NIGERIA: A TODDLER @ 50 ?

NIGERIA: A TODDLER @ 50 ?
By Sam Onimisi
The temptation to write on Nigeria at 50 has been so great that I couldn’t contain it any more. I contemplated the possibility of a miracle happening between now and the next six weeks and failed to see anything, safe for supernatural intervention. Even on this score, I tried some esoteric gambit so as to get a glimpse of, even if a little exoteric proof of some luck for Nigeria – something which can be said to be extraordinarily positive, the divine stars failed to deliver also. Mind you, I had tried prayers, fasting and meditation to see if an angel will have mercy and reveal to me what lies in the womb of the next six weeks, I was only left on the shores between migraine and hallucination. Not wanting to pass out before my time, I called off the search.
Nigeria got her name courtesy of the mistress of Lord Fredrick John Dealtry Lugard, the British soldier and colonial administrator who was governor-general of Nigeria between 1914 and 1919. He it was who, through the Royal Niger Company subdued the various kingdoms and chiefdoms, forced them together for what is known now as Nigeria. Throughout colonial rule, i.e. from 1900 to 1960, almost all British administrators, whether as residents, district officers or governors were military officers. Any wonder then that the military have monopolized governance even after independence; to the extent that civil rule or democracy is nearly an anathema to us.
One could say that we were at peace (or were forced to) when the colonialists were in charge; as aliens whatever they stole were repatriated home to U.K. Thus, one hardly sees any house or property acquired by them while here. Since Independence in 1960, our differences began to surge forward and our leaders appeared not to have any clue as to what to do. Those in charge were too proud to take advice from those who had some ideas and offered them ex-gratis. As a result, major tribes took up themselves through the government they controlled.
First, there was the Tiv riot which was brutally put down by the Sardauna of Sokoto. That event gave birth to the Police unit variously known or called today as ‘Kill and go’, ‘Riot Police’, Mobile Police or Mopol etc.
Then the meddlesomeness of Balewa’s Federal Government, in the regional affairs of the West, resulting in the controversial treasonable felony trials, conviction and jailing of Chief Obafemi Awolowo and his political associates in 1962. What followed was known as “operation we tie,” during which collaborators and traitors (so they were called) were targets of arson and mayhem. The rest of us thought it was no business of ours, as it was ‘they’ and not ‘us’; until Major Kaduna Nzeogwu thought otherwise through a coup detat in January 1966.
Just before then or around the same time, Isaac Adaka Boro got angry enough to want to take the Niger Delta from Nigeria for the same reason that eventually took more tolls, including Ken Saro Wiwa and many others. All this militarized the people and metamorphosed into the recent Niger-Delta war, although we refused to call it a war, yet we offer the warriors of Niger Delta amnesty and are currently being rehabilitated. We couldn’t manage Major Nzeogwu and his boys and so one pogrom leading to another came to a head in 1967 and Biafra happened, then a three year civil war which ended in 1970. Between then and now, there have been hundreds of ethno-religious riots mostly in the old North whose death toll may be more than that of the Civil war. Who cares to count? But what are those things we ought to have done but failed to do? Let’s go on retrospective excursion.
First, after the departure of the British, we ought to have summoned all Native Authorities representing ethnic nationalities to an Independent National Conference (INC) to discuss debate, bargain and agree to a set of terms of our co-habitation as a nation-state under the supervision of the United Nations. This is because whatever the pre-independence London Conferences discussed, participants could not have freely expressed their opinion as we were still under British bondage; what with their bias and preference for one side or the other.
Second, the INC ought to have changed the name of the country to reflect the physical features or landmark of the land. If it must be connected with inland water-ways, we had and still have River Niger and Benue, and could have changed name to NIBENA and by today, we could have been NIBENIS.
Third, it was easier at Independence especially during the INC to have adopted a native language as Lingua Franca and English would have become a second or third language of NIBENIS. By now, all citizens of 50 years of age or below would have been able to read, write and speak the language- a development that would have united us and helped make us into a true nation.
Four, the INC could have granted or admitted more regions based on territorial contiguity, ethno-linguistic and Socio-cultural affinity. These regions may not have been up to 30, but could have been more homogeneous and internally autonomous, big or resourceful to be economically self-supporting, politically important and willing to co-habit in an inter-dependent and reciprocal relations with other regions. Agitation for state creation, resource control and complaints of domination and ethno-religious riots would have been reduced to the barest minimum for peace to reign.
Five, there should have been a conscious and deliberately distancing or disconnection from Britain in order to wade off undue influence and so, debrief ourselves of colonial mentality and servility. This could have reinforced our freedom and liberty to pursue policies independent of Britain who naturally loathe our self-assertion. Six, we should have made agriculture and associated occupation such as fisheries, cattle herding and poultry as the main industry from which industrialization could have evolved, naturally. The much talk about food security and export income would have been attained, making oil and other solid minerals additional sources of revenue.
Seven, even if the 1967-1970 civil war was inevitable, we could have adopted the Biafran engineers and technologists and induct them into a national scientific and technological agency to train other Nigerians, develop and fabricate basic technological tools, instruments and machines for a sustainable technological development and industrial growth. This would have reduced our total dependence on foreign technology to a tolerable minimum. We squandered this opportunity for reasons, which is utterly absurd and altogether silly.
Ghana was known as Gold Coast, Ivory Coast is now Cote De’voure, Dahomey is now called Benin, Zaire was Congo-Kinshasha, Zimbabwe was Rhodesia, and Upper Volta is now called Burkina Faso. They all changed name for the salutary and Psychological effects on their countries after the trauma of colonial bondage. In Africa, children are named by their fathers, although mothers do give names too but those are mostly second or subsidiary names. Nigeria is saddled with a name given by someone’s concubine and no one has attempted a change, isn’t this a shame?
An average person at 50 is either a grandfather or grandmother or is aspiring to be. A country at 50 is expected to have resolved basic issues which are tormenting us today. That we cannot conduct a clean local government election, much less a general election is a collective shame. If all we achieved in 50years is that we have managed to remain one, it is not a guarantee that we shall forever remain so. I don’t want to say so nor am I happy in saying it but if any foreigner calls Nigeria a toddler at 50, I will not be angry. After all, what is there to cheer about? If you are big for nothing, you are the smallest of all men!