CONSENSUAL values in a developing democracy could be upended by the particularistic values of its ruling classes; which makes some citizens more equal and freer than others; an inequitable affair which drags many a democratic project down the abyss. Equality and freedom can hardly be realised, and sovereignty could be impaired within a potent framework of self-serving trade-offs which abound in young democracies; some of which are known to have selfishly trodden the trajectory of mutilating the sovereignty of their nations for selfish ends.
Nigeria’s ascent to the admirable status of a frontline state in the liberation wars of Southern Africa, and its descent almost half a century later to a mutilated sovereign nation can be explained by the erosion of core democratic values, bad governance, and self-centred trade-offs which engender national tragedies. It is tragic that a large swathe of Nigeria’s territory is under the control of ferocious non-state actors; and it is a compounded tragedy for Nigeria to contemplate becoming a lapdog of Franco-American imperialism in West Africa.
The take-off of Project Nigeria was a harbinger to a group of powerful emergent states, which could impact considerably on global politics, driven from the African axis by Nigeria, which unleashed the goodwill of the new nations; and the anti-imperialist global community.
But the dynamics of Nigeria’s predator classes led by fractious ethnic and regional elites, decapacitates it to realise its mission, leaving it to swing between different policy trajectories, with differential impact on Nigerians; such as the impact of the neoliberal policy thrust which led to a massive dispossession of publicly-owned enterprises by a tiny class of Nigerians; which conversely affected Nigerian workers and peasants, whose lives have nosedived to the lowest ebb.
ALSO READ:
Legislative Responsibility Or Lack Thereof; By Jibrin Ibrahim
Save those who perceive it favourably, most Nigerians are ill-disposed to the establishment of a foreign military base in their country, as the Anglo-Nigeria Defence Pact was vehemently resisted by their forebears in the early sixties.
Increased domestic and international clout of states is underpinned by a positive assertion of core values, a propound vision, and good governance, which propel states to enviable domestic and diplomatic stature. Whilst national decline contingent on loss of national focus, unrealised vision, and inequitable governance facilitates the descent of nations down the abyss.
Nigeria’s ascent to the admirable status of a frontline state in the liberation wars of Southern Africa, and its descent almost half a century later to a mutilated sovereign nation can be explained by the erosion of core democratic values, bad governance, and self-centred trade-offs which engender national tragedies. It is tragic that a large swathe of Nigeria’s territory is under the control of ferocious non-state actors; and it is a compounded tragedy for Nigeria to contemplate becoming a lapdog of Franco-American imperialism in West Africa.
What could be responsible for the transition from a giant with a high diplomatic exposure which facilitated Nigeria’s leadership of Africa during the Murtala/Obasanjo military regime to the contemptible lapdog of the French and American neo-imperialists it is allegedly contemplating to accept under the Tinubu administration?
Though Nigeria’s diplomatic nosedive predates the Tinubu administration, its failure to engage the West African coupists constructively led to the mess which polarised the sub-region; facilitated the ease with which Putin penetrated West Africa. Whilst its domestic policy which prioritises resources over human beings, rulers over citizens gives it an anti-human face.
First, since the character of a regime determines the nature of its domestic and foreign policies, the Murtala/Obasanjo regime, which earned the diplomatic feat for Nigeria, was a corrective regime perched on a policy template with zero tolerance for corruption, which led to a robust and transparent domestic policy thrust widely accepted by Nigerians. Its purge of the civil service and dismissal of corrupt military officers; and confiscations of their ill-gotten properties were unprecedented.
ALSO READ:
Laja Odukoya: The Intellectual As The Conscience Of Society; By Owei Lakemfa
Secondly, its foreign policy was as robust and engaging as its domestic policy. After it regained its bearing from its brief engagement with the American-sponsored government of national unity in Angola, it called off the bluff of the then United States President Gerald Ford; unilaterally recognised the MPLA as the legitimate representative of the Angolan people, and lobbied the OAU for its recognition. And former Nigeria’s military Head of State, Gen Obasanjo nationalised British Petroleum (BP) in pursuance of Nigeria’s foreign policy objectives in Southern Africa.
Third, the Nigerian economy was yet to be overtaken by the IMF and the World Bank for them to force their bitter pills down Nigeria’s throat. Fourth, there were no incentives for the Murtala/Obasanjo regime to trade-off national sovereignty for other goals.
Though Nigeria’s diplomatic nosedive predates the Tinubu administration, its failure to engage the West African coupists constructively led to the mess which polarised the sub-region; facilitated the ease with which Putin penetrated West Africa. Whilst its domestic policy which prioritises resources over human beings, rulers over citizens gives it an anti-human face.
Some of the conditions attached to the operations of the military bases are horribly subversive of sovereignty. Therefore, to grant a powerful state the right to establish a military base underscores the mutilation of sovereignty of the host state. Despite the official denial by the Nigerian authorities, it is strongly alleged that Nigeria is contemplating to host American and French military bases, changing roles with the former outposts of French and American neo imperialism in West Africa, who have gotten a new master: Russia’ s strongman Vladimir Putin.
Besides the defence and security imperatives of military bases for the master nations and the host states; their establishment, and acceptance, can be explained within a framework of interlocking trade-offs between the hegemons and their servile hosts. The more prebendal and authoritarian the host states become, the farther away the gaze of the powerful nations from them, emboldening them to deepen corruption, authoritarianism, and trample human rights; and the more their citizens sink into poverty, ignorance and ill health.
Generally, the more the strategic economic, defence and security objectives of the hegemonic states are achieved, the capacity of the host states for independent action becomes less, making them more subservient to the hegemonic states. This is the dialectical relationship between the hegemons who litter the globe with military bases, and their client host states. Therefore, the United States has traded off its right as the global democratic bogeyman, to forcefully fight authoritarianism and impose democracy, or fight corruption in the Asian and Middle Eastern sheikdoms, and in the despotic democratic enclaves in Africa and elsewhere for allowing it to establish military bases in such countries.
ALSO READ:
Step-Parenting: The Crux And The Clue; By Godwin A. Abeghe
Some of the conditions attached to the operations of the military bases are horribly subversive of sovereignty. Therefore, to grant a powerful state the right to establish a military base underscores the mutilation of sovereignty of the host state. Despite the official denial by the Nigerian authorities, it is strongly alleged that Nigeria is contemplating to host American and French military bases, changing roles with the former outposts of French and American neo imperialism in West Africa, who have gotten a new master: Russia’ s strongman Vladimir Putin.
From the prospective leader of the emergent states in the 60s, which rose to the diplomatic height of a frontline state in Southern Africa, Nigeria has dissipated the goodwill of its friends who had high hopes in its capacity to change global politics in their favour, which has unfortunately stooped so low to contemplate the inglorious role of becoming the lackey of the French and the Americans in Africa. Nigerians have had enough of the messy stuff of the right of centre political establishment, which has dominated its politics; the only prospects for it out of the mess is for left of centre politicians to take over.
Jahun, a commentator on public affairs, is based in Dutse, Jigawa State. He can be reached via email @: aminuhabibu58@gmai.com
