Redefining A Coup.

by Eze Eluchie

For decades, the practice of foreign interference in the domestic affairs of other independent countries had assumed the status of an international norm, despite repeated protestation by all countries that they refrain from such interference.

Weaker and less economically endowed countries more easily capitulate under interference from stronger and more financially affluent countries. Nowhere has foreign interference in the affairs of other countries had greater dire consequences for the populace than in sub-Saharan African States and now in North Africa.

Decades after mostly cosmetic political 'independence', most countries in the African continent are ruled by proxies of foreign powers or lackeys who would rather pander to the desires of their external paymasters than hearken to the needs of their peoples. Foreign governments, in one breath pontificate on issues of democracy, good governance, 'anti-corruption initiatives’, and respect for territorial integrity and sovereign rights of States, whilst at the same time, supporting and propping up dictators, sociopaths, kleptocrats and sadists to rule over countries where they may have interests.

The practice of imposition of rulers preferred by foreign powers for emerging countries attained its height during the cold war era and was more rampant in mineral rich countries. Coup d’etats and often times, outright murder of progressively minded heads of governments was common place. Some of the victims of this dastard practice included Patrice Émery Lumumba (of Democratic Republic of Congo), Thomas Sankara (of Burkina Faso) and Murtala Mohammed (of Nigeria). In replacement, rulers of clearly deranged mentality, without any ideas as to how to move their countries forward were imposed as infamously represented in the case of DRC Congo, by the imposition of Mobutu Sese Seko – a classic case of an imbecilic nitwit.

With the expiry of the ‘cold war’ and the onset of a ‘new world order’, which touts intolerance of Military intervention in democratic governments, the pattern of imposition merely changed, with resort to the use of (s)election processes as a ruse to impose lackeys. Elections Observers/Monitors became a covert way to impose candidates. When a candidate that is deemed not ‘conducive’ is on the path of emerging victorious, announcements are made to the effect that the political process is ‘irredeemably flawed and not likely to be free and fair’. With exactly the same processes and circumstances in a polity where a ‘preferred’ candidate is ‘programmed’ to emerge, the announcements quickly change to ‘there are problems with the process, but they are isolated and not likely to adversely impact the free and fair nature of the elections’. Gosh!

Once in every long while, a candidate deemed ‘not conducive’ will slip through the well guarded sieve and thus leave the powers that be with no other option than to use a military coup and or ‘civilian’ uprising to ensure the ‘cleansing’ of the polity and installation of a ‘preferred candidate’. The 1992 Algerian military coup organized to oust the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS - Front Islamique du Salut)) from power and deny the FIS its electoral victories is again a classical example of instigated coups.

With the generalized abhorrence for military intervention in political settings, it has become unfashionable and inelegant to support a ‘military coup’ per se. So rather than refer to a take-over of a democratically government as a coup: call out the population to express support for the military take over, and pronto, a ‘military coup’ becomes a ‘civilian revolution’!! Great thinking!!

But there will be consequences.

History and modern efforts at combating extremism, has proved severally, that it is always better to have a definitive idea of your foes, where, who and how s/he is and be able to engage in some form of meaningful dialogue with such foes, than to have to contend with thin air. As a party in government, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood party was beginning to exhibit early tendencies of scuttling the intendments and achievements of the Egyptian revolution and curb freedoms of Egyptians whilst enforcing fundamentalist Islamist ideology on Egyptians.  Other forms of pressure could have been applied to check such descent. The military coup (or rather ‘uncoup, since most governments have refrained from referring to what took place in Egypt as a coup), will be ultimately counter-productive and further fan the embers of radical extremism. With the present crackdown and violence, the Muslim Brotherhood will become like 'thin air'.

As the members of the fundamentalist Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood Party are hunted down, massacred and imprisoned by Egyptian security forces in the streets of several Egyptian cities, and trumped up charges are levied against President Mohammed Morsi, one does not need to look too far into the crystal ball to realize that the thirst for revenge, an integral part of Arabia culture, will in due course set in. For each member of the Brotherhood that falls to the bullets of Egyptian security forces, over 50 arch extremists would have been created – who are willing to cause harm to others, perceived as collaborating to cause the present crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

As Egyptian military strongman, General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, and his henchmen turn Nasr City into Egypt’s Tiananmen Square, one cannot but wonder if an opportunity to engage in dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood has been irretrievably wasted?

After over 10 years of combating the Taliban’s and hundreds of thousands of lives wasted in Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan, there is now resort to dialogue – how many will be wasted before the resort to dialogue in this instance.

When the reprisals begin, would the redefining of what constitutes a coup, as is now taking place in Egypt, have been worth it?

So sad.


Picture: Violence in Egyptian streets as troops open fire on supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood

Does Pope Francis have a death wish?

By Eze Eluchie

Does Pope Francis have a death wish?

Watching the Pope traverse down the Streets of Rio in a Fiat vehicle with his windows wound down, huge crowds swarming all around him, with some even reaching into the vehicle to touch the pontiff, what surely represents a nightmare to the operatives charged with papal security, one wonders if indeed the Pope appreciates who, what and where he is.

With the number of cranks all over the world; persons who want to enter the record books for whatsoever reasons; and the several conspiracies being unraveled in the Catholic Church (inclusive of the perpetual mess at the Institute  for the Works of Religion – Vatican Bank), candidates willing to have a go at Pope Francis are simply not lacking.    

As I wish Pope Francis a safe and peaceful journey, I could not but notice the fact that the Pope had traveled to Brazil using an Alitalia airplane which the Vatican had leased from the carrier for that purpose. Considering the Popes mode of transportation, I cast my mind back to our local smart alecs con-men all across sub-Saharan Africa, who, using the instrumentality of religion, hoodwink the majority of their countrymen to part with whatever little resources they have, to fund the purchase of exotic limousines and private jets to enable the ‘men-of-god’ junket the globe.

Here was the Pope, who, considering the resources of the Catholic Church, could afford a fleet of Airbus A380 jets and an own brand of luxury vehicles, opting to ‘rent’. Whilst our tin-god charlatans, who are allowed to continue in their perfidy by State authorities as a means of mass obfuscation, scam the living day lights out of us and purchase all manner of luxury vehicles and jets with their loot.

As Nigerians would say in our local version of the English language, ‘God go punish devil’.

Picture: Pope Francis vehicle mobbed in the streets of Rio de Janeiro

Restructure, Renegotiate, not Re-Destroy!

by Eze Eluchie

As the Nigerian contraption approaches its centenary (since the 1914 amalgamation of three entities, to wit: the Northern Protectorate, Southern Protectorate and Colony of Lagos into a single entity by British colonial authorities), the internal dynamics which has continually seen its various component factors, ethnic, religious and social, pitched in perpetual conflict, one against the other, appears to be approaching a climax.

I have been repeatedly asked as to why I refer to my country as a ‘contraption’. The answer is trite. That is simply what Nigeria truthfully is – a contraption. Referring to Nigeria as either a ‘nation’ or a federation’ would tantamount to telling a lie, as the country is neither! There is however nothing wrong in being a contraption – many nations today started off as contraptions, such as the former Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and the United States of America (US) which started off as a contraption of 13 British colonies. The problem is however what you do with your contraption.

With regards to the US, its founding fathers, worked hard towards transforming their contraption into the behemoth success it is today, setting in motion policies and practices which sought to integrate the various diverse peoples and cultures in their contraption into one homogeneous entity. Transformation from contraption into nationhood is however a continuum, as can be gleaned at from the racial-tensions which continue to blight the American dream.

Ours on the converse has been most retrogressive. From a contraption which saw ourselves as divided along three distinct geopo0litical lines in 1914, divisive colonial rule and its attendant legacies, left us sharply divided along myriad ethnic and religious lines by the time of ‘political independence’ in 1960.

Since ‘independence’, rulership under a primitive, thieving and self-destructive ‘elite’ class who, as a collective, seem to derive joy in inflicting hardship on their fellow co-travelers in the contraption has further widened the gulf between the various peoples of Nigeria into over 36 States, 774 local enclaves, a multiplicity of religious sects and denominations and now sexual/marital preferences. In a bid to retain a stranglehold on power, the rulers manipulate peoples who had previously felt some form of amity into blood enemies; brothers are turned against brothers; and brethrens against brethrens.

The worrisome state of our contraption has engendered despondency amongst the populace. All manners of separatist organizations (most of these are actually pseudo-businesses, as the leaders of such groups smile home to the bank on the back of the hapless coerced membership and the silence of the enlightened), each laying a bogus claim to representing one segment of the contraption or the other, have sprung up to feast on the decay.

If we were to go the way the various ‘separatist pseudo-businesses’ are clamoring, virtually every family group will be a republic unto itself – a travesty that will leave each and every of such new entities at the mercy of larger and more entrenched players in a new world order where might is increasingly becoming right. Moreover, as can be gleaned at from the modus operandi of these ‘separatist pseudo-businesses’, the people such groups claim to represents will fare far worse under the dictatorship of the ethnic war-lords in the event of an all out splitting of the contraption.

Resulting from inept rulership being experienced in all strata of governance, more easily noticeable at the center because of the overconcentration of resources there, too much innocent blood has been, and continues to be shed, to sustain our contraption. Certainly, it is better to be alive in family-group republic than to be a corpse in the gigantean contraption

Do we throw in the towel? Certainly not!

My persistent call for restructuring and renegotiation of the contraption is being cunningly re-crafted, reconstructed and presented to the populace, by a more lethal and dangerous band of kleptocrats posturing as ‘progressives’ and their cohorts comprised mainly of rejects from the ruling party, as a call to merely replace the present crop of rulers at the federal level.

Let me be explicitly clear in this instance: rather than falling into the trap being spawned by the band of opportunists led by and comprised of certificate forgers who see nothing wrong in placing their entire families and bootlickers in different political offices, ethno-religious extremists who are out of touch with our present realities and have no affinity across geo-political divides, and discredited criminal elements who after fleecing public coffers in the offices they were opportune to be appointed/(s)elected into now turn around and have the temerity to deem themselves as ‘opposition/progressives’ described in the preceding paragraph, we will be far better off continuing with the status quo (at the Federal level)! If the nightmarish probability of falling into the trap was to ever occur, it will tantamount to a re-destruction of the contraption.

My call has been for a restructuring and renegotiation of the contraption and certainly not for a re-destruction.

Goodluck Jonathan now simply has to buckle up!

Agreed Jonathan came into office primarily on the basis of the virtues enshrined in his and his wife’s first names (Goodluck and Patience); Further agreed that entrenched interests who had fed fat from the blood and resources of Nigerians and Nigeria had assured Jonathan upon his electoral victory in May 2011 that they will make Nigeria ungovernable for him; Also agreed that these same ‘opposition’/’progressives’ have unleashed benumbing violence on a scale unprecedented in the history of any African country against the polity to ensure public ill-will within the contraption;  The reality remains that for now, someone occupies the office of President of the Federal Republic, and that person should act accordingly.

In the interim, and certainly before any further pretense at national elections, Nigerians should be allowed the opportunity to discuss the framework for the continued existence of our contraption with a view to ensuring peaceful coexistence of peoples not only within our contraption but also forestall upheavals that will, with all certainty, impact negatively on the entire West and Central African regions.

Time is running out!

Picture: Anger in the land. An explosion in Nigeria will present a humanitarian disaster as has never before been seen anywhere since the end of WWII

The Senate was right: A 'married woman' is of 'full age'!

By Eze Eluchie

The seeming uproar against the vote by the Nigerian Senate to retain the constitutional provision which accords a 'married woman' the rights and privileges of a 'Nigerian of full age', is as astonishing as it is diversionary.

It is preposterous to suggest that a married woman, who is deemed capable of consummating her marriage, enjoying the various privileges of marriage accorded under our laws and has the potential of bringing forth new life, is not of full age.

The ideal position for those worried about the Senate vote, should have been to insist on a minimum age for marriage - and not to seek a constitutional review to deny a married woman the right of being deemed of 'full age'!

The Nigerian Senate was right to have rejected the alteration.

The reasons given by the Senate for which it rejected the alteration is, however, most dubious.

In the course of the Nigerian Senate's session debating the issue, a Senator and former Governor of Zamfara State (Mr. Ahmed Sani Yerima), who has the double sinister distinction of initiating the application of a flawed form of Shari'a laws as State law in Nigeria and a penchant to use the garb of Islam to mask his pedophilic inclinations (he infamously paid an incredulous huge dowry to marry an under-14 year old girl), flew the 'religion flag' as justification for the retention of Section 29(4){b} of the 1999 Constitution - The section in contention provides that a 'married woman' qualifies as a Nigerian of 'full age' for purposes of renunciation of citizenship or otherwise. The issues at stake had been whether a minor who was married was a person of 'full age'

With regards to the purported marriage of Prophet Mohammed (sallallahu alaihi wasallam - peace be upon him) to then 6-year old Aisha bin Abibakr (umm al-mu'minin - mother of the believers), a marriage which was consummated when Aisha was 9-years old, there may be the need to either distinguish the cultural practices in ancient Arabia from  Islamic injunctions or insist that religious practices must conform with the dictates of modernity.

Let energies be focused on real issues (in this instance, ensuring an acceptable minimum age for marriage) and not chase improbable shadows as the present campaign of calumny being waged against the Senate of the Federal Republic over a vote which is on all fours with good reason and reality, is unfortunate. It presents some elements of the Nigerian civil society as being too eager to lampoon the system, without any just cause.

If the unfounded attacks on the upper Legislative chamber over this present issue continues, credibility will be lost by those who engage in such despicable conduct. Our Legislators (and the entire system for that matter) have gross issues, let constructive criticism be reserved for such instances. Not this episode!

Some civil society organizations are understandably making hue and cry over the instant Senate vote with a view to impress their foreign funders - do not worry so much, the donor agencies already understand the realities highlighted in this post. Get back to work, more issues of national import are afoot.

As further evidence that our contraption is in dire need of renegotiation and restructuring, one is appalled by the inelegant draftsmanship which went into producing a most flawed Constitution of doubtful veracity as evidenced by the provisions of the entirety of Section 29 of the Constitution.

Picture: Senator Ahmed Sani Yerima who infamously married an under aged Egyptian bride and successfully led the campaign for the retention of Section 29(4){b}of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution. This character, whilst helping himself to millions of dollars in public funds as Governor also presided over the amputation of limbs of ;petty thieves' under a skewed application of Shari'a (Islamic) laws in Zamfara State.

As Justice is laid to rest.

By Eze Eluchie

A few days back, on the 30th of June 2013 to be precise, I had, on my Facebook page, posed a query concerning the likelihood of the United States losing the ‘moral war’ as a result of some judicial decisions emanating from its courts. For that innocuous query, I had received written insults and threats from some erstwhile colleagues at an ivy league American Law School.

Today, with the acquittal of a man who cold-bloodedly murdered a young black man, whose only sin was taking a walk, one can confirm that the US system seems to have given up on the moral war.

Some of the laws prevailing in the United States are so anachronistic to reason and justice that Justice, at times, seems to have taken leave from the US system.

It is instructive to note that the various ‘civil society organizations’ which also enjoy being described as ‘international human right activists/organizations’ who are quick to castigate and condemn justice, social and political system in other climes (particularly in countries derisively termed ‘low and middle income countries’) will hide under a cloud of sheepish silence in the face of the continuing infamy.

Rest in peace, Justice;

Rest in peace, Trayvon Martins.


Picture: Trayvon Martin

Has the laureate been bought?

By Eze Eluchie

Globally, there are best practices and acceptable standards of conduct in all spheres of human endeavor, be it wars/conflicts, medical procedures, impartation of knowledge, for whatsoever. Even for social critics.

In the area of social criticism, one acceptable no-go area, globally, is to refrain from attacks on the family of public office holders. This is for the obvious reason that the issue remains the office holder and not his/her family. The presence in the public domain of the spouse and or children of a public office holder is solely on account of the principal office holder. So 'attacks' should always be on point, on the public office holder and not his/her appendages.

This is moreso in an environment, such as ours, where the families of public office holders at all strata of government help themselves to whatsoever they can lay hands on, at will. The spouse and family of Local Council Chairpersons help themselves to the trappings of office in their areas of authority, just as those of State Governors do at the State level and obviously at the Federal level.

In the course of a renegotiation and restructuring of our contraption, which I have persistently advocated for, this national folly of ours will certainly be addressed. Partisan attacks on the spouse of one public office holder certainly do not address the decay.

It is permissible, in keeping with global best practices, to criticize and lampoon public office holders at will, but certainly not their families.

On a personal level, I have at various times, as appropriate (in my reckoning), had cause to use unflattering adjectives to describe various public office holders, inclusive of President Jonathan - a practice that will continue as long as the need for such arises. I have in all, always kept within the 'rules' and spared their home-front.

It is in the light of the foregoing that the recent descent into the abyss of pedestrian abuse by Nobel laureate, Wole Soyinka, of the spouse of President Jonathan is really, really quite unfortunate.

Having observed the rather unbecoming haste at virulent and vociferous defense of Chibuike Amaechi ever since the "3rd Port Harcourt Festival of Books" (2011) and the campaigns towards the city's bid as the "World Book Capital for 2014" both financed by Amaechi and chaired by Soyinka, one is left wondering if anything untoward has transpired?

NB: The despicable violent attack on the Rivers State House of Assembly which Soyinka sought to condone:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zM9P9nxNMA8 

 http://tribune.com.ng/news2013/index.php/en/component/k2/item/16453-rivers-assembly-fracas-how-it-all-started.html

Picture: Embattled Governor Chibuike Amaechi and Professor Wole Soyinka

The Nile for All!

by Eze Eluchie

In the course of a working visit to Uganda, I was opportune to lodge at a relatively luxurious river-side hotel in Jinja, with well maintained flora and which had an exhilarating view of the surrounding plains. 

The tourist that I am, I took off time out of technical discourse on how to rid the African continent of the menace of ‘tobacco smoke’ which had been my primary reason for visiting Uganda, to interact with the locals and appreciate more of their lives and the beautiful environment.

As I strolled towards the bank of the fast flowing water which bordered the southern flank of my hotel, my impromptu tour guide, upon an inquiry, informed me that the river we were approaching was River Nile. I was astounded. Here I was approaching the almighty Nile, and I hadn’t really realized how close I was to living history – that certainly was how I considered the Nile. I was further informed that indeed the source of the Nile was not too far away from my Hotel.

Innocuously, I inquired from my guide how come that their governments did not tap from the waters of the Nile to provide electricity and irrigation for several of the browned-out communities which dotted the area around Jinja. “Oga-man’, replied my guide, calling me by a prefix popularized by Nigerian ‘Nollywood’ movies by which most people in Africa address Nigerian expatriates, ‘our Government has to get approval from Egypt before we can fetch a bucket of water from the river we are now approaching’!

The consternation I felt was palpable.

I have since then deeply acquainted myself with a most partial international instrument of doubtful legality which incredulously denies Eastern African countries from which the Nile originates and traverses, rights to use the waters of the Nile. The so-called ‘Nile Water Agreement of 1929’ entered into by Britain and Egypt (East African countries had no part in this debacle) guarantees that a minimum of two-thirds (66%) of the waters of the Nile would be reserved for Egypt and that Egypt had the right to ‘veto’ any uses Eastern African countries tried to put the waters of the Nile River to.  At first, the contents of the Nile River Agreement appears to be a distasteful joke – until it gradually sinks in that this obnoxious agreement has been implemented for close to a century with disastrous consequences for the peoples residing along the Nile basin in East Africa.

To compound the situation for the Eastern African countries, donor agencies and international financial institutions skillfully ensure the enforcement of the Nile River Agreement by not only not granting facilities geared towards utilization of the Nile River resources by East African countries but also tying multi-lateral agreements to the enforcement of the 1929 Treaty.

What could have motivated such clearly skewed agreements between Britain and Egypt in 1929? Was the lives of the Africans who inhabit East Africa considered less worthy of benefiting from the Nile (and being preserved and protected) than the lives of the Egyptians?

Could access to the waters of the Nile have prevented the Ethiopian Famine of 1983 – 1985 which resulted in the deaths of over 500,000 people? Could access to the waters of the Nile have contributed to the development of the moribund economies of East African countries?

How would the peoples of Europe have reacted if an agreement in the style of The Nile Agreement of 1929 existed with regards to the waters of the Danube River – reserving the bulk of the waters thereof for Romania and Ukraine, from whence the river empties into the sea? or the peoples of West African with regards to the waters of the Niger River – reserving the bulk of the waters for Nigeria?

It is in the light of the foregoing that efforts by Ethiopian authorities to build a hydroelectric dam on the Blue Nile and the Governments of Tanzania and Uganda at asserting their sovereignty and debunking a most ridiculous outdated and untenable agreement entered into between Britain and Egypt deserves support from the rest of humanity.

Egypt should be encouraged to endorse the Nile River Co-operative Framework Agreement which has already been adopted by other source countries of the Nile – Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and now Ethiopia, and refrain from a confrontational posture and threats of instigation of violence as recently documented its State authorities.

The Nile should be for the benefit of all the peoples along its path.

NB: Video of an unbelievably revealingl Egyptian Cabinet meeting discussing possible clandestine actions against Ethiopia for daring to access the waters of the Nile.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=sSxkori-tPw

Picture: The Nile River as it snakes through National Park Safari Reserve, Uganda.

Let us learn from Egypt!

by Eze Eluchie

As Morsi is kicked out, let us learn from what is happening today in Egypt 

Our elections are rigged;

Our contraption is defective;

Our Constitution is fraudulent;

Our polity is in dire need of cleansing

Our people are pushed to extremes for survival;

Our politicians are, collectively, stealing the country dry;

Time is fast running out for an orderly restructuring and renegotiation of the Nigerian contraption.

A cosmetic change of guards will not suffice.

Let all those who will raise a whimper for so-called ‘democratically elected’ officials, begin now to advice and urge change, or forever keep silent when the likely, manifests.

Picture: Jubilant Egyptians celebrate the ouster of President Mohammed Morsi