₦airaland Forum

www.ooduapathfinder.com

DECEMBER 4TH, 2016

Preparations towards the first post-Independence Government of Nigeria involved an attempt to create an alliance between the Action Group led by Chief Obafemi Awolowo and the NCNC led by Dr. Nnamidi Azikiwe with the ultimate aim of running what would become the central government of the day. Chief Awolowo offered to be the Finance Minister while Azikiwe would become the Prime Minister. The consummation of this alliance would have put paid to the British induced shenanigans that fraudulently awarded spurious census figures to the North thus giving the North undue political advantage, which was the aim of British colonialism and its purpose for the Nigerian post-colonial State.
The alliance, which would have changed Nigeria’s history for the better, floundered on the basis of a suspicion as to the true intentions of each of the parties to the alliance. The NCNC based its response on “double dealing” of the AG wherein a faction of the AG was in some form of talks with the NPC at the same time the alliance was being discussed while the AG had to contend with fifth columnists in its midst.
NCNC’s reaction and response was not an isolated incident in the sense that it followed a historical pattern of always looking for ways of upstaging the AG, not only in the contest for Nigerian political power but also within the Western Region itself, otherwise, the question as to the primacy of which position to be taken would be asked: to checkmate British post-colonial intentions which the alliance would have done or play a one-upmanship on one another which the failure of the alliance ended up with?
The historical antagonism between both parties flowed from an ideological, political consciousness and content of Nigerian anti-colonial expectations, which, for the NCNC revolved around a Unitary Structure for Nigeria based on a false reality propounded, to wit: the Igbo are found all over Nigeria and it would make sense for Nigeria to remain as created by British colonialism, even if it would mean acquiescing to “northern” dominance which was already made a condition for the emerging post-colonial State, and any alternative would amount to “balkanization” of the country.
The view is false in that it is not only the Igbo that are found all over Nigeria(and beyond) hence that reason will not suffice to maintain a Unitary Structure. Furthermore the essence of anti-colonialism is the negation of colonialist fundamentals, primary of which is the reaffirmation of the formerly subject peoples’ humanity hence the Action Group’s Federalism and its insistence of the recognition of the multi-cultural and multi-Ethnic composition of Nigeria which must be taken into account in the new post-colonial State. Curiously, the “north”, represented by the NPC, recognized this multi-cultural nature such that Azikiwe was told in very clear terms that Nigeria’s differences cannot be forgotten, rather it must be recognized and worked through; of course, knowing that the British would give it whatever it wanted.
This singular failure of the alliance paved the way for Nigeria’s crises which are yet to be resolved. Instead, almost all the negative Unitarizing functions of that failure are now being given fresh life and made to appear legitimate through the Constitutional process, especially considering the role of the National Assembly, now that it is embarking on yet another amendment exercise in readiness for the 2019 elections.
One of the issues being addressed by this amendment exercise is in what NASS called Local government autonomy. By definition, local government remains local and any attempt at taking away its “locality” and putting it under the purview of a center is denying the same locals their God-given ability at self-organization and expression. Nigeria’s Local Government administration is based on a “northern” system as advanced by the 1976 Dasuki Report, which was initiated under military rule and carried over to every civilian administration. The Dasuki report was based on the emirate system of local governance which in effect solidifies northern hegemony in the affairs of Nigeria, which again reinforces British aims and aspiration for the post-colonial society superintended by the North and now being legitimized by the National Assembly which is only National in name but Northern in practice.
What then is to be done? The issue was and still remains the choice to be made between Federalism as propounded by Awo or the Unitarism of Zik. The failure of the 1959 alliance was the failure of a “unity of purpose” between the two opposite purposes. While not now advocating a “southern alliance” as being propounded by some, the failure showed that each particular Ethno-Nationality must “discover its mission, fulfill it or betray it” to paraphrase our own Frantz Fanon.
What then is the mission? If, for the Igbo, their being resident all over Nigeria makes it imperative for propagating Unitarism, they will need a rethink. Residing in any part of Nigeria was and still is neither a function nor a consequence of citizenship, as it were, but a socio-cultural tolerance and inter-relationships predating formal colonial State formation. Thus, rather than superimpose citizenship on this socio-cultural imperative, which the supposed local government autonomy would amount to, this imperative must become the foundation for citizenship translating into a fundamental re-working of the post-colonial State.
This is all the more so when it is realized that Unitarism comes with the struggle for control of Nigeria’s resources which must be “unitarized” for Unitarism to function; which is now being legitimized through the attempt to amend the Constitution paving the way for local government autonomy and which ought to be nipped in the bud by ensuring the failure of the amendment via utilizing NASS parameters for doing so, to wit, the denial of the required 24 states to ensure passage. This must not be seen as nit-picking what should be accepted and what not as Constitutional Amendment since there are other anti-Federalist provisions in the Constitution; local government issue is foundational to Federalism and once it is taken away, Federalism is out of the window. Hence, the reintroduction of Federalism becomes a mission for the “south” as a categorical imperative.
Politically, Unitarism involves an endless quest for the country’s presidency, almost as of right and consequently its “do or die” proclivities. A situation thus develops between the North, which sees the presidency as its birthright by virtue of British colonialism acquiescence and the East whose Unitarism imply equal access to this birthright via political posturing. So then, if, for whatever reason, the East succeeds in attaining to the presidency, does this imply a resolution of the fundamental developmental needs of the post-colonial society?
The Obasanjo experience, from the Yoruba angle provides a pointer. Chief Olusegun Obasanjo is a purveyor of Unitarism, up to some point denying his Yorubanness, and in spite of the fact that his close friend and personal legal representative, Chief Afe Babalola is a frequent and eloquent promoter of Federalism. Beyond these, Obasanjo’s Unitarism, a.k.a “nationalism” did not place Nigeria within any developmental radar in spite of the involvement of the world’s monetary and financial centers in the operation of Nigeria’s economy. Obasanjo spent most of his time fighting for the sustenance of his presidency such that all efforts at economic development always fall flat even before taking off and these are besides certain policies embedded in the social and economic paradigms that are anti-development in nature; for example, maintaining an over-bloated political infrastructure lapping up to 70% of the Federal recurrent expenditure without anything to show for it and a lack of development in Language and history as foundational issues in development thought and practice.
For the Igbo to now think they will “do better” will be a throwback to the famous quote attributed to Azikiwe, to wit: “the gods of Africa has empowered the Igbo to lead Africa out of the barbarism of the ages” which automatically indicts other Nationalities who also have something in their history to be proud of and will defend thus creating a continuous conflict within the post-colonial state and in the process throw development of whatever parameter into sometime in the future when the antagonistic Ethno-national forces have been suppressed one way or the other, if ever.
This is germane if the rise of white nationalism (economic and political) across the world is taken into consideration. Nowhere in this white world is any attempt made to tinker with the foundation of white economic supremacy, the Bretton Woods Institutions. None of the white nationalist rhetoric makes any mention of this; yet white economic nationalism can always play itself out within trade agreements, unions and pacts without altering the fundamental disparity between the “global north” and “global south” to which Nigeria falls.
The mechanism for maintaining “global south’s” perpetual economic dependence is the World Bank and the IMF whose policies are also anchored on maintaining the post-colonial State as they are, for all of their economic prescriptions are made in order to allow some form of economic leeway for these countries. The emergence of BRICS, largely from countries who are not beholden to their colonial State formation, is an attempt at countering the Bretton Woods effect and the only way it can be beneficial to the Nigerian or African post-colonial society is to fundamentally change the foundational precepts of that society.
How then does this become a choice between Awo and Zik? They personify the ideological/political choices to be made, regardless of our opinions about their persons, the choice being either Unitarism or Federalism. If Unitarism, the coast is clear as to the quest for the prime leadership position although already hampered by Constitutional arrangements in favor of a particular section of the country and if this remain the Igbo choice, they will be telling the rest of us that our subjugation is their mission; If Federalism, the necessity to challenge this Constitutional malady and institute a true form of the concept, not only as practiced in other parts of the world, as each society has its own uniqueness that ought to play a part in its operation but simply because it is the only way to achieve Ethno-National harmony and development for a people that had undergone over 400 years of global servitude.

. Op and burukutu are like bread and teatea




Anyway I no even read that novel wey u write sef

Until the propagators of federalism come out and state the uniqueness of the Federalism they are proposing it will always be regarded as a Yoruba's agenda.

As no one has given a clear cut of what this federalism is all about and please let them also remind us what form of government Nigeria is practising.

In this piece the writer which I believe is an awo student and not Nigeria political student was hellbent in discrediting the personal opinion of zik but have not also given us what his federalism is all about. What does it entail... Obj couldn't understand what his people want and went for nationalism for the interest of all Nigeria not for a section of a country.

Confederation is the way to go where every region will be able to say if he wants in or wants out, every other thing outside that is rubbish and we will continue with our system of government fine tuning it until we get it right.

Autonomy to local government is a way to go for direct development in our local level amounting to competition just like the federal and state level. Nothing like unitarism here as said by the writer whose intentions is already dubious.

How can you grant autonomy to ethnicity, op, how many autonomous state are we looking at?

What about the minority ethnicities that don't make up a single state in the current system of government... You see, your arguments are heavily flawed and blinded by sentiments promoting sectionalism. Which is very bad and that was what killed awolowo leaving him with no political legacy unlike zik and bello.

I rest my case

T9ksy:
So what legacy did the duo you mentioned above, left for their people that Awo didn't surpass for his people in particular and

all Nigerians, generally?

OK

T9ksy:
Abeg, STFU jo! At least, your fathers-cum g/fathers were opportuned to see the inside of a classroom , all thanks to the same man you lot just love to vilify.


I suggest you practice what you preach-why don't you goggle Awo's legacy before illuminating your intellectual laziness, bigotry and utmost
ignorance on a public forum for all to peruse.

Lol... hahahaha

Why not start telling us awos legacy and how it affects Nigeria positively...
Lol!! Still doing some searches for you, hold on