DO WE NEED HUMANITARIAN BOMBING IN NIGERIA TO SAVE THE INNOCENT?
WHEN IS NATO GOING TO START BOMBING FOR PEACEFUL DEMOCRACY?
KOFI
From: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com [mailto:usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Tony Agbali
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 9:24 AM
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Fwd: Post election violence in Nigeria
| This unfolding and unfurling violence is sad. It is unfortunate that violence would emanate from this election, that seemingly was adjudged fair and more transparent than many elections in the past, and which gives resounding victory to President Jonathan. In my estimation given the almost ten million voters that Jonathan more than that of his closest rival, General Muhammed Buhari (retired), the popular acceptance of President Jonathan is overwhelming, and it doesn't seem to be due to any massive malpractice- except if there are other informations that are still beyond our public knowledge. It is glaring that President Jonathan won clean and clear (as we say in Naija fashion), even if there if for whatever reasons, there exists certain reservations regarding his ability to provide sound leadership given his performance up until this point. However, no matter any reservations, he has shown certain acknowledgeable political principles, in the mode of his overt non-interference with the elections this far. The votes in the South West that went overwhelmingly in the way of Jonathan, after the Action Party of Nigeria (ACN), and partly the Labor Party (LP) won massive in the antecedating National Assembly election, the massive South-South, South-East, and the almost taken for granted Middle Belt recurring support for the ruling party, and even with Jonathan having a good enough showing in some of the northern states where Buhari won, indicates his popular acceptance. The resort to violence shows naiveity and a mindset of a group that always seem willing to have their way, even when they do not have the will or resources capable of getting there. Now, President Jonathan has a huge problem in his hand. He is the leader of a hugely divided nation. It can be conclusively stated that the Middle Belt fundamentally ensured the success of the elected ambitions of Jonathan, giving him the presidency. As a result these middle belt states, also northern states by geopolitical definition also provided Jonathan with a leeway, and a certain modicum of legitimacy, so much that while the core northern states went massively to Buhari, the northern peripheral states of Benue, Taraba, Adamawa, Kogi, Niger, Plateau, Kwara, and the Federal Capital, ensured Jonathan's easy win, alongside the Southwest, an ally of the old Middle Belt regional autonomy agitation. Unlike, the Middle Belt though, Jonathan's victory in the southwest is tinged with the teeming allegation by the CPC that the southwest votes were delivered by Tinubu to Jonathan; an allegation that cannot be simply subsumed as irrelevant. That leaves the quality of Jonathan's victory outside his south-south, and their traditional south-eastern ally, more resoundingly predicated upon the astute loyalty of the middle belt; which in spite of similar past support for the ruling party hardly translated into viable federal government programs and development efforts in that region. Yet since from around 1983, this region has continued to vote overwhelmingly for the ruling party at the center. Except for the Federal Capital Territory Abuja, they have been left virtually undeveloped with limited federal government infrastructural development. It is now time that the Jonathan administration take the Middle Belt region seriously given the tenor of their constant and unalloyed loyalty, especially to the ruling PDP since 1999. While Jonathan is considered to be a consensus building personality, some of these have been done through monetary deals with state executives, undermining is ability to appropriately fight corruption. The allegation that he disbursed about N108 billion naira in the prelude to the presidential election also affect his credibility and transparency. Yet, there is no doubt that, regardless of any malpractice, he is the one Nigerians have overwhelmingly entrusted their mandates. Therefore, he has to stymie the rapidly excerbating corruption that has continued to bedevil Nigerian politics and body polity, in spite of the loopsided and half-hearted rhetoric regarding fighting corruption. Jonathan has not shown enough dexterity and seriousness in combating corruption. Now that he has a full mandate, it is expected that he has to be more serious. That the current violence is emanating from the perception that Jonathan is weak on national security is not in doubt. Different poking events in the past seems to have opened the vista of violence as rewarding and unpunishable. Jonathan has shown a remarkable weakness in dealing with the spate of violence in the nation since before the October 1st Abuja bombing, with Jos aflame and Boko Haram running amok, not to talk of the "trademark kidnapping" that turned the south-east and south-south into a hellish space on earth. Jonathan has to tighten his belt in ensuring that national security becomes a topmost priority, and that those caught perpetuating any form of violence and/or terrorist activities, no matter their social ranks, are brought to justice. However, it seems with all the deal cutting that marked his ambition to become an elected president may stand in the way of this. While the current post-presidential election violence are despicable, one good thing that may evolve is that given that the perpetuators first began to attack northerners associated with the ruling party, burning their property, that this may help in propelling these political actors, to equally begin to renege on violence and their overt or veiled support, including harboring known behind-the-scene violence stimulators. Finally, the current violence in the northern states, should also be seen with another set of lenses. It is the northern way of galvanizing their relevance and claiming a stake in the Jonathan administration. Violence here is used as a negotiating tool of asserting relevance, so that the fact of their not voting for the ruling party does not boomerang to their face. Similar reaction happened in 1999/2000, when the north claimed that the Obasanjo administration had sidelined the north in appointing "non-northerners"- though northern military officers from the middle belt were appointed- as head of the military; which the north seemed to have claimed as a right. We saw many things, including the sharia riots unveiled, unsettling the peace and giving the northern oligarchy more inroad into the Obasanjo administration. Jonathan only has to tighten his belt and deal squarely with these malevolving forces. He is lucky that these are beginning to surface now than later- he is in deed better for it, as he takes the bulllock by the horn from the word go. But, I do hope that he does possess the potentialities to carry on when tough time needs tough actions- so far to my mind, he has been a weakling when it comes to issues such as these, in trying to curry the favors of all sections and interests, given his interested ambitions. --- On Mon, 4/18/11, Toyin Falola <toyin.falola@mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
|
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment