 Published
June10th, 2010
Nigeria, like other nations world-over,
always has an interesting national debate to engage the
sensibilities of her people and evoke their most eloquent
and polemic arguments. I particularly remember the heated
debates over IMF ‘conditionalities’, the June 12 ‘imbroglio’
and Obasanjo’s ‘secret agenda’. We cannot forget so soon the
debate over late President Yar’Adua’s illness and the delay
in transmitting power to then Vice-President Jonathan. Now
the issue is whether or not President Jonathan should run
for president next year. Once again, all sections of the
polity are falling over themselves to exercise their civic
right to express their views about this topic that has
virtually taken the public discussion space captive since
President Yar’Adua passed on barely six weeks ago. And once
again the national media is not only at the centre of the
ring, but at ringside, promoting, directing and creating a
huge hype around the verbal fireworks that keep everyone
glued to their TV and radio sets, newspapers and magazines.
It’s like Barrack Obama versus Hilary Clinton all over
again. But now, more than ever before, I think it imperative
for Nigerians to take a breather, step back and consider –
for once – what manner of debate it is we have allowed
ourselves to be embroiled, nay, obsessed with.
Why is Jonathan’s candidacy such an issue? I
think the answer is simple. For Jonathan to contest is for
him to win, as no incumbent loses an ‘election’ in Nigeria’s
peculiar democratic style. If this were not the case, then
it would be irrelevant whether he chooses to contest or not,
because the important question in any real democratic
contest is not who contests, but who wins. By being obsessed
with Jonathan’s contemplation to run or not, we admit that
we have no democracy, that we are slaves of the oligarchy
and forever at the mercy of the incumbent. What is more
irksome, is why we do not expend our precious collective
breathe in tackling the real problem. For how much longer
shall our national media lead us down the road of perverse
self-deception in their self-centered efforts to sell
adverting space by creating this Wrestlemania-type hype
around a farcical debate whose outcome has no impact on our
overall wellbeing?
The Nigerian media is hereby not only
failing in its sacred duty to engender the right debate over
the right issues, it is becoming as culpable as the current
political elite in the perpetuation of our country’s social,
political and economic backwardness. This is so because the
gusto with which these farcical debates have been conducted
in the media over the past decades have helped in no small
measure in legitimating that which is not only indisputably
illegitimate, but should be uncompromisingly made to appear
so. In orchestrating this illicit debate, the media is
indeed conducting an underhand but de facto election
for the oligarchy, as its outcome will determine the extent
to which Mr. Jonathan (or no other devious individual than
IBB himself) can push their good luck which has so far been
extremely phenomenal (from their point of view, at
least). The debate will serve no other purpose than to
enable the long-ruling cabal determine which of it’s members
(whether from the old house or the new emerging house)
becomes the next kid on Aso Rock.
But if the media fails to provide Nigerians
with leadership, why may we not help ourselves? Why must we
eternally allow lackeys of every sort play the tribe card or
the religion card to our detriment? Regarding the tribe
card, social commentator Colonel Umar made a very
instructive observation many years ago. He is credited with
remarking that the fact that Northerners had held the
highest office in Nigeria for so long has not affected the
number of beggars of Northern stock. Let’s not deceive
ourselves; a Northern president who emerges from a true
election will serve Southerners better than a Southern
president who emerges from the usual ‘selection’. Of course
it works the other way round. So the real issue is not that
the president, and all other elective leaders for that
matter, must emerge from a particular region, but that they
must emerge from genuine, free and fair elections. The blind
tribalist who insists on having his tribesman in office
should be aware that when the chips are down, the ‘selected’
oligarch – wherever s/he comes from – will protect their
personal interests and those of their clique rather than the
interests of tribe or nation. So, enough of these misleading
and unprofitable discussions: Let Jonathan and IBB run for
president if they want to. Even Abacha, Dimka and Lawrence
Anini can rise up from the dead and buy nomination forms if
they think they are fit. Let us rather debate how to make
the ballot sacred and powerful. If our votes are made safe,
the presidency will be safe. For then, except a (wo)man be
voted, s/he may not enter (or even see) the inside of Aso
Rock.
Ome Dede (omedede@yahoo.com)
|
