Chimaraoke Nnamani
Governor of Enugu State
With this benefit of five and half years of
democratic practice, as both a leading player in my State and front row
observer/participant at what obtains at the more global nation State, I
will hardly escape giving my own version of contemporary description of
statesmanship, that is attendant to relations with various sections of
the Nigerian Federation.
Indeed, most Nigerian leaders, past and present, have had to contend
with their individual abilities or chances to fit into roles perceived
for them by the more vocal and articulate elements of their immediate
environments or localities. They have as well faced the pressure of what
the others outside their ethnic origin perceived of them, especially as
they ascended higher positions of national responsibility.
Invariably, there is always this compelling situation of craved
attention as emanating from every segment of the nation such that
persons who assume very high national offices have questions to answer
how they, as individuals, perceive and treat each section of the
country; how they are individually perceived and seen to be deploying
national resources, as in allocation of offices, to persons of the
varying sections of the country.
In other words, such political ascendance makes no pretensions about
conferring the status of the conscience of the nation to those
individuals. So, whether they take it or not, those who have had the
exceptional privileges and blessings of God to assume high offices are
conferred with such values reminiscent of the influence of the super
dein even as they are still mortal.
Largely, these had come of the history of the nation State of which the
root of governance has always had serious legitimacy question.
Legitimacy, in this sense, rides the extent and functionality of the
credibility or trust conferred on the individual government (and key
functionaries). Legitimacy arguably derived from people's perception,
and readiness to relate with the authorities, especially in its current
status of authorities in deployment of national resources.
But even as legitimacy appeared yet unresolved in our previous
administrative episodes, the fact of sectional acceptance or
acquiescence, form the springboard on which further legitimacy is
conferred to successive enterprises of each administration.
Of course, we cannot remove the fact of suspicion arising from this
doubt over the thrust of leadership persons and indeed the direction of
the government. In fact, the strength of such suspicion or our inherent
readiness to doubt the sincerity of intentions, lead us to regard
actions with understandable apprehension and sometimes disdain. Really,
the strength of such suspicion and apprehension lead to varied
suppositions and further dread of being left out of the national
resources at the whims and caprices of the leader in question.
This has been the basis of the view that allocation of state resources
could be doctored and had followed the individual attitude of the head
of each administration, who is believed to be responding in turn, to the
immediate attitude of sections, especially in conferring or professing
legitimacy for his government.
Elsewhere, such matters as the usually alleged skewed distribution of
the national resources or allocation of high State offices, are resolved
by such compelling objective instruments or institutions as the
Constitution, broad based precedents, formulas, principles and practice
of fair sharing, based on equity. In such societies where matters of
distributing national resources were no longer issues subject to
individual fancy, the question would not be whether the president
accepted to follow the rules but whether he would deliberately fall into
obvious pitfalls such that will seal his political career.
In our specific experiences in these five and half years, the tendency
for Third World democracies to face the challenges as may be presented
from the foregoing tended to have its manifestation in the resolutions
of the Federal Executive Council, Committee and plenary resolutions of
the National Assembly, tradeoffs in the inner chambers of the
presidential (kitchen) cabinet and of course, the more notable
utterances of Mr. President himself.
But if there appears any definite track on which Mr. President appears
permanently assailed, even as the truth is to the contrary, it is his
perceived attitude to Ndigbo. Initially, I had wondered why he had to be
tackled with such persistent questioning of his individual attitude to a
whole Igbo race, a vital section of Nigeria and one historical strand of
Nigeria's political tripod.
Of course, bereft of proper understanding of Nigeria, viz ignorance
about the workings of government, it is disturbing that having played on
the scene of Nigeria as Mr. President has done; I mean hanging on with
such recurrent relevance and eventual impact at the very final deciding
stages of national life, since May 9, 1969, we should have duly
appreciated the person, the power wielder, the factors propelling him -
but not in the least leaving out his fact-based attitude to individual
ethnic groups.
With little or no manifest experience on how this Nation is run - that
is in failing to make the right efforts at ascertaining the laid down
rules for allocation of national resources (revenue sharing) - many a
commentator had carried on as if Nigeria had operated basically on the
shiftless stead on which the President of the Federation was
unchallengeable and could set out to rein in on a particular section of
the country.
But let us even pretend that a President can do that and over the years,
Olusegun Obasanjo had had the privilege of being in charge - this time
both generally in Nigeria and specifically in the Igbo areas - in their
times of need. Reaching back to my personal experience in this five and
half years, I find it hard to make out the basis of such claim that
Obasanjo hates the Igbo, that is even as I am aware that it is more
vehemently promoted by those of us who have had the best opportunities
of our better culture, political exposure and state privileges.
As a governor of one of the Igbo States, I have yet to ascertain or be
made to the claim of whole hatred and intent at extermination. Enugu
State has never had to go begging for its allocation at any time in
these years. Enugu State has not had to be humiliated, as such is not
part of the constitutional provision, to get its dues in the national
coffers.
Right in time, Mr. President directed the building of an ultramodern
International Trade Fair Complex, whose completion has virtually arrived
70 per cent in construction work done so far. He has also awarded the
extension of the runway of the Enugu Airport (now renamed Akan Ibiam)
Airport, Enugu, to facilitate its international status. Although our
government in Enugu built the Augustine Nnamani (Agbani) Campus of the
Nigeria Law School, Mr. President accepted the project as the school and
indeed adopted the financial cost on behalf of the Federal Government,
such that we are almost decided on what refunds are due to Enugu State
now. We have as well had reasons to embark on re-construction,
rehabilitation and re-channeling of Federal roads and waterways for
which we have gotten refunds and commendations. We are still strongly
indebted to Mr. President for the vast water project for greater Enugu
of which the completion will put behind us the failure of past
administrations to follow up on the trends of water development started
in the First Republic.
But while I apply the attitude of Mr. President to Enugu in determining
what I can boldly admit as his very warm and friendly disposition to
Ndigbo, I can say that I have, as well, had the benefit of such well
developed accounts of the Nigeria - Biafra War of which the then Colonel
Obasanjo exhibited a flair for reconciliation and harmonization which no
other person has yet revealed. This was a time it could be said that if
he was hateful of Ndigbo, at all, he actually had their soft underbelly
when his advancing Third Marine Division defeated the Biafra army.
In that period, we had a situation where the deans of the Biafra regime,
...especially those who had made mediations and reconciliation
impossible, as the late General Philip Effiong broadcast to the Biafra
nation, had voluntarily removed themselves from our midst... (see
Reluctant Rebel; Fola Oyewole, p. 182 Now, you can try to picture the
situation of Biafrans at the horrendous end of war days completely left
at the mercy of the conquering forces, headed by a presumed
dyed-in-the-wool Igbo hater and tormentor, himself.
Let's not mince words, Colonel Olusegun Obasanjo was that leading
conqueror and right before him was the Igbo underbelly at Amichi where
he found the abandoned remnants of Igbo/Biafra leadership debating their
surrender speech (see Gbulie, Ben, The Fall of Biafra, pp. 250 - 161;
Oyewole; Reluctant Rebel, pp 192 - 194; Achuzia, JOG; Requiem Biafra, pp
337 - 340; Odogwu, Bernard, No Place to Hide (Crises and conflicts
inside Biafra), pp 177 - 181). It is still difficult to understand why
many of those actors are either too discrete to step forward and restate
the facts of the scenario fairly as well as they have been represented
in well publicized accounts. May be, they have been too stunned by the
duplicity of such more prominent Biafra leaders who have gotten more of
government patronage and recognition, since the war.
Otherwise, it remains a wonder that the ready response of Obasanjo as in
assisting to structure the surrender speech so as to avoid such
emotional words and obvious pitfalls that could endanger the masses on
both sides, and the subsequent ways he handled the entire end of war
could not earn him a place in the inner recesses of Igbo leadership
mind. Mark my word, Igbo leadership mind, because the hapless
downtrodden did grasp their precarious and perilous state in which their
soon exiled leadership left them.
Of course, wars are terrible but as has been proven in recent times, not
even the vast technology that can bring about quick victory can make end
of wars less messy. End of any war can be very messy. The enemy may be
overjoyed and get into a firing frenzy. The enemy who has had to endure
the trauma of the war days may want to avenge the privations right at
the point of obtaining victory. The ordinary folk among the vanquished
who had been barraged by the propaganda of possible extinction can turn
suicidal in defense to the last man and such will only result in human
carnage, the like of which would not have been witnessed in Africa.
There was also the peculiar case of the makers of the January '66 coup
who faced possible re-arrest and instant execution in the hands of
highly aggrieved former colleagues who had sworn to avenge their
actions. One, the active ex- Sand Hurst officer, Colonel Tim Onwuatuegwu,
had to die in the same circumstances others had dreaded, (see Gbulie;
The Fall of Biafra, pp. 162 -263). Certainly not so for the officers who
fell into the hands of Colonel Obasanjo at Amichi and elsewhere in the
then crumbling Biafra.
This then Colonel Olusegun Obasanjo had crisscrossed Igboland, disarming
troops, re-instructing his charged and belligerent officers and men,
distributing relief to ensure a stemming of the hunger plague that was
employed to wage the war and in fact helping communities to assemble
leadership to respond effectively to the East Central State government
in Enugu. In these cases, and in such specific interactions with
identifiable Igbo families, Obasanjo was never accused of, let alone be
provably ascribed with, sadism, which was one common development among
conquering soldiers. Indeed, Obasanjo was to personally punish by
execution at Umuchima, in Orlu area, a Nigerian soldier, who was
apprehended and paraded before him for attempting to rape a female
refugee, (see Effiong, Philip; Re-integration: True or False, pp 28 -
30). At Awomama, in the same area, he had to order the execution of
another soldier who killed an unarmed Biafran soldier who had long
abandoned the struggle and had moved in the crowd of refuges.
Of course, Obasanjo could not have been the most popular officer in the
gathering of the same Igbo military brass who were defeated by his army
yet, one thing they have never tried to impress in this free world was
any form of sadism or deliberate blunder in his handling of the
surrender. Without belittling the efforts of such other Nigerian
Officers who played decent roles in that tempting stage and acted as
civilized men, Obasanjo's record of the last days of the war has yet to
be equaled by any such enterprise in modern Africa. Indeed, as Onukaba
Adinoyi Ojo summed it up in his book, Olusegun Obasanjo...in the eyes of
time...Obasanjo handled his relationship with the Biafran leadership and
indeed the entire Biafran people after the surrender with a lot of
panache and humanism (p. 151).
Obasanjo has followed this disposition with a very great attachment and
eventual adoption of the mother of his friend, late Chukwuma Kaduna
Nzeogwu, who lived for several decades thereafter under his cozy
son-ship and just passed on, in Okpanam. In and out of military or
government, Obasanjo pursued for this blessed woman such essentials of
life that she had to live a 103 years, 37 of which were after the death
of her beloved son, Chukwuma, in 1967. I personally had the privilege of
visiting this blessed woman, in company of her other adopted son,
Barrister J.S.P.C Nwokolo, and in that course had the benefit of hearing
her rich testimonies, the a feel of her world of contentment and love as
a woman living in the glory of two illustrious sons - Obasanjo and
Nwokolo.
It is even a wonder to me that since the death of this remarkable woman,
none of these who claim Igbo hatred against Obasanjo ever made any
statement, that is much as we all know that they never tried to link
with the mother of the young man who stood out in his representation the
usual Igbo iron will and courage.
Of course, Obasanjo, we know, played a role in the nomination of Ukpabi
Asika as the Administrator of East Central State. He was reported to
have furthered the chances of the people in his efforts at strengthening
the only civilian of the heads of the then 12 states. It was this
Obasanjo who made it a personal duty to reconcile Asika with the Great
Zik when Asika swore that he was set for full battle with the then
influential master of Nigeria politics over the allocation of market
stalls in Onitsha main market. As Onukaba Ojo puts it in Olusegun
Obasanjo...( p. 180), the General counseled Asika to see sense in
patching up things with Zik, since the Great man represented much of
Igbo feeling and aspiration. This relationship with Asika and family, we
know, has also continued, even as the intellectual-administrator quit
this stage a few weeks ago.
Records also showed that contrary to unfounded positions, Obasanjo
suggested the boldest moves for Ndigbo to reclaim their property in Port
Harcourt and elsewhere. He was said to have urged Ukpabi Asika to put
Ndigbo on the train from Enugu, in 1974, to storm Port Harcourt en masse
to reclaim what rightly belonged to them. Hear him, I did not fight the
war for the Igbos to lose their properties in Nigeria, he yelled at Ken
Saro Wiwa who was disappointed that he did not go for the whole story
that Ndigbo exploited them in the then regional government and should
lose everything in Port Harcourt
(Adinoyi-Ojo...Olusegun Obasanjo...pp.194 - 195). He reasoned that way
and so proposed because he rightly believed that the people were being
unjustly treated in the policy of dispossession called abandoned
property.
Initially, I had believed that it was customary for the defeated to see
the conqueror in such endless train of resentment, especially if the
conquered has yet to resolve matters of ego in accepting results
emanating from superior tactics and armour. I had assumed that it was a
normal way of the military never to accept defeat so that the individual
officers could maintain a certain level of sanity and hope, if only to
have somebody to pile one's blames on.
This belief has already worn when I came to realize that it has not been
a popular position that Obasanjo ever acted in ways for which we would
ascribe to him an Igbo hater or sadism. Indeed, I discovered that this
whole claim of hatred had emanated mainly from one or two leading actors
on the side of Biafra who have yet to accept the possibility of being
seen to be resoundingly defeated in modern warfare by forces led by
Obasanjo, a back water Egba boy who only hoped to be an automobile
mechanic, son of a mere farmer and an "engineer officer", not even Sand
Hurst-trained, who ought not know swift and effective deployment of
troops.
It quickly dawned on me, as I am sure it would have for others, that
some of us have claimed a duty in presenting Obasanjo in such perpetual
bad light so that he would never savour any form of reciprocal filial (ty)
attendant upon such high-minded disposition and handling of the last
days of a major civil war.
Against this background, it baffles me that a certain considerable
weight of Igbo elite opinion has run unchallenged in this bid to impugn
the character of another as in desperately fixing it in the minds of
every Igbo man that this is an Igbo hater.
To some extent, it looks very unreasonable that such wild elite claims
emanating from their personal political misfortune could be sold to the
generality of Ndigbo who should have seen the un-abating tirade and
bashing as designed by personal fancies and peculiar/pecuniary
interests.
I had believed that we have long gone beyond this kindergarten
imputations riding elite fantasies and manipulations suitable only for
war years. It is possible that such views that held to present the
people with common imaginary enemies worked for the enterprise of those
years but it is not quite reasonable to always reach back in time to
begin to portray men in their individual enterprises as hating the
generality of Ndigbo, for reasons nobody has convinced me about.
I am not for it and I do not think anybody hates the generality of Enugu
people, same the whole Igbo.