The merger of the southern and northern protectorates in 1914 by the British colonial government gave birth to Nigeria. However, it has been a journey of multiethnic nationalities, different religious groups, and dynamic political system under one roof as a united country. The task of unifying the various ethnic, religious and social groupings in the country has been a national challenge more than 100 years since amalgamation in 1914.
Segregated settlements such as Sabon Gari in Kano, came out of ethnic preservation and conflict issues. Southerners in the north asked for a unique settlement pattern and it was given to them by the colonial masters. Northerners in the south also did the same.
Looking at Nigeria’s socio-political problems from the sociological point of view, it is largely believed that the communities of Itsekiri and Urhobo are considered to have the most inter-tribal marriages in the country. But in the latter part of Babangida’s Administration, there was so much internal strife between these communities. If this is extrapolated to the wider Nigerian space, it shows a reflection of the ethnic disharmony in the country. The Nigerian people have so much in common, yet they find it difficult to integrate.
The gap between the various groupings seems wider as the nation continues to be plagued by ethnic rivalry, power sharing and lately violent agitations. Unifying the diverse ethnic, religious and political inclinations in the country amongst insecurity challenges, remains one that should be surmounted in order to uphold the central tenet of one nation.
Disagreements and controversies over the best federal structure to be adopted, size and responsibility of government as well as how resources are acquired and shared, have become some of the recurrent features of the Nigerian state. The country has not been able to craft a system that will enable it to manage its resources jointly and to enjoy the best it has.
After the Nigerian Civil War, Nigerians are still engaged in internal squabbles which they should have overcome by now. The talk about the indivisibility of Nigeria could be challenged, considering that hegemonies like the former Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, among others, have been split into different countries.
Since 1999, Nigeria has enjoyed uninterrupted democratic government but bad governance has however set pace for economic hardship which has links to the present insecurity, ethnic and religious tension in the country.
Most of our political elite including traditional leaders are not doing enough to harness our diversity so that we forget our tribal and religious sentiments. Elite fragmentation is largely the reason why the dreams of our forefathers have not been realized. The intention was to make Nigeria the biggest nation of black people in the world.
Similarly, the followership has been docile even though members of the public bear the consequences of policies of wrong and misguided leadership. Citizens must know that they are major stakeholders in the destiny of the nation. They need to know that they have a responsibility to participate in democracy and select leaders.
Sadly, citizens have not demonstrated that they have the capability to define their own destiny unlike in some countries where real leadership emerges from the grassroots. These leaders may also belong to the rank of the elite but the fact is that they have come from the groundswell of agitation, opposition and disappointment. That was why in the short historical trajectory of Nigeria, especially in the First Republic, there were political parties for the underprivileged. For instance, the Northern Elements Progressive Union (NEPU) championed, among others, the interest of the marginalized or the talakawas.
Our type of political management system is problematic. Too much power is concentrated at the federal level. In our politics, and in allocation of resources and its management, we divide the nation. This has generated conflicts, as ordinary Nigerians who are victims of this problem, fight themselves and make the nation ungovernable.
State governors have been described as emperors, who assume full responsibility as the Chief Executive Officers of their various states each time they want to witch-hunt their opponents by mobilizing security forces. But when it comes to providing adequate security in their terrain, they plead helplessness
Sociologists say that diversity in itself is not a problem; it is what is done with it that matters. Whether or not socio-cultural varieties strive for success entirely depends on how the society chooses to manage it.
Blessed with huge potential in human and natural resources including agriculture and minerals across the country, Nigeria has what it takes to be a great country. What binds us together is stronger than what separates us. Agitators and separatist movements should be engaged through constructive dialogue, so as to proceed to a sustainable national integration and development.
Nation statehood is the modern form of social organization; the focus should be on de-emphasising tribal societies. But the 1999 Constitution (as amended) lays premium on indigeneship instead of place of residence. Place of residence should rather be the key to communal living or the basis for representation or giving people positions of responsibility. That idea that a non-indigene is accepted and involved in the running of the system within his locality, propels them to be more interested in what is happening in the area they live.
The age of tribal entities as administrative units is long past. Two of the most advanced economies in Europe, Germany and Italy, were made of ethnic or tribal groups. But those cracks were mended by peace-builders who served as unifiers. Giuseppe Garibaldi was the bridge-builder in Italy while Otto von Bismarck played a similar role in Germany. In seeking to get a unifier of the diverse entities we have in Nigeria, we should avoid ethnic and parochial capture of leadership.
Nigeria should do well to generate such unifying enthusiasm amongst the people and to make that a national goal. But first, we have to create lofty values before talking about leadership that will implement them. Our leadership recruitment system should be rigorous and capable of throwing up a reasonable mass of people we can entrust our values to; leaders who can put the welfare of Nigerians at the very centre of the purpose of their national being.
Our management skills should be put to work in ensuring that instruments of integration continue to serve the purpose of national unity. The federal character principle, National Youth Service Corps (NYSC), unity schools, national symbols, National Orientation Agency (NOA), among others, have been adopted to facilitate national unity in Nigeria.
The unity schools, for example, were a creative idea by the late prime minister, to bring Nigerian students together by experiencing other cultures. It is said that experience is better than knowledge. That experience creates a sense of patriotism and belonging. These integrative instruments strengthen democracy and the peace imperative.
To have durable peace architecture, the leaders themselves will be willing and ready to embrace peace. Through this, it is expected that they won’t engage in any activity that will generate conflict. All the institutions and other arms of government must be connected and committed to having a peaceful nation. Commitment to peace means that leaders will be determined to implement the letters of the constitution.
National goals that are important to our collective welfare need to be pursued with vigor such as leadership succession based on national vision that everybody has to key into. Our leaders should have a national outlook so much so that Nigerians living in any part of the country will be accepted as compatriots and encouraged to achieve their aspirations. This way, patriotism and tolerance are engendered, and non-indigenes can be sympathetic to the problems of their host communities.
Obviously, patriotism is a way of strengthening national unity; it is a kind of bargain in which the nation state defines what it owes its citizens. It goes back to leadership and good governance. If the affairs of the country are well run and every citizen sees themselves as benefiting, they will love their country. If citizens compare themselves with other citizens in other countries and they know they are better off, and the difference is accounted for on account of their Nigerian citizenship, they will have a lot to defend.
No comments:
Post a Comment