SolidarityEconomy.net

By Kayode Komolafe, Nigeria

The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn. - Famous American Futurologist, Alvin Toffler.

One may not need the specialist knowledge of the world famous futurist, Alvin Toffler, to make reasonable projections about what will happen to Nigeria this year.

Toffler is reputed for his groundbreaking works on technological developments and their impact on society as well as the digital, communication and corporate revolutions. But what he has to say about the need to “learn, unlearn, and relearn” is somewhat relevant to making a prediction about the transition, which is the defining issue of 2007 for Nigeria.

As it is customary at this period of the year, seers and prophets have been offering conflicting predictions about the shape of things to come. While some have mercifully assured us that the elections would hold and in relatively peaceful atmosphere, others have only fallen short of prophesying the Armageddon. There are even those who claim they have not seen any election held this year in their own crystal balls. Whereas spiritualists are entitled to make prediction in their own realm, all that the secular analysts of public affairs can do is to interpret trends and make projections thereby. That is where the question of learning and, in fact, lessons of history become apposite.

As a futurist, Toffler places so many premiums on learning from trends. It is reported in his website that some political leaders have actually benefited from his ideas in trying to approach the future. Mikhail Gorbachev was reported to have benefited from Toffler’s ideas as he formulated perestroika in 1986 just like Zhao Ziyang, the reformist Chinese premier, did in 1988 in his pursuit of reforms. Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez is also reported to have read Toffler’s work while he was in prison.

Similar things could be said of South Korea’s Kim Dee Jung and Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohamad at one time or the other. Japanese leaders such as Hirofumi Nakaso and Junichiro Koizumi also respected him .

In the Nigerian context, the future that is being predicted is already here with us. It is not a matter of decades or generations. The subject of 2007 became that of intense scenario-buildings and several permutations especially with the political events of last year. Now, the much- talked about 2007 is finally here with us. And the most critical of the scheduled events of the year are expected to be completed in just a matter of five months. So, rather than just making predictions-positive or negative-it might be more helpful to continue to draw attention to those things that may impair the process of transition.

The most obvious danger to this all-important, and unprecedented transition is the seeming refusal by the managers of this transition not learn from the errors of earlier experiments. Or in the words of Toffler to” learn, unlearn and relearn” the supreme lessons of history, which made earlier transitions impossible, or a colossal failure. The problems of the earlier transition are well known. The process was grossly manipulated. It became an endless experiment with the fate of the polity. Rules were disobeyed with impunity. One man simply substituted himself for the law. The lawgivers flagrantly disobeyed even the rules set by them. At times the rules became imprecise. Institutions were bastardised and corrupted.

One wonders when the elementary lesson will sink into those in power that no leader can determine the fate of this nation for all times. You play your own part and leave the rest for your successors. The problem begins when a leader and the coterie of sycophants around him begin to develop a sense of indispensability. The leader must shape the present and determine the future in their narrow reading of history. Commenting on an earlier transition the late radical historian, Dr. Bala Yusuff Usman, said the managers of that transition carried on as if they were writing the last chapter of Nigeria’s history, whereas all their manipulations would end up only as a footnote. Usman was profoundly proved correct by the costly stalemate that ended that transition. Having destroyed the fabric of the system, it was no surprise that it suffered implosions. These implosions often assumed disastrous proportions. The present dispensation was actually built from the ashes of such a disaster that was the regime of General Sani Abacha. It is as if a collective amnesia is afflicting those in power about the recent sordid history of the country given the gross abuse of power currently in display. This is the point that the editor of this newspaper, Olusegun Adeniyi, makes eloquently is his The Last 100 Days of Abacha. It is a book that those who can make a difference about the fate of this transition should read again. It is not fair to Nigeria that this transition is still viewed with a significant dose of uncertainty. The anxiety is most undeserving. By now the system ought to be weaned with a measure of stability. Elections ought to become matters of routine to pass a verdict on leadership.

On a positive note, it would help if instead of merely predicting chaos efforts are stepped up by various class interests to ensure the following among other patriotic tasks: holding the elections according to schedule and in strict adherence to the rules and resisting manipulation by those controlling the apparatuses of the state; defence of the constitution and mobilising against its blatant violations and campaigning against the cult of personality around the leader and preserving the sanctity of institutions of democracy such as the courts, the legislature, the electoral commission and others.

For instance a group campaigning for the integrity of the ballot box, the Alliance for Credible Elections, is rendering a better service than those merely content with scenario- building. For the incurable optimist of the Nigerian situation, the attitude should continue to be that in the remaining 157 days to complete this transition , a lot could still be done stave off the nation from the disaster that would happen should the transition fail for any reason. It is not enough to say that the 2007 elections would be a “poor repeat” of the controversial 2003 ones. It is important to take a step to defend the integrity of the current process.

Interestingly, scenarios are built both at home and abroad about what the shape of 2007 will be. In private discussions there are well-informed and well-meaning Nigerians who would tell you that all indications point to the fact that there would be no elections and that the frenzy of political activities towards the end of last year was just a fluke. They project that some stalemate would ensure in the coming months that would be exploited to ask for extensions. All we can hope for is that may this not happen because the consequences are so frightening to contemplate. Nigeria needs a orderly transition so that it could build on the experience of the last eight years in liberal democracy.

Beside insisting on the elections and making relevant institutions work for the transition, there are other critical issues that will define 2007. They ought to be given maximum attention by the government and they should be the focus of public debates. Let us just take two of them as a sample.

First is the possibility of militancy being transformed into insurgency in the seemingly intractable Niger Delta crisis. For those familiar with the situation on ground in the region, it would amount to sheer hypocrisy to imagine that credible elections can actually take place in some crisis-ridden parts of Niger Delta. At least no one can place ballot boxes in the parts of the creeks where militants are holding hostages. If it is not possible to rescue hostages from the militants, how can any one conduct elections in the communities around them? It does not help the situation that all the major platforms seeking power in 2007 hardly see the problem beyond security. The extant issues of development and Nigerian federalism inherent in it are not being confronted.

It appears the matter is even taken more seriously abroad by those consuming the Nigerian oil. The BUSINESDAY reported yesterday that American military experts are already alleging that al-Queda might have linked up with some mujahidins among the militants of the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta (MEND). The United States depends on Nigeria for 15% of its oil import and this percentage is expected to rise to 20 in the next five years. America already feels that its interest is critically under attack in the poor region.

The newspaper quoted the American report like this :” Following MEND’s spectacular attack on Shell’s Forcados oil terminal during which the militants blew up two pipelines, set a tanker on fire and kidnapped two Americans, one Briton and six other foreign workers of US petroleum services firm, Wilbros, jihadist websites, the Middle East, posted photos of the militants with the inscription” Photos of Lions of Nigeria after having taken prisoners of some Americans. These are photos of the Mujahidins in Nigeria after the seizure of nine hostages from the US oil companies who rob the wealth of Muslim Nigeria and of the world.”

If you ignore the obvious inaccuracies in the perception of those who posted this sort of information on the website, you would see that the problem can only be compounded by its externalization in the murky global oil politics. The important thing is that for a stable polity the Niger Delta sore ought to be healed before it festers further. Beyond the security perspectives, all those seeking to rule this country should come up with clear-cut positions that could be debated. In an issue-driven election, the position of a party on the Niger Delta debacle ought to be a factor that would determine the votes it gets from the electorate. The campaigns this year should be a veritable avenue to debate the Niger Delta nationally.

The second issue is what to make of the reform agenda of the Obasanjo administration, which its enthusiasts crow so much about. The debate on the reform should also define the campaigns. The debate should be conducted relative to the socio-economic condition of Nigerians. It is not enough to state glibly that one is for reform continuity or discontinuity. It is more important to state how continuity or otherwise will affect the quality of lives of the people. The mere fact that external assessors of the reform find the statistics from Nigeria impressive does not justify continuity if it cannot be established that the quality of life has appreciated. The matter is not just about growth rate and the officially falling inflation rate, it is also about the well being of the people. It is about access to education, potable water, primary healthcare, good roads, electricity consumption etc. As one expert has put it beyond the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), we may need to compute the Gross Well-Being of the People(GWP). The social condition is a critical factor in how the transition is handled.

For those of us who would rather err on the side of optimism regarding this transition, the inter-play of the factors stated in the foregoing and the balance of forces among the forces propelling them will shape 2007. The important thing is not ignore these factors and others being thrown up in the system.

The responsibility for this does not rest with the government alone. The political opposition competing for power should take categorical positions on these issues rather than focussing on personalities alone. The people and non-governmental organisations should insist that the danger signals are obviated. For instance, it is possible to take a non-partisan position on the feud between the President and Vice President Atiku Abubakar. When the President sacks his deputy when he has no power to do so and then turns round to seek clarification from court, it should not be treated simply as Obasanjo Versus Atiku matter. The constitution is breached and institutions are threatened by such actions. The rest of us must insist that both parties in this dispute should play according to the rules.

It is by such alertness to rules, constitutionalism and decorum that 2007 will go down as a year of successful transition.

Published in This Day (Lagos), January 3, 2007 View original article here