell to the monarchy. Part of the sanity of the British democracy comes from the stabilising awe of royalty.

For all his republican craving, Napoleon Bonaparte crowned himself king in Rome and his seductress and wife Josephine as queen. In the United States, we see the appetite of royalty. Once, the Kennedy family was their unofficial royalty. In their absence, we have all forms of royalty, high like the imperfect Bush family, or low like the Kardashians. It is probably the reason America is the celebrity capital. As men seek gods, societies seek kings and princes. In fact, some Americans wanted George Washington to be crowned king. Others wanted him to reign as president till death. It is not for nothing that this celebrity fascination has drowned the world. In his novel, The Prince and the Pauper, Mark Twain, an American, emphasised the integrity of royalty by showing that a prince could never act as a pauper, or vice versa.

In Yorubaland, a saying goes thus, “we cannot serve the father and also the son.” That has been used with the Awo clan. That is probably reinforced because the palaces in Yorubaland still retain a certain grandeur. We were all witnesses to President Jonathan’s peripatetic folly of begging about the palaces of the Southwest.

I know many who say bad things about royalty in a democracy. If, for instance, chieftaincy titles were stopped, they would be the first to cry foul.

Rather than disavow royalty, we should learn how to make it work. We already have it in the way we organise our families, villages, local government, politics, business, etc. Rather than deny, let us explore it and make something out of it as Governor Ajimobi did. We may devise a new society and ideology from it. Just maybe. We may call it royal democracy. As we have social democrats, Christian democrats, etc, we may have royal democrats. Rather than savage the kings, we could salvage a system.

- In Touch, The Nation newspaper,