VANGUARD

Obasanjo : How will history remember him?
Friday, May 25, 2007 Friday withPini Jason

It was Richard Nixon who said something to the effect that in the footsteps of great men, we hear the roaring thunder of history. History is often about great men in great moments in a great country. Nixon recognized also that great men in history are not necessarily always good men, because whereas a manager strives to do things right, a leader must of necessity do the right thing.

 In describing Olusegun Obasanjo in his post-civil war memoir, Gen. James Oluleye described him as a man who rode on disaster to fame. In- deed, his career has mostly been that of coming in to claim glory when others have given their sweat and blood. He was given the command of the Third Marine Commando of the Nigerian Army at the tail end of the civil war, after Brigadier-Gen Benjamin Adekunle had battled the Biafrans to weariness at that sector. He thus became the man who accepted the instrument of surrender on behalf of his Commander-In-Chief, Gen. Yakubu Gowon, from the Biafrans.

That gave him, some would say, undeserved place in history. He became the military Head of State in February 1976 after Gen. Murtala Mohammed was assassinated by mostly Middle Belt officers led by Col. Suka Buka Dimka.

The predominance of Middle Belt officers in the aborted coup made it impossible for Gen. T. Y. Danjuma, the most senior Northern officer but a Middle Belter, to take over. Obasanjo was considered appropriate at that time, provided there was a Shehu Musa Yar’Adua in the loop of power, as his deputy. Thus, Obasanjo in 1979 handed over power to Shehu Shagari and got another spot in history.

After the battle for power shift by the Council of Unity and Understanding, CUU, the election of Chief MKO Abiola as president on 12 June, 1993, the annulment of the election, the battle waged against Abacha by the National Democratic Coalition, NADECO, for the revalidation of Abiola’s election, the death of Abacha and Abiola, the nation recognized the political necessity to compensate the South-West.

The power cabal made up mostly of Northern political hegemonists and their retired military clique remembered Obasanjo who served their need for s stopgap Southern ruler in the seventies and went for him. Thus again, he secured a place in history as the only Yoruba to rule Nigeria, not only once but twice.

 You can’t have power thrust on your lap all the time without becoming vainglorious about it. Thus, part of the Obasanjo persona is that which believes that he is God’s gift to Nigeria, and that there is no one else like him; hence the nation runs to him at every critical period. That is probably why he refused to recognize other institutions of the state except himself. That is also probably why he believed that no one else knows what is good for us, including who should rule us after him, except him!

Let us be sincere, we cannot peremptorily write off Obasanjo in the history of this country. The truth is that no one has touched this country, for good or bad, for so long as Obasanjo has done. Strong characters like Obasanjo evoke mixed emotions. There cannot be a unanimous summation of the Obasanjo phenomenon in Nigeria. In any case, most of the issues on which he can be rightly judged can only provide the evidence in the distant future. That for him is the unfortunate part as he leaves office.

Most of the immediate actions for which he will be remembered for now are the negative ones, especially the disastrous election, the failure in fixing our roads, the failure in the power sector, the double standards in his transparency and accountability crusade, the number of unresolved high profile murders under his watch, the muddle and corruption in the oil and gas sector which made Nigeria a hundred per cent importer of refined petroleum products and his setting our democracy back to the stone age. It would seem, borrowing Gen. Oluleye’s words, as if he is now riding on fame to disaster! It would seem that history has finally come to take its toll on all his claims to greatness!

 Yes, he will have the economic reforms to point to. But his assumption, which would be wrong, would be that no one else could have done it except him. How many Nigerians really remember that it was indeed, Abacha, as bad as he was, who for the first time really opened up the Nigerian economy for foreign investment by the singular act of abrogating the infamous Awolowo/Gowon Indigenisation Decree of 1972? Privatisation had started under Babangida who opened the aviation, banking and electronic media industries to private participation.

The benefit which Obasanjo’s reforms enjoyed, is that he had the stability of a civilian regime which was not available during the musical chairs of military regimes. Questions are nevertheless asked about the nature of the reforms as it concerns the new economic block that emerged from it. Questions are also asked whether the reforms could have been less painful and more transparent. All that notwithstanding, Obasanjo’s reforms have positioned the economy as a performing one, capable of sustainable growth. But how much have positive macro-economic indicators affected the lives of Nigerians? Unfortunately, Obasanjo will not be around when the gains of the foundation being laid now may begin to show.

Thus, for a change, someone else may claim the glory of his labours!

But by far, the worse legacy for which history will continue to remember Obasanjo is his subversion of every norm of a civilized society. In eight years of his presidency, he entrenched electoral bringandage in the face of professed anti-corruption war. He entrenched a do-or-die politics as a national ethos. He diminished all the gains of our democratic struggle most of which were waged while he was in prison. He relentlessly waged war on the separation of powers as an attribute of democracy.

He scorned respect for the rule of law. And these are the very minuses that may very well make nonsense of the modest gains on the economic front.

Whereas it can be posited that the longevity of democracy is directly proportional to the per capita income of a nation, the hard evidence is that economies have never flowered under weak democracies or dictatorships. Obasanjo should have worked on the two fronts, reforming and deepening democracy and restructuring the economy. Both are not mutually exclusive. In years to come, most of Obasanjo’s acts in office would have taken root and borne fruits. Then history can adequately judge him. For now, the jury is still out.