Buhari’s New Change Ought to Begin with His Igbo Problem

For full disclosure, I am an Igbo man. I am also one of the pundits currently being lampooned for cheering President Muhammadu Buhari to democratic power. Yet, knowing what I know now, I will lend that support all over again—and even more. Unless we have begun to view the history from a tainted lens, the thought of the very alternative, which was to bring back Goodluck Jonathan, remains a portent of much bigger crisis. More relatively, I strongly endorse Buhari’s latest mantra: “Change begins with me.” And that is exactly what this piece is set to accomplish.

Let me quickly wet the ground by first defining effective leadership as the ability of the leader to maximize the available resources within the internal and external environment and be recognized by the followers as meeting the expectations. Please notice that this definition has two components. One is for the leader to do a good job. The other, and probably more instructive, is for the leader to be seen by the follower as doing a good job.

Like every Nigerian leader, Buhari assumed the presidency with good intentions. The president is also working hard. Despite the economic mess left behind by the previous government, he is soldiering on with measurable progress on many areas. Regrettably, most Nigerians see the efforts as busy doing nothing. Accordingly, Buhari is making changes beginning from his very self. But there is one critical problem the General has continued to ignore that is firmly woven into the fabric of our current quest for economic revival: His Igbo problem.

For obvious reasons, the problem was initially waved off as a typical Igbo palaver. Sadly, it has now widened with untold social, political, and economic consequences. Before getting to the main gist, here is a cursory glance at the Igbo—just in case.

As one of the major Nigerian ethnic groups, the Igbo are the natural inhabitants of the Southeast and some areas of South-South and North-Central zones of Nigeria. The people are predominantly Christians and uniquely boast of being the first or second largest population in most parts of the country. Known for their unique resilience, resourcefulness, can-do spirit and, of course, unbounded technological and scientific acumen; the Igbo represent the hybrid engine of Nigeria’s commerce. These diverse traits help in no small measure as they forge social, political, and economic influence around Nigeria.

But the influence is even beyond. The Igbo have embraced the reigning economic gospel that we no longer merely live in a country but in a world. Thus, with a heavy presence around the globe, they gleefully play a commanding role in nation’s foreign exchange, foreign trade, foreign investment as well as relationships. Not surprisingly, the Igbo in the Diaspora are a leading block contributor to the yearly amount of foreign money remitted to Nigeria, which is ironically more than the national budget. Very significantly, the people are one of the key drivers of Nigeria’s media home and abroad and thus have the potential to influence how the country is perceived anywhere.

The foregoing attributes are more than enough to discern that the Igbo is as important as any other ethnic group and ought to be carried along in the current change agenda of the government. Chinua Achebe was more eloquent in the book, There Was a Country: The perennial tendency to undermine the unique role of the Igbo in Nigeria “is one of the fundamental reasons the country has not developed as it should and has emerged as a laughingstock.” But events thus far suggest that Buhari might have been ill-advised to challenge the theory from the onset.

This apparent dissent is rooted in the 2015 presidential elections where a vast majority of the Igbo joined the South-South to vote en masse against Buhari’s winning candidacy. However, rather than use the historic mandate to rally the different political divisions towards common purpose, the president would shock the democratic world by revealing his plan to marginalize the zones that voted against him. Many pundits thought his statement was a mere gaffe. But the records afterwards seem to suggest that Muhammadu “Okechukwu” Buhari actually meant the threat of vendetta against the Igbo, particularly those from the Southeast.

Critics are free to join here. But there is no gainsaying that the Igbo people are truly marginalized in the current scheme of things. As I had penned in October 2015, the upper echelon of Buhari’s government is a preview. “The underlying rationale in this case is that the positions of the President, Vice-President, Senate President, Speaker, Chairman of the ruling party, and the Secretary to Federal Government have been staked in the past 16 years as the main thrust of the party in power and thence rotated among the six political zones of the country.” Yet, the Southeast was conspicuously denied its share. Moreover, it is no coincidence that the same Southeast Nigeria, the mainstay of the Igbo nation, is the only zone without a personnel presence in the nation’s security leadership apparatus.

This outlook coupled with a stoic indifference by the president triggered outrage in the land. It straightaway provoked the Movement for the Actualization of Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), then a sedate outfit, to declare “that Buhari is not seeing Ndigbo as part of Nigeria.” The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) was not to be left behind, as it heightened its call for secession from the country. Their activities, however, were met with brute force, including the detention without bail of its leader, Nnamdi Kalu. This plight is today commonly linked to the birth of a new militant group under the auspices of Niger Delta Avengers. We are all living witnesses to the economic repercussions of the Biafran movement and their Avengers ever since.

The title of this piece will not be apt if the empathy for the current wave of Igbo marginalization did not flow past east of River Niger. Recognizing that the ruling party treated it as business as usual, the opposition from the highly influential Southwest Nigeria led by the trio of Ayo Fayose, Femi Fani-Kayode, and Femi Aribisala capitalized on the saga to strike back. What just took place here, and painfully so, is that Muhammadu Buhari had inadvertently provided a lifeline for the corrupt brigade of the immediate past regime—from the east, north, and west—to resurface and now grandstand as latter-day fighters of what is widely believed as naked injustice to the people of the Southeast. And what followed, thereafter, was a montage of propaganda that successfully painted the president as an unapologetic bigot determined to punish not only the Igbo but also the entire Christian-dominated South.

The development caught the attention of the Northern zone of the Christian Association of Nigeria, which lamented as follows: “while there were volumes of allegations from the South that the appointments made so far were in favour of the north, facts on the ground revealed that those appointments were lopsided in favour of Muslim north to the detriment of Northern Christian community.” More dauntingly, many blame part of the current crisis on Buhari’s economic policy, particularly foreign exchange, which is believed to be tribally skewed to specially benefit his Fulani kinsmen who control bureau de change across the country.

Today, not only is the national economy in recession, the negative opinion of Buhari is growing beyond our shores. Although a number of world leaders showered praises on him during the recent UN session in New York for giant strides against corruption and terrorism, which is very gratifying, a creeping concern within the international community remains that Nigeria’s president is a dictator, tribalist, sectionalist, misogynist, and religious bigot—all in one person. This emerging view—whether real or not—explains why US Congressman Tom Marino, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, on a September 1, 2016 letter, would warn the United States to withhold selling arms to Nigeria until Buhari demonstrates true “commitment to inclusive government and the most basic tenets of democracy: freedom to assemble and freedom of speech.”

This spectre is gloomy, square. It does not bode well for an economy in recession. In short, it scares away investment whether local or foreign, especially in this era of economic globalization where millions of Nigerians in the Diaspora, the Igbo well included, represent the convex lens through which the world sees Nigeria. This also goes to say that even as President Buhari might have done a good job on the area of corruption, the fact that he is generally perceived as condoning gross injustice at another area renders his entire effort pyrrhic.

The central problem is complex and thus difficult to capture at once. But the solution is quite simple. For every question raised in this essay sufficiently answers itself. Buhari has to simply trek back to where the rain started beating him and make amends. Allowing the problem to linger not only threatens the chances of economic revival but also the hard-earned change. Even if he is not thinking of 2019, which he should, Mr. President cannot feign ignorance of the fact that his queasy quandary with the Legislature has his Igbo problem written all over it. Very true!

♦ SKC Ogbonnia, Ph.D. writes from Houston, Texas. Contact >>>

Trump’s “Deplorable” Minority Outreach Has Backfired

Let me start by disclosing that I have been a Republican throughout my donkey’s years in America. This affinity is shaped by my values as an African. For we are fundamentally religious, pro-life, support prayers in school and advocate school choice. More profoundly, we promote traditional marriage between a man and a woman. We also work very hard, strongly oppose higher taxes, and are very cold to radical feminism. These conservative principles are widely shared by most people of colour as well as the Republican Party.

Therefore, even as the minorities have generally owed their allegiance to the Democratic Party in recent decades, there is always a high possibility for a dramatic shift. Such shift had seemed ripe in the 2016 presidential election that determines which party takes over from President Barack Obama.

Vaulted to power on the mantra of hope and change, Obama has been painted as opaque by the minority groups that anchored his journey to Pennsylvania Avenue. Without a doubt, he has recorded a measurable success in the general polity, especially considering the gloomy spectre upon assumption of office. But the minorities remain peeved that the election of one of their own as president has not reflected the desired change in their immediate communities. More strikingly, the Hispanics feel betrayed that Obama has deported more illegal aliens than others before him. And the black elites are not enthused that President George W. Bush showed more interest and did more for Africa than the first African American president.

Yet I am joining the vast majority of the American minority to support the Democratic Party in this electoral cycle. This is noteworthy because it means endorsing a party that has nothing in common with me. My reason, though, is simple: Donald J. Trump.

He is truly deplorable. He neither shares Republican ideals nor conservative values. But to gain political prominence, Trump would embrace the Tea Party, a hateful fringe sect within the Republican Party that constantly stokes racism, hegemony, and xenophobia. With the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and Sean Hannity then stale voices; Trump became a fresh echo-chamber to the birther conspiracy. The birther goal, of course, was to delegitimize the first African American President by falsely claiming that Obama was not born in the United States.

The birther scam ultimately endeared Trump to the ultra-conservative right-wing America. But it also sowed a deep seed of discord with the black population. His perceived shortcomings within the African American community notwithstanding, any serious jab on President Obama remains a personal slap on any black face.

But the bombastic billionaire was not done. By the summer of 2015, Trump noticed that the very extremist right-wing lane was wide open in a Republican field of 17 presidential candidates. And he was set to go full circle. The gambit this time was to rubbish the other major minority group in a manner never witnessed in history. By the minute he was done with his eventual announcement for a presidential bid, the Latino image in America would never be the same. Donald Trump simply branded their immigrants as drug-pushers, criminals, rapists, scum-bags, and much worse. And his target audience roared in agreement.

Trump’s toxic rhetoric did not hinder his meteoric rise to the Republican nomination. For extremism has been a wining tonic for primary voters. After all, the American electorate is very forgiving. Any logical pivot to the center is typically welcome for the general election. But this case is entirely different. Mr. Trump is the antithesis of political logic, and that is where his dream of the White House became a mirage. The objective point is that the man actually knew where to start but did not know where not to go: Courting the minority votes.

Often ignored in the electoral debate is that Donald Trump once had the chance to gamble his way to the Oval Office, if the minority voters had remained lukewarm about the Democratic Party and its presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton. While Trump’s right-wing supporters had shown steady enthusiasm, the minority voters were ambivalent about the 2016 polls altogether. But that was then.

Trump, since then, has attempted to reap where he did not sow by pandering to the minorities. He has shuttled to Mexico, assembled at a black church, and called his opponent a bigot. But the manner of the outreach is definitely deplorable and has backfired. The whole maneuver has finally exposed him as an erratic goofball. Even his message on immigration, the very signature campaign issue, has become so incoherent that the few Latino leaders on his camp are fleeing while his base supporters are beginning to grow in doubt.

More broadly, the brazen outreach woke up the Democrats early enough. They have come to realize that minority votes must not be taken for granted this time, and they are now countering with specific policies. Worst for Trump, the press as well as the Democratic leaders have masterfully brought to fore Mrs. Clinton’s tireless attention to minority communities while at same time exhuming his life-long iniquities against people of colour.

Race is now left, right, and center of the presidential election; and that is not a winning proposition for the real estate mogul. For example, a recent survey by USA Today and Suffolk University has revealed that a stunning 44% of likely voters think that Donald Trump is a racist. For the Quinnipiac poll, a majority of Americans believe the Republican nominee “appeals to bigotry.” The political optics is that the potential US president is a racist.

This racial spectacle has emboldened Mrs. Clinton to expose a cache of fetid sins against Trump. She has already called out his linkage to Alt Right, a right wing group that advocates white supremacy. She would double down by openly declaring a group of Trump’s supporters as a “basket of deplorables…racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it.”

The minorities now fully get it. Not only do they now see a fighter in Hillary, they are profoundly provoked. In short, they no longer have to ponder Trump’s rallying question: “What the hell do you have to lose” for voting for him? They have since known to answer: “Everything”

There is everything to lose with a “deplorable” racist in the White House. The minorities now see the election as a matter of good versus evil. Party affiliation notwithstanding, we have finally become enthusiastic to vote en masse against Mr. Trump, thanks to his deplorable outreach for minority votes at the Eleventh Hour.

■ Dr. SKC Ogbonnia, Ph.D., writes from Houston, Texas – Contact: email to skcogbonnia@firsttexasenergy.com

Lionel Messi announces he is quitting the Argentina national team

Not satisfied with the defeat in the Copa America final, Lionel Messi refused to receive the award for best player in the competition that Argentina lost in penalties to Chile. According to the newspaper Minute Uno, Messi refused to climb to the podium to receive this award, a decision that led the organization to abdicate to choose a replacement as best player of the tournament held in Chile. Messi had already been elected best player of the 2014 World Cup, competition that Argentina also lost in the final against Germany.

Leander Schaerlaeckens, FC Yahoo

EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J. – Lionel Messi’s apparent final act as an Argentina player was to blast a penalty kick over the crossbar, inducing a chain of events that ended in his retirement (just three days after his 29th birthday) from the national team he brought to three Copa America finals and a World Cup championship game.

After 120 minutes of frightfully physical but scoreless soccer here in the final of the Copa America Centenario on Sunday night, La Albiceleste and Chile once again took their final to a shootout – just as they had last year in the regular edition of this tournament. And yet again, Chile prevailed on penalties.

That made it three consecutive summers in which Messi and Argentina had lost the final of a major tournament in extra time. In 2014, it was the World Cup final, which was decided by Germany’s 113th-minute goal. Last year, the outcome was the same as this year, falling to Chile in the Copa America final on penalties.

Messi was Argentina’s first kicker in Sunday’s shootout, airmailing his effort. That didn’t seem so consequential at the time, as Chile’s Arturo Vidal, shooting first, had already seen his soft effort saved by Sergio Romero. But Lucas Biglia would miss the Argentines’ fourth attempt as well, and the Chileans, having missed no other shots, won 4-2 to become the champions yet again.

He emerged from the locker room more than an hour after the final whistle after accepting yet another runner-up medal. Accompanied by a burly security guard and a police officer, he scampered by the hordes of journalists shouting his name and made a beeline for a cluster of TV cameras from Argentina’s national networks. He walked upright. His hair was coiffed just so. His reddish beard was tidily kept. His growing collection of tattoos poked out of his national team-issued T-shirt and shorts. He mumbled a few things, avoiding eye contact. And then he walked off.

Most were too far away to hear what he said, pushed out of the crush of human flesh straining to get near him. But soon enough, word emerged of a cataclysmic announcement.

It’s difficult,” some outlets reported him saying. “It’s a tough moment for any kind of analysis. In the locker room I thought this might be the end for me on the national team. This isn’t for me.”

“The national team is over for me,” other reports quoted him as saying. “It’s not for me after four finals. The decision is taken, I believe.”

Plainly, Messi was distraught over having missed a penalty. And he was perhaps disillusioned over not having played a bigger role in the game. But that was probably more of a credit to Chile’s suffocating defensive pressure than it was a knock on the record five-time world player of the year.

Either way, he’s had enough. For now, at least.

And some context is required here. Messi has always said he is proudly Argentine, but he has a complicated relationship with his national team and its fans – going beyond the dysfunction within the Argentina federation and the friction that it causes.

Messi was only 13 when he left his home in Rosario to join Barcelona’s youth academy. He grew up in Catalonia and became a man there and then a star. He’s lived in Spain longer than he has in Argentina. And it took him a good few years with the national team to become as influential and successful as he had been with Barca.

There are plenty of good reasons for this, of course. He didn’t know the players as well. The system wasn’t designed around him so seamlessly as at Barcelona. For a lot of those years, Argentina was a deficient team, surrounding him with markedly lesser players than his club did. These valid explanations were not always understood at home.

So now comes his decision, perhaps taken rashly or perhaps mulled over for months or even years, to stop donning the iconic white and light blue.

Nobody denies that Messi’s experiences have been hard to swallow.

“There’s nothing we haven’t already said about the weight decisive matches bear over us, the finals of these past few years, and he is the way any football player must be when he participates and gets to a final and loses,” Argentina manager Gerardo Martino said just a short while before Messi made his announcement. “And certainly to lose again is painful.”

So dispiriting was a third consecutively lost final, in fact, that after the game, word got out that defender Javier Mascherano was also quitting the national team. Perhaps striker Sergio Aguero as well, it was rumored.

If he sticks by his decision, Messi will hardly be the first national team star to bookend his international career long before he quits the game altogether. It’s an understandable move.

Playing deep into a tournament every summer had been an added burden to a player who already carries a heavy workload with the most successful club of the last decade. As he nears his 30s, eliminating the summer tournaments and a great deal of travel from his list of responsibilities will likely extend his prime. Which is to say nothing of the mental weight of forever carrying a fanatical and demanding nation’s hopes ever since he first got to a Copa America final with Argentina in 2007 – losing to Brazil 3-0.

If this really is it for Messi, he leaves one of the world’s most storied national programs as its all-time leader in goals with 55 – he eclipsed the great Gabriel Batistuta with a stupendous free kick against the U.S. during a 4-0 romp in the semifinals – and with a Golden Ball as the 2014 World Cup’s best player in his bloated trophy case.

That will be scant consolation. For him or Argentina.

And while his decision is surprising and feels rash, it’s also defensible and understandable.

Leander Schaerlaeckens is a soccer columnist for Yahoo Sports. Follow him on Twitter @LeanderAlphabet.

PDP is too corrupt and too sick to lead the opposition

It is a common knowledge that any government without credible opposition is open to dictatorship and abuse of power. Recently, there was an array of hope for Nigeria. For all intents and purposes, Nigerians had witnessed a formidable opposition activity by the time for the 2015 elections. But that is no longer the case. The current main opposition party, the Peoples Democratic Party of Nigeria (PDP), has turned out to be too corrupt and too sick to play a leading role.

So far, President Muhammadu Buhari is doing a commendable job grabbing the corrupt PDP henchmen one after the other. Yet, the attitude of the culprits once they are granted bail is not funny at all. Instead of standing firm to defend themselves and the cause of the opposition, these PDP leaders are usually befallen with one form of acute sickness or another. To rub in the ploy, the sick looters typically opt for treatment abroad while the masses are saddled with poor medical facilities at home.
Interestingly, the ardent supporters of the former ruling party still see hope. They believe the party will soon usher in some credible leaders in the crucible of a party convention, whenever that might be. But don’t hold your breath. Of course, PDP still boasts of fairly untainted figures like Ken Nnamani, Nuhu Ribadu, Donald Duke, Segun Mimiko, Ibrahim Dankwambo, Ibrahim Shekarau, and so on. Alas, the Peoples Democratic Party of Nigeria is not ready to entrust its future on any novice in primitive accumulation of wealth. The dilemma, therefore, is that virtually all its anointed leaders with deep pocket—from the north, east, and west—wear loud beads of corruption around their necks. Take a look at the lineup below.
Namadi Sambo: In a normal clime, the mild-mannered former Vice President would be the shoe-in to the leadership vacuum. However, he is yet to recover from an overseas medical treatment resulting possibly from the new wave of sickness common with PDP chieftains being fingered for abuse of office. Moreover, Sambo cannot feign ignorance to the monumental corruption that rocked the National Economic Council while he was at the helm.
Enter the man of the hour, son of a former Sultan, and the former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki who has been in dire need of foreign medical treatment in midst of dizzying criminal charges. Dasuki had exhibited a measure of political shrewdness when he stormed the London Think-Tank Chatham House to make a case for the postponement of Nigeria’s 2015 elections. But it is clear that his was a fall before the rise. The Sokoto prince will forever be remembered for freebooting $2.1 billion defense funds budgeted to save human lives—now referred to as Dasukigate.
The case of the recent PDP Chairmen does not exude hope. Haliru Mohammed Bello, for one, has become a permanent fixture in the contemporary discussion of corruption in Nigeria. Currently confined to a hospital bed but indicted in connection to the Dasukigate, Bello is the same character thrust into the position of Defense Minister during the Goodluck era despite being embroiled in the infamous £8.6 billion Siemens bribery scandal. Similarly, though he is been out of the public scene since stepping down after failing to account for N12 billion party funds, Nigerians will never forget how Adamu Mua’zu ascended the top party post in the face of pending allegations for stealing N19.8billion from Bauchi State coffers. Even more, not only is the former governor rumored sick somewhere, Mua’zu remains an integral quotient in cracking the various Dasukigate equations.

PIC.2. FROM LEFT: VICE PRESIDENT NAMADI SAMBO; PRESIDENT GOODLUCK JONATHAN AND PDP CHAIRMAN, ADAMU MU'AZU, WAVING TO THE CROWD DURING DECAMPING CEREMONY OF ATTAHIRU BAFARAWA FROM APC TO PDP IN SOKOTO ON SATURDAY (8/2/14). 794/8/2/14/AAG/NAN — PIC.2. FROM LEFT: VICE PRESIDENT NAMADI SAMBO; PRESIDENT GOODLUCK JONATHAN AND PDP CHAIRMAN,
ADAMU MU’AZU, WAVING TO THE CROWD DURING DECAMPING CEREMONY OF ATTAHIRU BAFARAWA FROM APC
TO PDP IN SOKOTO ON SATURDAY (8/2/14).
794/8/2/14/AAG/NAN

Sule Lamido is a well-nurtured party stalwart then widely seen as the heir apparent to 2019 PDP presidential ticket. Sadly, the ex-governor and son are now awaiting trial for plundering Jigawa State treasury. The plight of the past Chairman of Northern Governors Forum, Muazu Babangida Aliyu, is equally sad. Not long ago all roads pointed to Aliyu’s Minna residence, but that was then. Today, the erstwhile “Chief Servant” of Niger State is mired in N2.9 billion fraud charges at the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The timbers of the 7th Legislature, particularly former Senate President David Mark, Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu, and former Deputy Speaker Emeka Ihedioha are pondering what could have been. They were well groomed as the picture perfect babyface of the opposition with every resource in tow. However, not surprisingly, the trio has suddenly grown too old and too impotent due to a raging fear of imminent probes into the billions budgeted for Constitutional Review and Constituency Projects from the year 2007 to 2015. Ordinarily, PDP could have explored Senator Godswill Akpabio, the official opposition leader in the Legislature, but the former governor has become dumbstruck out of the blue after an encounter with the EFCC for allegedly carting away N108 billion from Akwa Ibom State treasury.
That brings us to Olisa Metuh, a man of cerebral pedigree, then packaged as a fearless patriot in his role as the PDP National Publicity Secretary. Regrettably, the party has just found out the hard way: Promoting Metuh as its official mouthpiece is akin to bursting the Pandora’s Box in a public square. Lo and behold, the credibility of the Nnenwi High Chief is deep down the tubes at the spur of the moment after failing to make sense of how and why a portion of the Dasuki corrupt largesse landed in his individual business bank account.
The most brazen is the spectacle of Governor Peter Ayodele Fayose of Ekiti State grandstanding as a self-appointed “Leader of Nigeria’s Opposition”. A man of voluble tidings, Fayose is the shameless fugitive ex-governor previously impeached for corruption but drafted back by his party to recapture the seat by any means necessary. Ultimately, he is rattled by the anti-corruption war and has been roaming the political space inciting the public with all manners of innuendo against the ruling party as if PDP had shared the stolen billions among the poor masses. But Nigerians have become wiser. We are well aware that the commotion is nothing but the wailing of a highbinder awaiting serious time for his involvement in the N1.3 billion poultry scandal plus 2014 Ekiti election fraud.
It will be a gross disservice to the reading audience if this exposé is to conclude without a special attention on Femi Fani-Kayode. Quite frankly, at the chagrin of friends, I was overjoyed when the former minister was acquitted of money laundering charges. Though always traducing, Fani-Kayode’s kind of verbal opposition is not totally bad for the polity. At least, his bombastic style has entertainment value—a radio station away from a poor man’s Rush Limbaugh. The issue with this one, though, is that new revelations from the Dasukigate have shown that the constant bravado is not only to blind the gullible masses but also to fan the embers of crises in anticipation of looming indictments over new graft allegations.
This whole picture portends a troubling future for Nigeria. Although President Buhari has recorded a measurable success thus far, he is far from sainthood. Like in any human undertaking, excesses abound. Very unfortunately, however one views it; and no matter the line of argument; it is clear the PDP brand is hopelessly banal—too corrupt, too sick, and too witless to checkmate the party in power. Even if the PDP is to succeed in its dream of a makeover, the ensuing leadership will always be dismissed, and rightly so, as an appendage to an unrepentant corrupt cabal. The posterity beckons on patriotic minds within the different opposition camps, therefore, to unite towards the path to a true democratic culture. Instead of the maddening rush to the ruling party, it is time to explore a new opposition party that is steadily alert to expose the weakness of the APC central government and credible enough to offer alternative solutions.
■ Dr. SKC Ogbonnia, Ph.D., is the current president of Nigerians in Diaspora Organization (NIDO) – Contact: email to skcogbonnia@firsttexasenergy.com

How PDP and APC Created New Biafran Agitations

By SKC Ogbonnia….

Socially, Unlike my father, my mother Esther Oligwe Ogbonnia hardly cares who wins or who loses in presidential politics so far there is peace. Not in 2015!

Full of excitement following Muhammadu Buhari’s victory, I placed a call to my mother in Nigeria, but she was not her usual cheerful self.

SKC (Me): “Mama, why are you sounding strange?”

Mother: “Hmmm…I am okay but not very okay. There is trouble. The problem seems to be your friend—the Hausa man. They say the man has become the president again by force and plans to take away our Bible. They also say he is the same person who caused us harm during the war, and is going to replace all our people in government work with Hausa.”

SKC: “Who is saying all those things about Buhari? When did you become a politician?

Mother: “Well, I am not a politician. And I may never have crossed River Niger or know how to count 1.2.3, but I can smell counterfeit from a distance. My son, the fear of that man is rearing up everywhere—in the church, our meetings, and the marketplace. Even our ‘who is who’ in the North have already packed back to Enugu. I pray this aura of doom will not be felt where you are in America…”

SKC: “Mama, please do not mind them. I am very happy to have supported the man. As I told you before, he is better than Jonathan by far. He will end corruption and provide jobs for our youths. Kidnapping and armed robbery will go away. Those saying bad things about Buhari are some of the same people who stole the money meant to complete Ugbo road. They are afraid he will put them in prison. That is why”

Mother: “So the Buhari man is truly a good person? But did you hear that he locked up Jim Nwobodo and one good man from Onitsha area for no just cause? Do you know they also say that he killed one young boy from Udi Agbaja for nothing? Biko, how did you know the man?”

SKC: No, I did not know Buhari before. However, when he was head of state, there was no corruption. Watch…things will change within few months. NEPA will provide light day and night… You will say, I told you so.”

Mother: “Well, I have heard you, my son. So, we should not worry? I am feeling better now, but I don’t know about our people. They see the man as danger…”

Clearly, the general perception of Muhammadu Buhari in the East before the election was that of a jihadist, dictator, and a bigot—all roped in one, thanks to a montage of propaganda orchestrated by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). The then ruling party did everything humanly possible to cling on to power. And you can’t blame them. Having squandered our common wealth while at the helm, PDP had nothing on the ground for the Igbo masses and thus needed to sustain mass following by deceit.

For example, one infantile lie drummed since 2011 to prevent the restless Igbo youths from revolt had been that “Things will get better once President Goodluck Jonathan zones presidency to the Igbos after his tenure.” It was not surprising, therefore, that Buhari’s victory was readily seen as a coup d’état in the East, particularly among the jobless youths, who thence seem to have nowhere else to perch than clench their angst towards one form of Biafra or another.

The gist, if it is not already manifest, is that these new Biafrans, most of who are under the aegis of PDP Youth Wing, are the byproduct of the party’s gloomy narratives of Buhari. In fact, any careful review of the recent activities of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), leaves no one in doubt that his rebellion was heightened by the defeat of Jonathan and PDP. And it does not take a genius to discern why prominent opposition leaders from the East have continued to tiptoe around the Biafran agitation even when it has widened.

For sure, the rallying cry for the current Biafran movement is the inexplicable marginalization of the Igbos. But we must not ignore one bitter truth: The last 16 years of democratic rule did not take place under Muhammadu Buhari or the All Progressive Congress (APC)—but squarely under PDP where every ethnic group, including the Igbos and their Southern neighbors were well represented.

Yet both President Buhari and APC have not helped matters. Upon assuming office, Buhari’s body language, including lopsided political appointments, began to appear as if the old Eastern Region was an illegal alien. To add salt to an open injury, the president shocked the democratic world by stoking a statement generally interpreted as a plot to marginalize the zones that gave him fewer votes. This gaffe was definitely beyond the pale and had deserved every damage control.

Sadly, instead of telling the president the simple truth, many APC leaders went as far lampooning the Igbos for expressing their right to choose. The ruling party conveniently brushed aside the fact that virtually all Nigerian presidential elections in history were influenced by ethnic sentiments, yet there is no record where a section of the country was denied its share of the national cake on the basis of voting pattern. The whole APC approach on political appointments triggered a nationwide outrage, with many groups charging the new government of ethnic chauvinism. According to a faction of the Movement for the Actualization of Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), the development was a clear testament “that Buhari is not seeing Ndigbo as part of Nigeria.”

The presidency reluctantly addressed the dilemma, quipping that, “At the end of the exercise, no part of the country will be left feeling left out.” Unfortunately, recent events suggest otherwise. The much-awaited ministerial allocations have come and gone but failed to reflect the balance needed to allay the fear of Igbo marginalization.

Although it is true that Igbos, particularly Chibuike Amaechi, Kachikwu Ibe, and Godwin Emefiele, occupy powerful positions in the central government, the gesture is wallowed in mistrust. The crème of Igbo intelligentsia as well as leaders of the Biafran agitation perceive the motive as a postwar federal agenda to drive a wedge between the Igbos of the South East and their brothers and sisters of the South-South. Moreover, many are dismayed with the attempt by the Federal Government to isolate the history of Biafran movement solely to the Southeast. After all, not only does the Igbo territory extend beyond the Southeast, the die-hard leaders of the Biafran war included the natives of the South-South zone, such as Chukwuma Nzeogwu, Phillip Effiong, and Joe Achusia, to name a few.

This medley of unforced errors on the part of APC government did nothing but play into the prevailing PDP narratives—those very fears narrated by my mother when I had called from America after Buhari’s victory. Today, the opposition is gaily saying “I told you so.” For the restless Eastern youths, it was the perfect excuse to finally embrace the call for secession from Nigeria—with Nnamdi Kanu as the totemic leader. Kanu has since been arrested and denied bail by the federal authorities. And different pleas for his release have also been rebuffed, leading to mass protests and loss of property as well as innocent lives.

But the quagmire must not continue. Rather than brute force, there is the need for solution through diplomacy.

First, President Buhari should go above the fray and order without further delay the release of Nnamdi Kanu. There is no doubt that Kanu’s rhetoric is hugely offensive, and deserves every condemnation, but keeping him behind bars for expressing his fundamental rights of self-determination does more harm than good. The matter is gradually gaining worldwide sympathy, and Nigeria’s economy must not be exposed to a new wave of ethnic havoc on top of Boko Haram.

Second, the APC government ought to find ways to dialogue with the pro-Biafra groups and reassure them of a genuine desire to carry the Igbos along, with specific attention to youth employment. Such dialogue can help the agitators to realize that the real enemies include their own brothers, faceless politicians, who carted away development funds in the East.

Third, but most ironic, if the war against corruption is a good omen, Buhari must be careful to avoid being mired into another form of Igbo marginalization. Even though the anticorruption war has already visited high profile culprits in every other zone of the federation, notorious politicians in the Southeast are still acting as if Goodluck Jonathan still holds sway. It is time to double up and expose the political merchants who abetted ageless money-spinners, such as Enugu-Onitsha/Enugu-PH Expressways, 2nd River Niger Bridge, Dredging of River Niger, Akanu Ibiam International Airport, Sam Mbakwe International Cargo Airport, Constitutional Amendment exercise, the criminal demolition of Eastern Nigeria Secretariat at Enugu and, of course, various abandoned Constituency projects littered across the area. The president may as well head further south to unmask the incubus choking other vital projects with huge employment opportunities, particularly Calabar and PH ports, PH International Airport, and the East-West Highway. Seeing is believing. Nothing can assuage the feelings of these youths more than prosecuting the crooked politicians who exploited the poor masses for selfish gains.

The view immediately above mirrors a topical goal of the current Biafran movement which, in its own words, strives to hold accountable “all looters, embezzlers, kidnappers, sponsors of terrorism, child traffickers, corrupt judges, crooked university lecturers, murderous Nigerian security forces and all thieving individuals masquerading as public officials who steal public funds thereby preventing developmental projects from impacting positively on the lives of the ordinary people.” This very idea of the pro-Biafra group is hardly unpopular. In fact, one may think their statement was adapted word-for-word from the campaign book of President Muhammadu Buhari. Said differently, these youths and Buhari share common dreams for a corrupt free society, after all. And they need each other. Sustaining our hard-fought change demands broad participation across the breadth and depth of Nigeria.

■ Dr. SKC Ogbonnia, Ph.D., is the current president of Nigerians in Diaspora Organization (NIDO) – Houston Chapter.

Like Us On Facebook