By Adisa Adeleye

Contrary to what an expartriate colleague said to me in 1976 (after the coup that toppled Gen Yakubu Gowon from power and the bloody overthrow of his successor, Gen Muritala Mohammed) that “I am happy that I am not a Nigerian”, I am proud to be a loyal Nigerian citizen Nigeria is a country of absolute beauty and of continually changing phases.   But I must confess that Nigerians are as unpredictable as the English weather.

File: Voter casting her vote

That week-end that witnessed in Ibadan the large crowd of seemingly over-fed (by their protruding stomachs) party zealots and sycophants urging President Jonathan to seek a re-election in 2015, also related the news of the declaration by the insurgents of a caliphate in Gwaso (North-East of Nigeria).   But the pleasant news this week is that Nigeria‘s military forces have calmed our jerked nerves that no inch of Nigerias territory would be ceded to Boko Haram or any enemy.

However, under the prevailing passive mood of the populace after the assurance by the government of its ability to defend the territorial integrity of the nation, many are still worried about the logistical expertise of the insurgents in the choice of their targets during swift operations.   The Boko Haram insurgents who do not believe in Western Education have sacked schools, attacked army barracks and now unleashing their deadly weapons on police training centres with surprising regularity.   Every single event points accusing fingers at enemies within.   This shows the risks being faced by the over-burdened security forces.

As it has been pointed out in this column several times before, the Boko Haram insurgency is a national and not a regional affair that requires complete national efforts and resources to combat successfully.   The reaction of the leadership of both the ruling party and the opposition seem unaware of the danger to political survival and economic stability of the nation.   It is unfortunate that many Nigerians (especially those in the relatively safer South) do not seem to appreciate the obvious threat to their own domain if the insurgents in the North do succeed.

It is painful, if not comical, that past Nigerian leaders appear baffled at the present situation of the country which they were past rulers.   The past army generals who had ruled as Heads of State and military presiden have all at one time or the other expressed dissatisfaction about the expected achievements of greatness by this country which has become elusive and the prospects of unity which are fastly receding.   A former president has also criticized the present administration under President Jonathan of wiping away the essential middle class through negative economic policy.

While it is appropriate to admit that Nigeria is yet to reach its full potential as the giant of Africa in its pursuit of political and economic goals, it could also be asserted without any serious contradiction, that the past leaders had contributed to the problems by encouraging and profiting from military coups.   The 14 years of democratic practice would not be sufficient to repair the damages suffered during those years of economic regimentation during the military rule.

The old military formation of a central control has not been lost on the present civilian political leaders who are adept in selecting and not allowing for election of suitable candidates for political posts.   Also, the present economic principle is based on the pernicious habit of sharing the “oil money” between the federal government and the states, majority of which are not (economically viable) every month.

The result of such policy has been executive flippancy and legislative extravagancy.   The present national position which has become intolerable to past military rulers and the generation of suffering Nigerians is based on increasing unemployment which has bred insurgency, armed robbery, assassination, kidnapping, disease and hunger arising from rural depopulation and urban congestion.

In fairness, the present government, under President Jonathan could not be faulted for not trying enough through its Transformation Agenda.   The ruling party also could be seen in its efforts to hold on to power tenuously through winning of elections and impeachment of some vulnerable governors.

In the midst of political, social and economic uncertainties, other proposals for safer journey towards 2015 could be considered if not fully adopted.   Nigeria appears lucky that professional politicians are not divided on ideological lines.   There are not many dangerous communists around, and the few that could be found would easily be controlled through the developing “infrastructure of the stomach”. The socialists of old are the successful business entrepreneurs (capitalists) of today. Thanks to political patronage.

A remarkable aspect of Nigerian politics is that the dividing line between the ruling party and the opposition is very thin (or non-existent) indeed, thus making it easy to cross from one party to the other.   A typical local politician could be APC in the morning, join the Labour party in the afternoon, and move freely into PDP in the evening, if prospects are favourable for his personal ego.   The emphasis here is on personal gains and not on national sacrifices.   It looks as if governorship ticket, ministerial slot and ambassadorial gift have become the alluring features.

Thus, in the absence of a typical strong personality who could subjugate personal and sectional interests to national needs, it might be necessary to find a common ground or consensus.   The theory of multi-party system in an immature society is a mirage.   As we are being constantly reminded that the Greeks who invented Democracy did not prescribe that it should be practised under a multi-party system.   It is assumed that much could be achieved under an all inclusive regime which does not encourage divisive politics associated with the ‘winner-takes-all‘ mentality.     This aspect escaped the sharp minds of the members of the recently concluded National Conference.

THE ECONOMY
Since it appears that the economic philosophy of all parties is rooted in sharing the booty (oil money) and little or no emphasis on self economic development, efforts ought to be be geared towards baking a ‘bigger cake‘ for all to share.   Among the resolutions of the National Conference is the reduction in the federal share of the booty to 42.5 per cent and to .increease the share of the states to 55.5 per cent.

The ambiguity of such a proposal becomes manifest if it is realized that the federal government is the sole financier of all oil activities with the joint venture partners.   My idea of equity and fairness is that those who share oil revenue must contribute evenly to the oil production expenses.