Buhari’s war on corruption: Real or fake (4)
Buhari
Continued from yesterday
THIS three-caste concept of Nigeria had to be modified after the civil war because of how it was fought and won. To defeat Biafra, the Caliphate relied heavily on the “willing tools” from the Northern minorities, and on the Yoruba from among the conquered territory of the South. After the war, the castes had to be shuffled to reflect that reality. The modified version was publicly articulated in 1992 by a senior Caliphate politician, Maitama Sule, when he described the revised version of the caste system they deem proper for the relationship between the peoples of Nigeria:
“In this country, all of us need one another. Hausa need Igbos, Igbos need Yoruba and the Yorubas need the Northerners. Everyone has a gift from God. Northerners are endowed by God with leadership qualities. The Yoruba man knows how to earn a living and has diplomatic qualities. The Igbo is gifted in commerce, trade and technological innovation. God so created us individually for a purpose and with different gifts. Others are created as kings, students and doctors. We all need each other. If there are no followers, a king will not exist, if there are no students a teacher will not be required, etc.”
– Alhaji Maitama Sule in an address which was written and spoken in Arabic during the launching of The Power of Knowledge authored by Alhaji Isa Kaita, at Durbar Hotel, Kaduna on December 22, 1992.
[Ayoada, J. A. A. Nigeria and the Squandering of Hope, Ibadan: University of Ibadan Press, 1997, p. 14]
The main post-civil-war changes were as follows: the Yoruba from the South were promoted to join the Northern minorities in the caste of willing tools and junior partners, i.e. house slaves, to the Caliphate masters. The defeated Biafrans remained in the lowest caste – the slaves who were never to rule over the Caliphate masters or to be allowed to have control over their future. From this Caliphate perspective, it was a serious breach of the Caliphate-established order for Jonathan, from among the defeated Biafran slaves, to be a President ruling over the Caliphate masters. That aberration was made possible by the quarrel between the Caliphate masters and their Yoruba junior partners over the annulment of the June 12 election by Sultan Dasuki.
The masters had been forced to hand power temporarily to their loyal Yoruba agent, General Obasanjo. But Obasanjo, for his own personal purposes, schemed to place Jonathan in line for the presidency by making him the running mate to Yar’Adua, the Caliphate scion to whom, in 2007, he dutifully handed back their power that they had lent him. When Yar’Adua died in office, the Caliphate plotted to prevent Jonathan from succeeding him. When that plot failed and Jonathan was installed to complete Yar’Adua’s term, the Caliphate demanded that he not exercise his constitutional right to seek election in 2011. They threatened that if he did, they would make the country ungovernable for him. [North ’ll make Nigeria ungovernable for Jonathan –Lawal Kaita http://www.nairatown.com/index.php?topic=6190.0 ]
But Jonathan had the temerity to defy them and win office in his own right instead of vacating it when the masters demanded it back.
In Caliphate eyes, Jonathan’s living in Aso Rock was a desecration of an inner sanctum of Caliphate power, like a slave sleeping in his master’s bed. The indulging by his officials in the looting that is a privilege of the masters was seen as eating the forbidden fruit. For this unforgiveable sin, he has to be punished now that the masters, through Buhari, have retaken what they regard as theirs and theirs alone. The usurper slave from Biafra has to be punished as a deterrent to any others who might dare to repeat the crime of usurping the masters’ power and privileges.
Those to whom the masters lent their looting privileges are exempt from punishment. But those who usurped that privilege must be punished for the crime of usurpation. Accordingly, usurpation of Caliphate privileges is the real crime for which Jonathan and his officials, especially his fellow ex-Biafrans, must be punished under the guise of the war on corruption. That is why Buhari’s war on corruption must be confined to the Jonathan administration and must not be extended to the regimes of President Yar’Adua, President Obasanjo, General Abubakar, General Abacha, Ernest Shonekan, General IBB, General Buhari, President Shagari, General Obasanjo, General Murtala Mohammed and General Gowon.
From the foregoing examination, we can see that Buhari has tailored his war on corruption to make it serve the Caliphate agenda of protecting the Caliphate system of lootocracy. Looting by regimes led by Caliphate scions or by Caliphate-approved agents must not be probed, prosecuted and punished. And above all, the 1999 Constitution, the godfather of lootocracy and the fountainhead of corruption must be preserved. That is why Northern leaders want to ensure that the 2014 Confab report is not implemented. [Northern leaders move to block implementation of confab report http://sunnewsonline.com/new/northern-leaders-move-to-block-implementation-of-confab-report/]
Conclusion
We can now answer the question: Is Buhari’s war on corruption real or fake?
It depends on what he does: (1) whether he extends it to cover all the regimes since 1966, like Bakarbe Musa demands; (2) whether he prosecutes himself for the missing N2.8bn and, above all (3) what he does about the 1999 Constitution.
If he omits (1) then it is a war with many sacred cows; and if he omits (2) then he is coming to equity without clean hands.
That would be bad enough.
And if Buhari goes along with the Northern leaders, it will become clear that he is opposed to dumping the 1999 Constitution – that he refuses to meet the necessary condition for “killing” corruption before it “kills” Nigeria. Should he do that, Buhari’s “War on Corruption” would have failed the litmus test for being genuine, and would become exposed as fake. And Nigerians would be justified in feeling conned by Buhari.
• Concluded
• Chinweizu wrote via Sundoor999@gmail.com
Related
Latest
Get the latest news delivered straight to your inbox every day of the week. Stay informed with the Guardian’s leading coverage of Nigerian and world news, business, technology and sports.
5 Comments
Chinweizu, your article contains an obvious misinformation that Jonathan is from among the defeated Biafran slaves, when in fact Jonathan is from Niger Delta. Jonathan,the most timid president Nigeria ever had, has himself to be blame for his failures by not doing what is right by holding people accountable and ensuring that Nigerians get minimal electricity and good roads, and dealing decisively with Boko Haram, a terrorist Islamic organization that he refused to label a terrorist organization in the face of killing Christians, Muslims, kidnapping and raping children, and blowing up newspapers offices and United Nations building. That said, whether Buhari’s war on corruption, is real or fake is not about how many governments or which governments get probed, it is about what systems Buhari has in place to check and prevent corruption. To probe requires facts. With all the noise that Buhari has been making about probes since he came into power, how many people have been brought from Jonathan’s government before any law court for looting? None! Even the $6 billion dollars alleged by Oshiomhole that was stolen by a minister as informed by the United States official is ludicrous, because if it is true we expect to see immediate prosecution and recovery of funds before the individual abscond. Please stop blaming the Yorubas for the defeat of the Biafrans, blame the Biafrans that first attack Midwest and Yoruba up to Ore that did not instigate the killing of Biafrans in their region. So, the Yoruba had a right to defend their territory rather than leaving it for Biafrans’ occupation, which is in line with your celebrated Achebe vivid argument by Okonkwo in Things Fall Apart, “If a man comes into my hut and defecates on the floor, what do I do? Do I shut my eyes? No!” So, stop the blame gain of the Yorubas. Blame the Biafran leadership that failed to understand the politics and Biafran dominance of Nigeria before the war, which they failed to use to their advantage to continuously dominate Nigeria.
Was Gen. Philip Effiong that led Biafra at the final stages of the war from Biafra or Niger Delta? What is the difference between Biafra and Niger Delta? When and for what purpose was this your Niger Delta invented? Your honest answers to these questions will help you revise some of your comments above.
Odumodu, you are right that General Philip Effiong was Biafran. Also, was Colonel Victor Banjo and Major Adewale Ademoyega, Yoruba descents, and even Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu, a Midwesterner whose state upon captured was declared as Benin Republic by the Biafrans. Colonel Banjo strategic planning led to the early capture of Midwest (Benin Republic) and South West up to Ore. Biafra geographically, purportedly covered the entire old eastern region, which was split into 3 states (East-Central State, South-Eastern State, and Rivers State) in May 27, 1967 before the declaration of Biafran Republic in May 30, 1967 right before the civil war of July 1967. The later states (South-Eastern State, and Rivers State), dominated by Ibibio and Ijaw were seen more as minority ethnic groups rather than as part of the Biafran federation. So, the heart and soul of Biafra and the true Biafran nationalists were the Ibos in the East-Central State whose properties were even seized by Rivers State and declared as abandoned property and some to this date have not been returned to their true Ibo owners. Even before Biafra Republic, was the Niger Delta Republic, which was declared by Major Isaac Adaka Boro and his Ijaw nationalists volunteer force in February 23, 1966, but were crushed by the Nigerian Federal troops and Major Boro was subsequently convicted and jailed for treason. Major Boro upon being released by Gowon, joined the federal military to fight against the Biafra Republic. In a nut shell, there was Niger Delta Republic before Biafra, and the Ibos were punished severely as Biafrans by even having their properties seized in Rivers State that was purportedly a Biafran region. Is that not ironic? Not until a true Biafran (Ibo) becomes Nigerian president, the civil war is still not over.
The trouble with Chinweizu is that he sees only the facts that are supportive of his case and nothing else. A scholar ought not to do that. The same Yorubas that he called the house slaves of the Caliphate he once described as the most sophisticated on the eve of the last election; and they were more consistent in their opposition to the Caliphate politics much more than his own people the Igbos. May be he has his facts misplaced and confused and he needs to be reminded certain facts.
In the First Republic it was the Yorubas who remained in opposition to the same Caliphate politics and power sharing. Where were the Igbos? Of course, in government sharing the booties of the office with their caliphate senior partners of NPC. In the Second Republic Yorubas remained in the opposition; it was NPP, the Igbo party that formed alliance with their Northern partners- the same people Chinweizu called Caliphate politicians- to form a corrupt government that laid the foundation for the economic crisis that we are still grappling with today. So who are the house slaves of the Caliphate in all these, if not the Ibos? It is your people who have always formed alliance with the North to form government, the same people who killed many of your kinsmen and who are still killing you.
When June 12 was annulled by Dasuki was it not the Igbo officials in government who encouraged Babangida to go on when he was prepared to de-annulled the election fearing the wrath of international community? What role did Akpamgo as Attorney General play then? Were they not the ones who canvassed the nebulous theory, very irrational to me, ‘that June 12 is not the only injustice done in Nigeria’? Read Omoruyi’s book on June 12, he was an insider for the role Igbos played in the annulment seeing an opportunity to settle scores over Civil War with Yorubas. Who drafted the Interim Government Decree? Was it not an Ibo man, Nwabueze, to keep the same Caliphate in power. Was it not Chukwumerije as megaphone for Abacha who once threatened jail for anyone who mentioned June 12? So if Caliphate ever has any house slaves in the South it is not
the Yorubas, it is infact, and ironically too, the Igbos.
As a matter of fact the Unification Decree which abolished the federal arrangement and regionalism at independence which now brought the whole nation under the same Caliphate was crafted by an Ibo man and signed by an Igbo head of State, Aguiyi Ironsi. So Igbos have in fact served the cause of the Caliphate more than any one whether they realize it or not. Yorubas have fought resolutely in the opposition for years which the igbos cannot.(If Yorubas are now in alliance with Fulani, so be it.) Else why are your leaders carpet crossing to APC? Where is honour in that? Please read Igbokwe, an igbo man and a honest man on this issue.
As to the Civil War which Chinweizu mentioned the Yorubas had to fight because the Biafrans did not behave as if they are fighting for secession but for occupation. What were Biafrans doing in Ore, a Yorubaland? Why were Biafran soldiers facing Lagos, Ibadan, Yoruba land, where no pogrom occured? To achieve what really? Why did they not face Kaduna or Sokoto the seat of the Caliphate with whom they are in disagreement? Does anyone in his right sense expect Yorubas to throw up their hands to welcome the Biafrans? Does an army of liberation faces the capital of another oppressed people or of the oppressor? In the American Civil War the two parties aimed their respective capitals. Ibadan is not the capital of Northern hegemony or the Caliphate- Sokoto and Kaduna are the political and spiritual capitals. So Awo was right to describe Ojukwu plot as not for secession but for occupation. Yorubaland is however the wrong place to go. So why should an intellectual find it difficult to see how Yorubas must fight? Read Echeruo, an Igbo from Delta; his account captured Ojukwu’s failures as a diplomat. It is time you stop blaming anyone over Biafra.
Again he sees the war on corruption as a ruse because there are no institutional mechanisms to fight it and there are impedimenmts. Well if we have to wait for every thing to be in place nothing will be done. It is amusing that Chinweizu did not see anything wrong with the incompetent Jonathan government and his ring of looters. Dizeani has just been arrested in UK; AND SOON MOST OF JONATHAN RING WILL BE STANDING TRIAL if not in Nigeria in other countries of the world as a signpost to one of the worst era of looting of national treasury in any nation. Of course Igbos constitute the core of Jonathan cabinet and the financial sector of his government. Chinweizu sees nothing wrong about this. If that government is clean why has Jonathan been running around trying to beg Buhari from probing his government? Can anyone really say a war against corruption against the background of such widespread looting a ruse?
Chinweizu is a great intellectual and firebrand, no one can take this away from him. His an original thinker and pan-Africanist but sometimes his love for his people often blinds him from seeing reality and from seeing the fact that there are other realities.
.
In my earlier post 15 days ago ( see below) I took Chinweizu up on certain references to historical facts. I was particularly troubled and I felt my sense of honour as a Yoruba man being impugned by certain references in the article which equally provoked my response. However, I do grossly misunderstand Chinweizu not having read his entire series. I read only the last two parts and might have misunderstood the tenor of his interventions.
Chinweizu saw this misunderstanding and has personally written to me to clear the misunderstanding. He was not referring to the Yorubas as house slaves but only interpreting the Nigerian situation in the light of Caliphate Colonialism within the larger context of Hausa-Fulani Muslim oligarchy vis-a-vis the rest of the nation. The misunderstanding is regretted.
I am grateful to Chinweizu for taking the time for this clarification and I hold him in high esteem.
We will review and take appropriate action.