Political violence in a fledgling democracy

Political Violence in a fledgling democracy

Professor Julius O. Ihonvbere

Text of public lecture delivered under the auspices of THE BREEZE MAGAZINE, Airport Hotel, Ikeja, Lagos March 14, 2003

Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to speak for too long today. I would prefer to be brief and to leave enough time for discussions and questions. Let me also confess that I hurriedly put this lecture together in the last two hours or so. I think it does contain enough to generate some conversation. I have left out details of violence. I chose to focus on the conceptual aspects of the problem though I would use examples as necessary. I thank you for honoring me with your invitation. I commend you for your courage, vision and commitment to the truth in a society that is as decayed as ours.

Thirty seven years ago, a young, charismatic and courageous military officer declared in a coup broadcast:

Our enemies are the political profiteers, swindlers, the men in high and low places who seek bribes and demand ten percent, those that seek to keep the country divided permanently so that they can remain in office as ministers and VIPs of waste, the tribalists, the nepotists…(Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu, January 1966 Coup Broadcast.)

Ladies and gentlemen, let me ask a few questions: Are the political profiteers gone from the Nigerian society? Are the bribe takers gone? Do they demand ten percent or more today? Are those that seek to keep Nigeria permanently divided gone? Are the VIPs of waste no longer with us? What about the tribalists? Are they gone? Are they weaker in their politics? What about the nepotists? Have they been reformed? If we can answer “yes” to one of these questions, we can end the lecture right here, go home, pop some champagne and sing halleluiah because our country has been reborn. Let me put it to you all (as if you did not already know) that our country is still in big trouble. These troubles were not created by some invisible elements or by God. They were generated and nurtured by people that live amongst us; people that we all know very well. In fact, in many instances we have encouraged and protected these characters and this attitude has emboldened them to take more risks in perpetuating their dubious agenda. Today, we are all paying very dearly for the indiscipline, irresponsibility, arrogance, limited vision, wickedness and greed of this group. Unfortunately, their pathological fixation of irresponsibility, nepotism, corruption, waste, and other lucrative unproductive but not really helpful ventures have percolated to the lowest ebbs of our society to such an extent that even ordinary people now mimic the decadent elite. This is very unfortunate for a creative and hardworking people.

It is the coalitions, contradictions, distortions and disarticulations arising from these factors and forces that shape the content and context of our politics and society. It is the inability of the state to emerge as a relatively autonomous force; the inability of the governing class to build hegemony and emerge as a ruling class; the contradictions of production and exchange relations; and the continuing marginal location and role of the social formation in the global power balances that have created the foundations for political rascality in Nigeria. Thus, rather than build structures, ideologies, relationships, networks, and enabling environments to build a nation-state (if not a nation) out of the contending diverse interests, identities and nationalities that occupy our political landscape, the opportunistic politics of the power elite has rather, congealed alternative sites of loyalty and power. It has enthroned and reified normless politics, alienated significant communities that continue to survive and operate outside the hegemony of the state, and promoted a culture of cynicism and reliance on extra-legal processes and actions that now guide relations between the people on the one hand and the state and its custodians on the other. It is not an accident therefore that informality and informal relations continue to reign supreme whether is it to get a job, scholarship, admission, contracts, relate to public institutions and officers or whatever, Nigerians consider first an informal approach before or alongside a formal one.

Political Rascality and Violence

In the history of every society, the dynamics of production and exchange relations have significant implications for class and power balances. The mode(s) of accumulation shapes the hegemony and solidity of state and class. The power elite use the structures of power to legitimate the domination and exploitation of non-bourgeois forces and through numerous hegemonic projects try to build an ideological bloc that in turn moulds and determines the nature and direction politics as well as the world view of dominated forces. Control and domination are exercised in civil society rather than at the political level which relies on intimidation, violence, manipulation, and the containment of the popular will. Rather such elite has a sense of nation and a sense of mission. It might quarrel over broad issues but it shares deep ideological commitments that bind it together in the interest of larger national objectives. For instance, democrats and republicans may fight in America but they all remain American capitalists. There is a limit to the degree of political irresponsibility that would not be entertained. There is some predictability in political actions and political institutions can exercise their functions as are laid out in the constitution. There is unanimity of respect for the constitution and a near total finality in the pronouncements of the law courts. As well, when the national interest is threatened, they band together against any external threats. In short, almost all, Americans, irrespective of color or class believe in the American project. A country like South Africa is steadily working towards that. The problem is that the African elite is so irresponsible, highly factionalized, ideologically bankrupt and confused that it often lays the foundations for the subversion of its already tenuous hegemony. This is because its political rascality prevents it from generating, packaging, circulating and sustaining longer term political, economic and social strategies for building growth, development, democracy and hegemony. This is a class that lives for the day with little or no interest in longer term projects. This explains why it is in so much hurry to embezzle public funds without providing services to the people. Of course, this alienates the people, erodes the credibility of the power elite, and precipitates anger, distrust, alienation, and violence. The already tenuous hegemony dissolves into petty squabbles and political indiscipline or rascality become the celebrated form of political engagements.

Political rascality therefore is that brand of politics that lacks ideological content and context, that is short sighted, disorganized, opportunistic, and incapable of building strong, efficient and effective institutions. This brand of politics is generally superficial, alienating, and pedestrian. It is often focused on the capture and deployment of raw power and its mobilizational capacity is often limited. In broad contexts, it is anti-people. This is because issues of gender equality especially women’s rights, the environment, social cultural rights, community rights, minority rights, and popular participation in the making and implementation of decisions are often taken for granted, trivialized or simply ignored. Political rascality is essentially individualistic and it often expresses itself in the inability of politicians to maintain discipline within their own parties. There is an excessive focus on building personality cults, subverting laid down rules, seeking short cuts to power, and using power to marginalize already voiceless and marginal communities and citizens. Of course, political rascality is also a “strategy” for covering up monumental policy failures on the part of the elite. It shows up as a sort of “shakara” politics where critical issues and discourses are reduced to pedestrian levels and trivialized. Thus rather than present serious minded and focused well-thought out strategies or programs for change, the politicians engage in the politics of personality and diversions. Under this mould of politics, there is often a well-packed strategy of blaming the victims rather than the perpetrators. A steady strategy of depoliticization, defensive radicalism and de-ideologization become the basis of political relations and competition.

The depoliticization strategy involves an effort to reduce the strength and focus of politics especially at the local level. The political rascals try to politicize trivial issues while subjecting critical questions to dubious negotiations. In fact, they appropriate the political voice of the people by anointing themselves as leaders. Hence, the vice-president Atiku Abubakar declared only recently that the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) does not and cannot speak for the north. The vice-president was convinced that with the existence of elected legislators and executives, a group of self-anointed and non-elected persons could not claim to be speaking for the peoples of the north. Such groups exist in the West and East and among minorities be it Ohaneze, Afenifere or such groups. Who or when were they elected? They simply called a few people, decided on what they considered important and on the best strategies of achieving their declared goals. Now they arrogantly decide who should run for office, how they should run for office, what should be the priorities of regions and ethnic groups, and when they quarrel amongst themselves they expel each other and try to rationalize their actions based on informal rules already decided in secret. Some even declare arrogantly that party primaries would not be necessary because they were satisfied with the performance of incumbents or that “vacancies” do not exist for certain political positions. Of course, they are accountable only to themselves. Members of the Nigerian elite have done a lot of damage to this country in the name of their peoples even as they act without consultation. This, simply put, is part of political rascality.

The strategy of defensive radicalism is exhibited when they adopt fake and opportunistic radical postures. Scratch the radicalism and militancy and you would find greed, corruption, and total disregard for the short and longer term consequences of their actions. They blow a lot of hot air with no strategy, capacity, or desire to actualize their numerous threats. Often designed to gain attention or win an invitation to the “dining table” their actions reflect more of commitment to illiberal democracy than a peoples’ democracy. You would find a lot of this in some prodemocracy movements, human rights groups, trade unions, ethnic associations, professional groups and in the specific struggles on north-south relations, minority-majority contestations and permutations, and in the resource control or political restructuring debates. Many that openly pretend to articulate positions on these issues go behind the curtain to negotiate lucrative benefits for themselves. Once they get appointed to political positions, they engage in double-speak or simply become silent. In the June 12 movement, there were many who openly supported the struggle but privately urged Abacha and Adulsalam not to concede to the June 12 demands. Similarly, many so-called radicals and militants had no qualms with working for Abacha even when his junta was looting, maiming, killing, and brutalizing the entire society. Some so-called radicals had no regrets in writing to invite Abacha to take over power when a serious ideological reading of that moment would have told them that a character like Abacha could not be a vehicle for the restoration of democracy and stability in Nigeria. Ironically, some of them are today very close to the seat of power in a liberal arrangement that they had worked very hard to subvert. Unfortunately, the ordinary people confuse them with real or serious radicals and use their failings to deride the genuine efforts of committed patriots.

The de-ideologization strategy is simply to atomize concrete ideological questions and pretend that they are best handled in bits. In fact, the struggle to sort out the contradictions in compartmentalized (as against holistic) forms relies heavily on the ethnicization or regionalization of issues. The use of religion and other primordial proclivities is equally rampant. Because the Nigerian elite hardly read, it is largely unaware of developments in other parts of Africa and the larger world so it continues to recycle outdated and long-abandoned ideological and political tools. Reminiscent of the traditional “planning without facts”, the elite engage the contradictions of domination, exploitation, marginalization, and underdevelopment without a philosophy or at best a pedestrian one. If it gets as far as “pan-Africanism” it has done very well though quite often it has no idea what this is all about and has no plans to alter what Nkrumah said decades ago to fit contemporary realities and challenges. In essence, the goal is to float around with no philosophical blocks to build a comprehensive national project that would outlive regimes and individuals.

Because political rascality enables the power elite to immerse itself shamelessly in irrelevance and waste, it can accumulate rather rapidly even if the process undermines the state and mortgages its own future. The longer run consequence however is the reproduction of negative coalitions, suspicions, poverty, disease, foreign domination, and violence. In my view, this has largely been the experience of Nigeria. Let us focus on the Nigerian elite and the state.

Causes of Political Violence

We all know the causes of violence-political, psychological, spiritual, economic and politics, even cultural- in our society. Allow me to list some of the causes then concentrate on just three to save time. The causes include:

Nature of the State- It lacks stability, legitimacy, predictability, transparency and hegemony. Citizens largely see it as enemy and therefore pay little attention to its strategies for development.
Character of the ruling/political elite- it is factionalized, fractionalized, mediocre, disorganized, conflictual, dependent, corrupt and very indisciplined. Its \woeful record since independence can be seen in the uncompleted projects, poverty of its citizens, huge debt profile, bad roads, hospitals without doctors and drugs, dilapidated institutions, archaic technology, and irrelevant and irresponsible gyrations in the arena of public policy.
Inherited distortions in the society- the so-called Christian –Moslem, North-South, poor-rich, illiterate-educated, rural-urban, oil rich-oil poor etc divisions continue to mediate efforts at growth and development, promote violence and distrust.
Greed and corruption- not much need to be said here. Though Nigeria is NOT the most corrupt country in the world, our elite have shown that they are amongst the worst. Their criminal tendencies especially through the occupation of
Insensitive leadership- The continuing gulf and distrust between the power elite and the people of Nigeria is clear indication of frustrations over longstanding insensitivity, manipulation, neglect and abuse. This breeds anger and makes the masses vulnerable to the merchants if violence.
Manipulation of primordial differences- Without a clear national ideology or philosophy of governance, the power elite has frequently, and continues to manipulate region, religion, ethnicity, language and at times class difference. This helps to weaken civil society, distract the people from the failures of the elite, and congeal loyalties around pedestrian and opportunistic political posturings. Today they are congealed into three major ethnic cabals of Afrenifere, Arewa and Ohaneze. We are yet to see the bridges of contact, dialogues, negotiations and commitment to social justice and development and democracy amongst the three groups.
Weak political institutions- Specifically, the political parties are weak and appear to be finding it difficult to keep their members in check. More on this below.
Weak security/surveliance structures- Of course there is corruption in the police and security forces. This is not unique to Nigeria. It is a tough job to police a crisis-ridden, poorly managed and violence prone society. Legacies of criminal military dictatorship have not helped matters. Civil war in neighboring nations leading to the proliferation of small arms has not helped either. Sand the moral decay and dislocation, partly the result of the commandist and undemocratic culture of military rule, is further complication issues for the police and security forces. While short term measures would include the purchase of more arms, more recruitment, more amenities and the construction of prisons, the real solution is in fundamental political restructuring, the involvement of civil society in crime watch and control, and the improvement in the conditions of service of the police and security forces. The police is a microcosm of the larger society, the quality of leadership, the nature of politics and the relationship between the state and civil society.
Closure of opportunities for self expression and self- improvement- when people have no opportunities to express their grievances, they go underground or adopt extra-legal mechanisms. It was a wise decision to register more political parties. The violence today would have resembled a civil war situation. Now those that feel manipulated, outsmarted, intimidated, cheated or harassed in some parties can move elsewhere even if it is clear that they would not win. This is happening everyday in Nigeria. But the poor management of intra-party politics, appointments, nominations, primaries and so on, have bred and precipitated assassinations and other forms of violence.
Foreign interference/manipulation- the role of external interests cannot be overlooked. Be it in their economic policies or in their military and political interests. Clearly, the monetarist programmes of the IMF and World Bank without adequate safety nets have precipitated violence in Nigeria. We all remember the anti-sap riots. As well, the on-going efforts by the United States to fight global; terrorism in all its manifestations, real and imagined, would breed acts of violence as opportunist cash in on the initiative to advance their own agenda.
Greed for political power- In Nigeria, power is everything. Power allows you to drive on a one-way in the opposite direction. It brings wealth, friends, and the ability to engage poverty face-to-face! With power, you can do and undo. You can buy the police, buy judges, and buy forged certificates. You can even try to eliminate real and imaginary enemies. With power you can grab another person’s land, house, wife or car. You can eliminate some poor houseboys or house workers. You can push all others off the road so that you can get to the toilet or a restaurant on time. This is the root of the violence in our country: the criminal appropriate and deployment of naked or raw power. This erodes elite and state legitimacy, compromises development, and contaminates the political process.
Intolerance and lack of democratic values- There are no democratic values guiding the on-going political engagements. Party rules are not respected. The constitution is not respected. Party constitutions appear not to exist. The masses are seen as objects of manipulation rather than objects of participation in the political process. Violence, lies, distractions, diversions, manipulations, and political 419 seems to be characterizing the process. The good and fair politicians have been overshadowed by the crooks, assassins, criminals and dubious personalities. These tendencies, taken together, constitute a recipe for violence.
Economic decay/dislocation- unemployment, underemployment, inflation, non-payment of wages and pensions, rural-urban drift, decaying or dilapidated infrastructure and job insecurity arising from precarious economic conditions can precipitate violence. Someone who is hungry, disillusioned and desperate would also be a prime candidate for violent acts.
Marginalization/repression of the youth- Our youth have no place in national life. They are seen as mi8creans, area boys, and problems to the enjoyment of the elite. This is very wrong. Young persons can make or break a nation. A national that ignores its your is preparing a direct entry into chaos and violence. Such ignored, marginalized and alienated you are easy recruits for trouble makers and the entreprenuers of violence.
Decaying educational structures/cultures- the decay in Nigeria did not start today. Cults and others forms of violence already took over the universities before the Obasanjo administration. But the unprecedented decay in our academic institutions for which we must hold past leaders responsible is today one of the major elements in our unsteady and violent political realities.
Criminal appropriation of the voice of the voiceless- when people have their values, dreams, hopes, identities and voices appropriated by others who now claim to speak for them without authority, this could precipitate violence and instability. This is happening as all sorts of extra-legal security and vigilante groups are emerging on the political landscape. Also agglomeration of non-elected elites that are claiming to speak for people that have already elected their representatives is causing a lot of tension.

The State in Nigeria as Instrument of Domination

The state inherited at independence was a violent, undemocratic, and privatized structure that was barely constituted to serve as the basis of governance or efficient delivery of services. This state structure was not dismantled at political independence. Rather, it was simply “whitewashed” or “Africanized” and handed over to a carefully nurtured political elite that was extremely hungry for raw power. The state building project in Nigeria has failed to transform power into authority. It has continued to dominate society at the political level relying on violence almost at the first instance of political engagement. In many instances, it has become largely irrelevant to the existential conditions of the people because they engage it only at the point where its agents are extracting resources and visiting violence on them and their communities. All over Africa, people are learning not to trust or rely on the state and have designed ingenuous strategies for avoiding, evading, confronting, and weakening the state. This sort of non-hegemonic state encourages political rascality because its capacity and propensity to rely on violence is very high. This capacity makes it attractive to political opportunists, mediocre politicians and persons committed to struggles of limited objectives. This in itself lay’s the foundations for instability, the abridgment of individual and collective rights, and the suffocation of civil society.

The Nigerian state, a product of history and managed by a largely unproductive elite remains very unstable and non-hegemonic. The challenge of building hegemony remains its foremost predicament. Its credibility has been severely mediated by decades of military rule, insensitivity to the plight of the majority, and its frequent resort to violence against non-bourgeois communities. To be sure, the structures of the state have been reformed or reconstructed over the decades since political independence. These reforms have not been consistent and have hardly involved the people. Speeches introducing new projects and policies are simply read on TV and the people are expected to fall in line or to support project that they know nothing about. Such support have often been temporary or superficial hence state creation, a new anthem and pledge, national honors, new local governments, new states, a new federal capital, new leaders- military and civilian-, new universities and other institutions to name but a few have failed to build the sort of Nigeria we all dream of. However, with the accumulative base of the ruling class largely located in access to the state and its resources rather than in productive activities, it has been difficult to construct an efficient, effective, legitimate, truly sensitive, transparent and democratic state. Its unsteadiness is evidenced in the numerous challenges to its tenuous hegemony; the wanton disregard for is rules and regulations; its inability to extract surpluses; and its frequent resort to intimidation, manipulation and diversions. Even with the return to democratic rule in May 1999 the contradictions of the state have not diminished. Part of the problem lies with the struggle to undo the legacies of military dictatorship. This struggle often comes up, unfortunately, as moves against regions/religions and interests. In reality, individuals and cliques affected often transpose their narrow interests on those of regions and communities in order to build a dubious regional grievance list.

Unfortunately because of the nature of the May 1999 transition, the quality of politicians that found their ways by hook and crook into power has complicated efforts at genuine democratization. Those that got into power have simply shut out those that they see as real or imaginary competitors, opponents or claimants to the throne. Though subtly, power is being used to build huge political war chests, personal fortunes and to buy the structures of violence such as the police even the legislatures. A situation where a governor publicly denounces formal state security services and the police and hands issues of crime control to thugs and extra-legal bodies demonstrates the deepening crisis of the state. The existence of several extra-legal political associations that frequently and openly challenge the power of the state is also evidence of the crisis of legitimacy. It is no wonder that the campaign for the 2003 elections started in 1999: performance is on the pages of newspapers and on the lips of sycophants and praise singers rather than in the concrete transformation of the environment. Why a local government chairman would advertise the so-called achievements of his administration in the Guardian or Newswatch beats me. It is largely because they are not performing and are seeking dubious ways of confusing already confused and cheated citizens. In the grim struggle to keep out others and as well as in the strategizing to unseat incumbents, the norms of governance and democratic competition have been mortgaged or sacrificed by the political elite. The numerous cases of assassinations, attempted assassinations and publicly issued death threats by politicians at all levels all over the country is reflective of the premium placed on power and the unorthodox or extra legal mechanisms of capturing power. The net result is the reproduction of a violent, wasteful, unstable and inefficient state. Certainly not the type of state that can guarantee individual and collective rights or consolidate a fragile democratic enterprise.

The Nigerian Elite as Obstacle to Democracy

At political independence the new elite inherited a state with limited legitimacy and without hegemony. This condition complicated the nature of political engagements. Of course, since only a handful of elites were involved in the contestations for power, the various governments they formed reflected and represented those narrow interests. Thus, right from election day the legitimacy of the government was compromised. In trying to exercise control, the elites have had to rely on force, manipulation, and violence. With time, politics degenerated into warfare. This was a war in which everything was deployed and no prisoners were taken. Pluralism and tolerance were thrown overboard with democracy, and intolerance and bestiality, at best, insensitivity to the plight of the disadvantaged became the order of the day. The foundation for instability, bad governance, corruption, violence, waste and the recycling of underdevelopment became firmly established. We are all familiar with the rest of the story.

The dominant class at political independence was a pathetic parody of what a dominant class really should be. This reality complicated the continent’s chances of engaging the forces of neocolonialism and the contradictions of underdevelopment. Thus, right from the 1960s, the possibility of building new structures of accommodation, pluralism and good governance was mediated, even subverted by the nature of Africa’s political elite. The new elite, including the nationalists, settled into an unequal, exploitative, and subservient relationship with foreign capital at the expense of the workers and peasants. Aside from the fact that it was small in size, it was also a very pretentious, underdeveloped, dependent, corrupt, and highly fragmented class. It lacked confidence in itself. It was reliant on foreign tastes, markets, and its world-view was externally determined. It had only a tenuous relationship to production and its accumulative base depended on its lucrative but unproductive relationship with foreign capital. Its economic strategy was largely determined by its ability to divert public resources away from development and basic needs into private interests and foreign bank vaults. With its tenuous accumulative base, the African bourgeois class turned to the state as its instrument of accumulation. Thus, rather than building a productive base in industry and agriculture, the bourgeois class began to extend the powers of the state to build up its own capital base mostly through dubious projects, over-inflated contracts, and direct stealing of public funds.

This pattern of accumulation required the abridgement of popular rights, the diversion of public resources to serve private ends, the construction of extensive security networks, and increasing intolerance for the opposition. It also required the development of vicious strategies of primitive accumulation and political containment that saw the working classes and peasants as the main victims. With time, the media, students, trade unions, peasant associations, minorities, and professional groups became victims of the emergence of the “big man.”

Those who captured the state, its instruments of force and resources, simply personalized it, wiped out all features of sensitivity, and imaginary and real enemies were found and immediately eliminated or forced into exile. Local “axes of evil” (as George Bush would put it) were found as necessary and were subjected to the most brutal and merciless power of the state. However, each act of brutality and repression bred new cells of opposition to the state, its institutions and agents. Within two decades of political independence therefore, the continent was littered with military coups and counter-coups, civil and inter-state wars, ethnic violence, agitations for autonomy by minorities, alienation of the public from the state and its custodians, and the withdrawal of support for public policies. Good governance was thrown over-board and leaders busied themselves with the construction of dubious ideologies, personality cults and looting their respective treasuries. As political decay, uncertainty, violence, and disillusionment replaced the euphoria of Uhuru, even fractions of the power elite began to construct parallel structures of power and opportunities. This was evidenced in the use of foreign schools for the wards, reliance on foreign hospitals for medical attention, use of foreign banks, airlines and advisers; the use of private security in place of public police, the reliance of private water bore-holes and private electricity generators in place of publicly provided alternatives, and investments abroad rather than in the local economy. The state was hardly the sort of force that was capable of opening up the political space, mobilizing the people, and building a true foundation for democratic politics and constitutional rule. Indeed, for most Africans, the state is very much a wicked, hostile and insensitive force to be avoided, challenged, and where possible defeated. Hence, rather than perceive it as a force to organize society, support individual and collective initiatives for accumulation and survival, most Nigerians now avoid the state as they find comfort, security, and hope in alternative sites of power and opportunities. Even philanthropic organizations like Lions Club and Jaycees as well religious organizations have capitalized on the irrelevance of the state to forge new linkages with civil society. As informal social structures they are now in competition with the state for the loyalty of the people. In fact, in recent times, ethnic associations appear to be commanding as much legitimacy and support as the state.

The truth is that the state is largely perceived as enemy and its custodians seen as crooks and unreliable characters. Loyalty is given to the ethnic or community group in the first instance because the state has failed woefully to inspire confidence, patriotism or commitment. Those that have tried to shift loyalties away from the ethnic group to the nation-state have been forced to “return to base” as their hopes for a democratic, transparent, and supportive state evaporates in the face of criminal corruption, waste, violence, and at best illiberal political conduct. Worse still, its custodians have become obstacles to the attainment of the basic reasons why people agree to live together in plural communities. The “big man” in Africa has always been and remains a danger to society. This is a really dangerous, undemocratic character whose track record shows nothing but corruption, waste, violence, human rights abuses, misplaced priorities, and a pathological commitment to the recycling of mediocrity. The typical “big man” in Africa has no respect or regard for women much less gender equality. He is not interested in environmental protection. He is anti-intellectual and hates non-governmental organizations. He sees the media as a menace and minority rights hardly feature in his confused understanding of pluralism and social justice. He measures his worth or importance by the degree of poverty, disease and squalor around him. Rural people are idiots and illiterates and have no right to discuss national issues. The youth are stupid: after all they pay no taxes and have no grounds to comment on the challenge of national development. The so-called “big man” spends most of his time thinking and plotting how to corner public funds, subvert the course of justice, weaken public institutions to cover his criminal activities, and while constantly tooth-aching and bellyaching about how public facilities fail to work, does nothing about a viable alternative. The “big Man” is not ashamed to be in charge of an unstable, ramshackle, unsteady, inefficient and corrupt state. He insists on being called by all sorts of flamboyant names: “The Great Lion,” “The Big Goat”, “The Huge Lizard,” “The Killer” and “The Teacher”, “The Father of the Nation”, “The Rain Maker” to take a few examples. He carries himself as if without him the world would be destroyed by the almighty. His every word, even jokes are to be treated as law. He blames real and imaginary enemies, especially trade unionists, students, the IMF and World Bank and armed robbers for his failure. Impatient with democracy and due process, he contaminates, compromises and encapsulates the other arms of government. He does not hesitate to eliminate or exile his opponents. He constructs huge houses for his sycophants, mistresses and relatives. While closing local schools because of “irresponsible” and radical students, he keeps his wards at the best schools abroad. While reducing budgets to local health facilities he regularly seeks medical check-ups and treatment abroad. He attends the Mosque and Churches regularly and with fanfare but has a resident babalawo in his mansion. He has many cars and airplanes yet cannot operate a national airline. His morality stinks as he sleeps with the daughters of his ministers, priests, friends and contractors. He fathers children all over the place and has countless mistresses. He treats national resources as his personal resources and insists on being thanked for constructing highways and paying salaries to workers. He detests unions and strikes and constantly amends the constitution to check opposition. He is very convinced that he is the nation’s best warrior, bureaucrat, thinker, businessman, accountant, and sportsman. Even when he can hardly read a legibly written speech, he considers himself the best orator in the world. He humiliates his ministers in public and does not expect them to complain or resign.

The above is by no means an exaggerated rendition of the sort of characters that squandered Nigeria’s opportunities for growth, development and democracy and subverted post-independence constitutions. Today, many (if not most) Nigerian politicians and so-called leaders still operate in this unsavory mold. With a non-hegemonic and very illegitimate state in place, this sort of dominant class could not enhance or protect civil society or promote constitutional governance. They remain bound to violence as the only strategy for power consolidation and deployment.

Political Parties and Political Stability?

Unfortunately for countries like Nigeria where political rascality is highly pronounced, party politics often reflects the nature of the state, its institutions, agents and custodians. Of course, rascal politicians would establish rascal parties. To be sure, we should make allowances for the so-called learning process. Though none of the current politicians ever claimed not to be experts in all aspects of politics, power and authority. Nonetheless, it would be expected that by now, the three parries that contested for the 1999 elections would have their houses in order and give Nigerians a new taste in party politics. Of course, opportunism has encouraged decamping and all sorts of factionalization and violence. Most of the leaders still have no regard for the people and appear not to understand the purpose of party politics. A political party is just as good as its leadership, structure, resources, programs, and the environment in which it operates. In Nigeria, none of the three parties is seriously performing the functions of parties. I have my doubts if the newly registered parties would do better given the quality and character of the respective leadership. They appear to be toys in the hands of party leaders who do not pretend that their main goal is to build a truly democratic organization. Indeed, even when some good leaders have tried, they were easily swallowed up by the greed and hunger for power and money around them.

New parties have been registered and many have produced emergency presidential candidates. It is as it the presidency is the key to all the problems in their respective communities. But they fail to perform the functions of parties. The parties do not identify, train and present the best candidates for office. They have mostly assumed members. They do not provide public education. None has a research center or institute for serious and sustained research and policy development. At least we are yet to see their products. They are all fragmented and constantly bickering over leadership, money or contracts. One of the three leading parties asked its presidential candidates to pay a fee of N10 million each. This is unfortunate for a fledgling democracy and amounts to preserving that position only for the rich. Of course, this does not include fees for the “leaders”, the mobilizers, campaigns for the primaries etc. Campaign costs in Nigeria are probably the most expensive in Africa. Then there are gatekeepers who “own” the parties: the so-called godfathers- often reactionary and undemocratic, they show very limited interest in the meaning and essence of democracy. The “leaders” privatize opportunities for building new networks and building new voices and leaders as they hold meetings late at night, make dubious deals, anoint their own boys for positions without regard to credibility and capacity. They see politics as one thing: the capture of raw power. The parties assume that the only reason why they exist is to win elections by hook and crook. Few in the political parties can effectively articulate party ideology and relate this to the challenges of growth, democracy and development. For the parties, elections are a die and die affair. The parties are not democratic, as ordinary people have no voices. It would be an insult to politics and political science to call these contraptions political parties. How many Nigerians have their manifestoes? How many have access to party records and programs? With these sort of political contraptions, the future of Nigerian democracy can at best be tenuous. While the registration of new parties would generate new energy in party politics and compel the existing parties to take themselves more seriously of find themselves out of power and out of office, the overall character of the Nigerian elite still casts doubts on the degree of commitment to true democratic values.

Conclusion: Rescuing Nigeria from Political violence

The fact that the government of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo has not been overthrown in a military coup d’etat to date in spite of the rascality of large sections of the political class is clear evidence that democracy is working. It is an indicator that Nigerians have come to believe that there is no alternative to democratic governance. This does not necessarily imply that all Nigerians are pleased with the state of the nation. It only means that when opportunities arise to compare the violent, wicked, oppressive and evil military dictatorships of the past with the current democratic dispensation, with all its uncertainties and imperfections, the present arrangement remains superior and preferable. To move the nation forward therefore, governments at all levels, professional groups, civil society organizations, and patriotic Nigerians must collectively insist on and embark on the following:

Promote good governance: To be taken seriously in today’s world, there is a degree of leadership as reflected in the quality of governance that is important. Imagine if Nigeria had no oil? True, we have a large population. But what use is a huge population of literate, disillusioned, hungry, unemployed, and alienated citizens? Qualities of accountability, social justice, transparency, sensitivity, and patriotism must guide the character of governance and leadership.

Mobilize civil society: Civil society is the foundation of stability, creativity, the market, and progress. Progress can never be made unless there is a clear effort to open up political spaces and allow civil society to thrive. A government and leadership that are not sensitive to this are doomed to fail. Foreign interests frequently gauge how much popular or grassroots support a government has. Most Nigerian leaders are yet to understand or appreciate the meaning of civil society much less how to mobilize its energy for the task of national development.

Promote rapid economic development and industrialization: With oil wealth, Nigeria abandoned agriculture and by implication the rural areas and the majority of Nigerians. Today, our rural areas look like 14^th century hamlets lacking all basic amenities. The rural and urban areas are delinked. Our so-called factories and industries rely largely on imported inputs. Our consumption patterns are dependent on the productive activities of foreign investors and producers. Government should not get into the business of production except in sensitive and very capital intensive areas. It must however have a clear policy that favors its citizens first. It must create an enabling environment. It must design policies to assist those that demonstrate the capacity to go into serious business. With an underdeveloped economy, a nation would be deluding itself to think that it has global influence, much less power. South Africa’s sudden prominence in African and world affairs is directly linked to its industrial and general economic capacity. Nigeria must take industrialization more seriously. Building so-called industrial estates without industries is an escapist approach to serious industrialization. Enough of talking about industrialization. It is time to act and show results. Allow me to suggest that a national think thank be established to work out a holistic strategy for industrialization based on local content in the first instance.

Address the national question: The failure of previous regimes to address the national question continues to tear the country apart. This has precipitated untold pains, violence, massacres, alienation, and hatred even among communities that once coexisted. From the Nigeria Delta through the Middle Belt to the north significant communities and interest groups are acting out their understanding and perceptions of how Nigeria ought to be structured and organized. The emergence of IPC, OPC, APC, IYC, MASSOB, MOSOP, MWI and so on, only reflects frustrations with the present. It is much easier to address these problems through a national dialogue or conference before they get out of hand. We have lost millions of naira and thousands of innocent souls to religious intolerance already. To the extent that we keep thinking that these groups would exhaust themselves, we provide ammunition for the enemy. Again, investors, donors, lenders, and foreign governments are watching this closely. The poor handling of the Ogoni issue cost us our voice, relevance, and credibility in the international arena including sanctions from the west and the UN and suspension from the commonwealth. The crisis is not over and the earlier it is addressed the better. An unstable and violence-ridden nation cannot moralize or preach to the world. Our undemocratic political situation under Babangida and Abacha mediated our credibility when we announced that our intervention in Liberia was to restore democracy! Nigerians must be allowed to sit and discuss how they want to live together, to negotiate the national question, reach some minimal consensus, and collectively commit to democracy, social justice, tolerance, and coexistence.

Revamp, restructure, retrain, and re-equip the police, armed forces, and security services.: No doubt the Nigeria military has received a bashing to its credibility in recent years no thanks to the inglorious juntas of Babangida and Abacha. The military still has a role to play in national development and in protecting the integrity of the nation. However, it needs to be restructured both in its training, responsibilities, and relationship to a democratic reality. The retirement of “political military officers” is a good starting point. There is a need to take a serious look at the issues of training, deployment, promotions, location of hardware, conditions of service especially for the so-called “other ranks” and political education. If Nigeria is going to continue its longstanding involvement in peacekeeping, a disciplined, well-trained, well-paid, and well-equipped military is indispensable. If the military is left in its old structure, ideology and mode, it could challenge our democratic experiment and take us back to square one. With the current anti-coup posture of the OAU and tendencies in the global community, Nigeria would face ridicule and isolation to the detriment of the quest for development, stability, and global influence.

Tackle corruption: We all know that the government’s anti-corruption initiatives have had very limited effect. Recently the former chairman of Ibaja Local Government was jailed by a Lokoja High Court for awarding a N4.9 million contract without budgetary approval or cash backing (Thisday October 1, 2002). He was prosecuted by the Anti-Corruption Commission. If this should be the case most of our governors and ministers should be in jail for awarding contracts that they have remained unable to pay: no cash backing! By not probing leaders that were known to be corrupt, the government has created the impression that there are sacred cows. But more importantly, there have to be ways to empower civil society organizations, communities, and official structures to get involved in the task of fighting corruption. Corruption is not good for business or the image of the country. Many Nigerians abroad have been denied several opportunities because of the image of corruption, lack of discipline, and official inability to check the excesses of businesspersons. Corruption eradicates discipline and merit. It increases the cost of business. It endangers national security and leads to waste.

Address the problem of the youth, women and minorities: The youth and women constitute well over 70 percent of the Nigerian population. Nigeria has no youth policy in the country and we hardly take the question of women seriously. Though there is a ministry that is supposed to address this, there is no comprehensive agenda. Our women remain marginal, dominated, disrespected, and exploited. They are still seen as objects for sexploitation rather than partners in the task of national development. Most of those in power today are insensitive to gender issues and they see the youth as constituting a nuisance. This is a grave mistake. Until the government is able to effectively address the issue of the youth and women, it might as well be indirectly funding a powerful opposition army that would rubbish its overall programs. No nation in the contemporary world overlooks the possible contribution of women and young people. The negative consequences of their reaction to alienation and marginalization could totally upset a country’s stability.

Rehabilitate decayed institutions especially academic and research centers: to put it mildly, our academic institutions are largely a joke today. Aside from the brain drain that has affected the institutions official neglect has also promoted decay at all levels. No wonder, most graduates from Nigerian universities are hardly better today than high school graduates of the 1970s. It is not surprising that many are no longer admitted directly (if at all) to graduate programs abroad. Libraries are empty or ten years behind in literature. Laboratories are empty. Buildings are dilapidated. Teachers are unpaid and angry. Students have taken to cultism and violence. In fact, it is a shame. Some universities started and are still operating bogus and useless “Satellite Campuses” or so-called “Executive Programs” and “outreach campuses” in all nooks and corners of our major cities just to raise money. Universities that are unable to retain staff, pay salaries, recruit qualified faculty or maintain their main campuses were running external campuses. The government must take this issue seriously. It is embarrassing the Nigerians are now sending their kids to Ghana, South Africa, Botswana and Uganda for higher education. At the elementary level, the middle and upper classes have abandoned the public schools for the expensive private schools all over the country, in Benin and Togo. A country that neglects education will not survive in the long run. Not much needs to be said about this. We either rebuild, strengthen, re-equip, and restructure our schools or prepare for disaster. I recommend an immediate N1 billion special grant to all existing universities specially for libraries, laboratories, and infrastructure. This money should be managed by a committee of Council. Senate. Faculty and senior staff unions, and the students’ unions.

Give the country a popular constitution that would promote good governance, national unity, the rule of law and political stability. The 1999 constitution is, at best, a fraudulent document. It cannot serve as the basis of governance and it has been condemned across the country. The fact that the National Assembly and the presidency have set up mechanisms to review the constitution is evidence of the problems with the constitution. The process of constitution review must however be seen as an opportunity to promote mass political education, mobilization, national dialogue or debate, and for addressing the national question especially issues of women, human rights, citizenship, religion, refederalization, language and the rile of law. These are some of the contradictions that precipitate violence.

Encourage Creativity and Reward Merit: We must establish a system that encourages the creativity, originality and curiosity among Nigerians. It must be a system that rewards merit and would bring new blood and new ideas into government. With due respect, we cannot keep recycling old men and women with old ideas, persons who have not read a book in five or more years and who hardly know where or how to turn on a computer in this turbo-technology and market driven era. We have a choice: continue with these conservative and pro-status quo ideas and persons in power or revamp our nation so we can move forward to harness national energies and creativities for the overall good of all. Personally, I cannot believe that persons who were in power when I was an undergraduate over 20 years ago still in power today! When are we going to move forward and allow new voices, new ideas, and new leaders to help bring our country into the new era?

Politicians must call themselves to order: The Nigerian power elite is once again putting Nigeria on the path to destruction and authoritarianism. These same elite and their progenitors precipitated a civil war, several coups and counter coups as well as the current economic predicaments of the country including a huge foreign debt profile. Their unguarded, insensitive, provocative and undemocratic conducts and pronouncements in heating up the political landscape and promoting cynicism, suspicions and violence. They are taking Nigerians for a ride once again. They must call themselves to order immediately.

Parties must be accountable: Political parties must hold themselves accountable for the actions of their leaders and members. INEC, the police and judiciary must be prepared to take drastic action against the parties and their leaders for any act of violence. The parties must all begin to design mechanisms for party discipline and be prepared to punish those politicians that revel in indiscipline, corruption, arrogance, and violence.

Political Decampees must be carefully watched and managed: Where political parties accept decampees at least 6 months to any election, such persons must miss one election exercise before putting themselves up for election. If it takes over three years to realize that a party is not suitable or it takes rejection at a party primary to realize this, movement to another party is only opportunistic and not based on serious ideological considerations. By restricting entry into the political race, decampees do not upset existing party programs and try to force out existing candidates through intimidation, bribery, thuggery, manipulation, lies, and other extra-legal mechanisms. It would check irresponsible and opportunistic decamping from party to party, corruption, and violence.

The people must liberate themselves: Nigerians are going to have one more opportunity to liberate themselves from disease, hunger, waste, criminal leadership, unpaid salaries, inflation, and marginalization in 2003. They must use their votes very wisely. A word is more than enough for a fool. It is ordinary people that are often recruited for violence, thuggery, rigging, intimidation and so on. Hunger and unemployment are not excuses for stupidity and indiscipline. They must use the 2003 elections as opportunities to correct existing political mistakes and must see through lies, political arrogance, and the oratorical fecundities of politicians. They must consider the individual, the track record, party agenda, specific programs related to particular communities, and where possible go into open or public contracts with the very best candidate.

Progressives must bid for power: I am a very strong believer in the fact that progressive persons and activists must make a bid for power. This is not the time to sit by and complain or criticize endlessly. It is time to deploy the accumulated experience and networks into the service of the people. It is ideologically wrong to leave the terrain to rascal politicians and then complain that they are not performing. Those who have no desire to run must support those that have the courage to run. It is ideologically fraudulent to give up a war even before fighting a battle, to discourage those that a making a bid for power and to conclude, even before they win elections that they would fail. If you do not have power you can change nothing.

Convene a National Conference: I do not see an alternative to a national conference in this country. If we had a national conference since May 1999, we might have avoided many of the pitfalls, hot points and fault lines that currently characterize our nation’s politics and society today. Things have become really bad. We do not trust each other. Criminals are being celebrated. No amount is too large to steal and no community is too civil to be wiped out or terrorized. Power has become an instrument to loot, kill and destroy. Values have been subverted. Ideologies have become worthless. Leaders have become frightened, tired and weak. Institutions have come delegitimated. How many of you here trust the police? Love the customs? Have anything to do with the fire services? Our people are hoping against hope. Tears are no longer the preserve of the hungry. Frustrated young men have become armed robbers. Greedy and misguided young women have become prostitutes. There is hardly a distinction between a professional prostitute and spinster today. Our campuses have been captured by cultists, armed robbers, thugs and persons with no interest in academic excellence. No university building is too strategic to be torched as we just saw at Delta State University. Armed robbers, indicted public servants, crooks, pimps, and 419 king pins are being made chiefs and celebrated as heroes. In short, the fault lines in our society are getting wider by the day as massacres, intimidation, violence, corruption, compromised and contaminated leadership, and poverty continue to eat steadily at the nation’s fabric. The solution in my mind is a two year national conference at the Ward, Local Government, State and national levels. Truly comprehensive, involving all segments of the Nigerian society and culminating in the production of a new national agenda. A conference would not break up the country and would not in any way challenge the power of those in office. Of course it would set new rules for accountability and transparency, social justice, environmental protection, women’s rights, religious harmony, ethnic equality, freedoms, socio-economic rights, and the mechanisms for capturing and deploying power. I would concede that a sincere, serious, representative, well-funded, and autonomous constitution review process can achieve similar objectives as was the case in South Africa. The choice is there for the power elite. If it fails to seize the moment and bring about critical reforms and anchor the future of our democracy in the people and their communities, it would have itself to blame pretty soon. Nigerians must make support or non-support for a national conference or a truly consultative, inclusive and people-driven constitution reform a political and campaign issue. Those candidates that refuse to support the agenda should be voted out of office without remorse. It is only through such reforms, involving the people and their communities that we can redress the structural deformities in the system, get a truly democratic constitution, promote social justice and build as foundation for social security and democracy.