Opinion

Buhari Fails Again In Sudan

Published

3 years ago

May 1, 2023

When Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022, unleashing the greatest refugee crisis since the end of World War II, about 5000 Nigerian students were taken unawares with nowhere to run to; and no help in sight from the Nigerian Embassy in Ukraine, or the Buhari government at home. What ensued was a fiasco that saw many Nigerians trekking for many days to get to the Hungarian border. These Nigerian students studying in Ukraine found themselves in the middle of a war that had nothing to do with them, rather, their only crime was being in the wrong place at the wrong time; especially, when viewed through a Russian lens.

In spite of the outcry from parents and well-meaning Nigerians, evacuation began two weeks later, by that time a reasonable number of the Nigerian students have managed to cross into neighbouring countries on foot. They were failed by their government. In fact, it was a miracle that we did not record any death, but a government should only hope for a miracle as icing on the cake, only after it has done everything within its power with the intelligence at its disposal. But our government dropped the ball; and even though the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Geoffrey Onyeama, praised the Nigerian Ambassador to Ukraine, Shina Alege on his official Twitter handle, calling him indefatigable, the truth remains, that they had enough window to have initiated an evacuation before the first Russian bomb dropped in Ukraine.

It is barely one year since the Ukrainian invasion, and less than 30 days to the end of President Buhari’s administration, and what do we see in Sudan? A Nigerian government with a fresh experience, but lacks the ability to transform that experience into functional knowledge capable of solving the same problem a year later. From what we can observe, there is only head scratching, and scrambling from pillar to post, while some Nigerian students caught up in the crossfire are contemplating heading to Ethiopia. The only difference here is the Nigerian Ambassador to Sudan, but all the other major players are the same. Mr. Geofrey Onyema is still the Minister for Foreign Affairs, while Hon. Abike Dabiri still occupies her position as Chairman of the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NIDCOM).

What is currently playing out in Sudan, where the number of Nigerian students is estimated to be above 10,000 is a déjà vu. It appears as if we have not learned anything from our Ukrainian experience of a year ago. Should Nigerians at home believe that the signs of imminent hot conflict were not there? Or, is it that our military attachés at the embassy were asleep at their duty post? If they indeed gathered quality intelligence, was it disseminated promptly to all those with the power to act on it? If intelligence was indeed shared promptly to all those in position to act, including the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Ambassador to Sudan, and the Chairman, NIDCOM, why do we now hear of setting up of a panel after about 400 persons have already been killed and 3500 injured in the conflict?
As the situation continues to deteriorate, other countries have been given a window to evacuate their people, but in our own case, a panel is being set up instead of getting the relevant agencies to work in synergy to bring our children back home. Our capacity as a country to fail at critical times of need in recent times is indeed unprecedented; because when I compare the Ukrainian debacle of a year ago and the ongoing fiasco in Sudan, it is very easy to note that Nigerian students are at the centre.

However, these students are largely from the working-class families of the country whose parents are nowhere near the corridors of power, most of them are civil servants whose only goal is to ensure their wards graduate before their retirement without recurrent ASUU strikes. This is an issue for another day.
Nigerian students suffered in Ukraine, and now thousands more of their counterparts are stranded in Khartoum and other parts of Sudan just because they are not the children of the Nigerian elites. Of course, ostentatious Nigerian elites cannot afford their children to attend universities where the tuition fee is only $1000 for foreign students. Nigerian elites whose children are schooling abroad are in UK, US, and Canada, but the most painful part is that some of these students are even on government scholarships that were denied other students with better academic standing. This is Nigeria, a country where anything is possible, especially the perpetuation of evil by those in power.
Unlike the Ukrainian situation, most parents whose children are schooling in Sudan have the Muslim month of Ramadan to thank due to the month-long vacation during this period. According to some estimations, as many as 6000 Nigerian students were already home for the Muslim Holiday before the fight broke out on April 8. Sadly, after two weeks, other students are yet to know their fate. There is no telling the level of trauma these students are currently passing through while our government tries to get its acts together.

One major issue of concern is the alarm raised by the UN in the case of violence against women and girls, regarding rape in particular. No parent wants to contemplate the idea of their daughter being turned into a sex slave in the theater of war. More so, in a country like Sudan which is a major centre of modern slavery. The trauma is markedly increased for parents with people’s children in that country at a time like this. But truth be told, these are people who have been let down by their country. Most of these people, as I stated earlier, have found themselves in this precarious position, not by their choice, but by the deliberate actions of Nigerian government as it concerns the funding of tertiary education in the country.

From this same government which left students at home for more than eight months, dillydallied while our students in Ukraine trekked for days to the Hungarian border, should we expect anything after two weeks of the unfolding civil war in Sudan? Yes. This is President Buhari’s last stand, the last major humanitarian crisis he would ever manage in his life; and therefore a rare opportunity to leave the Office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in spite of his innumerable failures. Consequently, he should rise to the occasion and bring whatever he has learned diplomatically, during his many travels to salvage the situation.

The statement by National Emergency Management Agency, that the situation in Sudan is complex amounts to nothing because every rational person understands that every theater of war is multifaceted and complex. Therefore, it is no excuse. The bottom line is that the people in charge of the responsible agencies must justify their pay. They have to justify the huge amounts spent on international conflict management.
As Nigerians, we shall hold him completely accountable if any thing happens to our children in Sudan, especially for any loss of life. We are tired of lots of talks and political speech without any substantive action to back it up. President Buhari should use all his diplomatic channels to extract a safe window from the warring parties. We know he was already tired from the outset of his government, in a few days he will have more than enough time to rest; but for now, he should not sleep until the last student has been airlifted from Sudan.

After the new government has been sworn in on May 29, there should be a post-mortem on the Sudan fiasco just a year after Ukraine’s. Nigerians reserve the right to know why our embassy in Khartoum failed to warn the federal government of the imminence of the conflict, especially given the fact that all the students could have been moved out of the country during the month of Ramadan. We need to know the role played in this failure by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and NIDCOM. People must be held accountable for putting our children in harm’s way either by their actions, or inaction. Last year it was Ukraine, today Sudan, tomorrow, who knows? The National Assembly must, on our behalf be interested to find the cause of this recurrent national dysfunction.

By: Raphael Pepple

Opinion

Towards Affordable Living Houses

Published

4 hours ago

December 22, 2025

The Tide

Quote:” Increasingly viewed as a commodity, housing is most importantly a human right. Under international law, to be adequately housed means having secure tenure—not having to worry about being evicted or having your home or lands taken away”

The rising cost of house rents across cities and urban areas across Nigeria is most worrisome to say the least. More worrisome is the fact that while house rents are on a geometric increase, and the cost of living is astronomically high, the economy has remained most unfriendly and salaries very disproportionate to the basic necessities of life. Some State legislatures, like Lagos, have legislated on house rent control to check the Shylock attitude of some landlords. As good and necessary as such Legislative intervention, the feasibility of effectively controlling housing rents without adequate participation of public and organized private sector in remedying the housing deficit in Nigeria, in my considered view, is like building castles in the air, which will inevitably translate to an exercise in futility.

The reasons are not far-fetched: the spiralling prices of building materials today leaves much to be desired bringing house owners to face the challenge of property maintenance. No doubt the cost of building a house is about ten times more than it was five years ago. It is so bad that people wonder if civil servants and other low income earners can ever build a house. The hyper inflationary trend in the country has compounded the situation reinforcing the reality of the economic law that increase in the prices of essential commodity will inevitably result in increase in the prices of other commodities because the dealers will need to increase the price of their products or commodities to remain in business.

Though Nigeria is not as populous as China with a conservative 1.4 billion population, and having the capacity to provide to the housing needs of her people, it is not saying a new thing that the growing population of Nigeria and rural-urban migration has heightened the quest for decent living houses with more money chasing scarce accomodations.The terms of payment is very outrageous as house agents cash on housing deficit to connive with landlords to unwittingly increase rents and the monetary requirements to access a decent living place. One can’t imagine how a two bedroom flat will go for N1.2 million to be paid for two years, exclusive of the pecuniary benefits accruing to the house agents and legal fees and other outrageous charges.

Corruption is another major problem of housing deficit as government allocations to the housing sector were either outrightly embezzled or misappropriated with impunity. Housing need remains endemic in most nations of the world, including Nigeria. As a basic material necessity, of humans, availability of adequate and affordable housing has become one of the challenges government at all levels, multinational or corporate organisations must grapple with. The United Nations’ Year 2000 Millennium Development Goals which includes “Shelter for all”, has failed to address housing deficits 25 years after it was initiated. According to reports, of a global population of about eight billion people, more than 1.8 billion people live in informal settlements or inadequate housing with limited access to essential services such as water and sanitation, electricity and are often under threat of forced eviction.

One of the most severe violations of the right to adequate housing—homelessness—has been on a steep increase in many economically advanced countries. Housing is a right not a commodity. Increasingly viewed as a commodity, housing is most importantly a human right. Under international law, to be adequately housed means having secure tenure—not having to worry about being evicted or having your home or lands taken away. It means living somewhere that is in keeping with your culture, and having access to appropriate services, schools, and employment. Too often violations of the right to housing occur with impunity. In part, this is because, at the domestic level, housing is rarely treated as a human right. The key to ensuring adequate housing is the implementation of this human right through appropriate government policy and programmes, including national housing strategies.

Adequate housing was recognized as part of the right to an adequate standard of living in article 25 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in article 11.1 of the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Other international human rights treaties have si

nce recognized or referred to the right to adequate housing or some elements of it, such as the protection of one’s home and privacy. According to the UN Charter and Declaration, adequate housing is protected against forced evictions and the arbitrary destruction and demolition of one’s home; free from arbitrary interference with one’s home, privacy and family; and right to choose one’s residence, to determine where to live and to freedom of movement.

Looking at what adequate housing entails, it is obvious that fixing housing deficits is capital intensive project that will be perennial to achieve through private and government synergy. The roles of housing as the basis of stability and security for an individual or family can not be undermined. As the centre of our social, emotional and sometimes economic lives, a home should be a sanctuary—a place to live in peace, security and dignity. According to The United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights the right to adequate housing should not be interpreted narrowly. Rather, it should be seen as the right to live somewhere in security, peace and dignity. The characteristics of the right to adequate housing are clarified mainly in the Committee’s general comments No. 4 (1991) on the right to adequate housing and No. 7 (1997) on forced evictions.

Therefore, Government at all levels should synergise with the Private sector to intentionally and consciously drive the initiative to mitigate housing deficit in Nigeria. Government budgetary allocations should not be seen as a national cake but be made to perform optimally by those in the saddle. Value should be given to every kobo, while corruption should be checked.

By; Igbiki Benibo

Opinion

The Labour Union We Want

Published

4 hours ago

December 22, 2025

The Tide

Quote:”Symbolic street protests are not enough; workers want actions that translate into real improvements in their daily lives.”

It was refreshing to see the leadership of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) finally spring into action after many months of apparent silence. For a long time, organised labour seemed to have slipped into a coma while workers groaned under worsening economic and social conditions. Poor governance, rising insecurity, and deepening poverty continued unchecked, yet labour’s voice was barely heard. This silence understandably drew criticism from workers and the wider public, many of whom questioned whether the NLC was still living up to its historic role as defender of the masses. Historically, Nigerian labour has stood firmly on the side of the people. From the anti-colonial struggles of the 1940s to resistance against military dictatorship and anti-people economic policies, labour has played a critical role in shaping national consciousness. The historic 1945 strike, which lasted 45 days, forced the colonial government to improve wages and working conditions and cemented labour’s place as a force for social justice.

During the military era, particularly under Generals Ibrahim Babangida and Sani Abacha, the NLC was among the few institutions bold enough to challenge authoritarian rule and oppose the Structural Adjustment Programme, warning—correctly—that it would deepen poverty and inequality. Perhaps the most defining moment in recent labour history came in January 2012, when the NLC and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) led nationwide protests against the removal of fuel subsidy by the Goodluck Jonathan administration. The Occupy Nigeria protests paralysed economic activities and forced a partial reversal of the policy, reminding Nigerians of the power of a united and courageous labour movement. Against this backdrop, the NLC’s decision to call a nationwide protest on Wednesday, December 17, over rising cost of living, poverty, and insecurity came as a welcome relief.

It rekindled hope that organised labour is reclaiming its relevance. For workers enduring hardship with little institutional backing, the protest symbolised courage, consistency, and a willingness to confront policies that worsen the lives of ordinary Nigerians. However, Nigerians expect more than symbolic street protests. The real test lies ahead. Labour leaders must counter the long-held perception that union leadership often “sells out” during negotiations, placing personal or political interests above collective welfare. Whether fair or not, this perception has weakened trust in organised labour. As former NLC president Adams Oshiomhole once warned, labour must not become “a pressure group that barks but does not bite.” Workers expect transparency, firmness, and outcomes that translate into real improvements in their lives.

One urgent issue demanding labour’s sustained attention is fuel subsidy removal. President Bola Tinubu justified the policy in 2023 as necessary to curb corruption and free funds for development. Nigerians were promised that savings would be redirected into infrastructure, social welfare, and economic growth. Two years later, however, many citizens see little evidence of these gains. Instead, they face skyrocketing fuel prices, transport costs, food inflation, and an unbearable cost of living.Labour must therefore demand accountability: How much has been saved? Where has the money gone? Which projects are directly linked to these funds? These are legitimate questions that deserve honest answers. Closely related is the unresolved issue of Nigeria’s state-owned refineries in Port Harcourt, Warri, and Kaduna. Billions of dollars have reportedly been spent on turnaround maintenance, yet the refineries remain largely non-functional.

Former NNPC chief Mele Kyari repeatedly assured Nigerians that the refineries would be operational by 2023, promises that were not fulfilled. Today, conflicting claims about their status continue to fuel public frustration.This presents another opportunity for organised labour to assert relevance by demanding transparency on funds spent, current operational capacity, and accountability for failures. Without this, Nigeria risks repeating cycles of waste and deception. Beyond petrol, the rising cost of cooking gas has become a major burden for households. Despite Nigeria’s vast gas reserves, inadequate domestic production, limited processing facilities, and poor infrastructure have made locally sourced gas scarce and expensive. Heavy reliance on imports paid for in dollars means that naira depreciation continues to drive prices upward.

Labour must expand its advocacy beyond wages to include structural reforms that reduce import dependence and shield workers from inflationary shocks. Security also remains a critical concern. While recent steps such as reducing police protection for VIPs and recruiting more officers are commendable, they are insufficient. Nigerian workers still live in fear of kidnapping, robbery, and violent attacks. Many now weigh personal safety before accepting jobs or commuting to work. No worker should risk their life simply to earn a living. Labour must consistently pressure government to prioritise security, intelligence, and community-based policing while addressing root causes like unemployment and poverty. At the heart of labour agitation is workers’ welfare. Nigerian workers need wages that reflect harsh economic realities, not salaries eroded daily by inflation and currency depreciation.

Prompt salary payments, regular minimum wage reviews, inflation-linked adjustments, job security, and enforcement of labour laws are no longer optional—they are essential. Casualisation, arbitrary dismissals, and denial of pensions have become widespread and must be firmly resisted. Most importantly, workers need hope—hope rooted in job creation, affordable healthcare, quality education, and dignity for labour. The labour union Nigerians want is not one that surfaces only in moments of crisis, but one that remains vigilant, principled, and unwavering. It must understand the pulse of the people, confront injustice boldly, and refuse to compromise workers’ welfare for anything less than the collective good.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Wike VS Soldier’s Altercation: Matters Arising

Published

2 weeks ago

December 8, 2025

The Tide

The events that unfolded in Abuja on Tuesday November 11, 2025 between the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Chief Nyesom Wike and a detachment of soldiers guarding a disputed property, led by Adams Yerima, a commissioned Naval Officer, may go down as one of the defining images of Nigeria’s democratic contradictions. It was not merely a quarrel over land. It was a confrontation between civil authority and the military legacy that still hovers over our national life.

Nyesom Wike, fiery and fearless as always, was seen on video exchanging words with a uniformed officer who refused to grant him passage to inspect a parcel of land alleged to have been illegally acquired. The minister’s voice rose, his temper flared, and the soldier, too, stood his ground, insisting on his own authority. Around them, aides, security men, and bystanders watched, stunned, as two embodiments of the Nigerian state clashed in the open.

The images spread fast, igniting debates across drawing rooms, beer parlours, and social media platforms. Some hailed Wike for standing up to military arrogance; others scolded him for perceived disrespect to the armed forces. Yet beneath the noise lies a deeper question about what sort of society we are building and whether power in Nigeria truly understands the limits of its own reach.

It is tragic that, more than two decades into civil rule, the relationship between the civilian arm of government and the military remains fragile and poorly understood. The presence of soldiers in a land dispute between private individuals and the city administration is, by all civic standards, an aberration. It recalls a dark era when might was right, and uniforms conferred immunity against accountability.

Wike’s anger, even if fiery, was rooted in a legitimate concern: that no individual, however connected or retired, should deploy the military to protect personal interests. That sentiment echoes the fundamental democratic creed that the law is supreme, not personalities. If his passion overshot decorum, it was perhaps a reflection of a nation weary of impunity.

On the other hand, the soldier in question is a symbol of another truth: that discipline, respect for order, and duty to hierarchy are ingrained in our armed forces. He may have been caught between conflicting instructions one from his superiors, another from a civilian minister exercising his lawful authority. The confusion points not to personal failure but to institutional dysfunction.

It is, therefore, simplistic to turn the incident into a morality play of good versus evil.

*********”**** What happened was an institutional embarrassment. Both men represented facets of the same failing system a polity still learning how to reconcile authority with civility, law with loyalty, and service with restraint.

In fairness, Wike has shown himself as a man of uncommon courage. Whether in Rivers State or at the FCTA, he does not shy away from confrontation. Yet courage without composure often feeds misunderstanding. A public officer must always be the cooler head, even when provoked, because the power of example outweighs the satisfaction of winning an argument.

Conversely, soldiers, too, must be reminded that their uniforms do not place them above civilian oversight. The military exists to defend the nation, not to enforce property claims or intimidate lawful authorities. Their participation in purely civil matters corrodes the image of the institution and erodes public trust.

One cannot overlook the irony: in a country where kidnappers roam highways and bandits sack villages, armed men are posted to guard contested land in the capital. It reflects misplaced priorities and distorted values. The Nigerian soldier, trained to defend sovereignty, should not be drawn into private or bureaucratic tussles.

Sycophancy remains the greatest ailment of our political culture. Many of those who now cheer one side or the other do so not out of conviction but out of convenience. Tomorrow they will switch allegiance. True patriotism lies not in defending personalities but in defending principles. A people enslaved by flattery cannot nurture a culture of justice.

The Nigerian elite must learn to submit to the same laws that govern the poor. When big men fence off public land and use connections to shield their interests, they mock the very constitution they swore to uphold. The FCT, as the mirror of national order, must not become a jungle where only the powerful can build.

The lesson for Wike himself is also clear: power is best exercised with calmness. The weight of his office demands more than bravery; it demands statesmanship. To lead is not merely to command, but to persuade — even those who resist your authority.

Equally, the lesson for the armed forces is that professionalism shines brightest in restraint. Obedience to illegal orders is not loyalty; it is complicity. The soldier who stands on the side of justice protects both his honour and the dignity of his uniform.

The Presidency, too, must see this episode as a wake-up call to clarify institutional boundaries. If soldiers can be drawn into civil enforcement without authorization, then our democracy remains at risk of subtle militarization. The constitution must speak louder than confusion.

The Nigerian public deserves better than spectacles of ego. We crave leaders who rise above emotion and officers who respect civilian supremacy. Our children must not inherit a nation where authority means shouting matches and intimidation in public glare.

Every democracy matures through such tests. What matters is whether we learn the right lessons. The British once had generals who defied parliament; the Americans once fought over states’ rights; Nigeria, too, must pass through her own growing pains but with humility, not hubris.

If the confrontation has stirred discomfort, then perhaps it has done the nation some good. It forces a conversation long overdue: Who truly owns the state — the citizen or the powerful? Can we build a Nigeria where institutions, not individuals, define our destiny?

As the dust settles, both the FCTA and the military hierarchy must conduct impartial investigations. The truth must be established — not to shame anyone, but to restore order. Where laws were broken, consequences must follow. Where misunderstandings occurred, apologies must be offered.

Let the rule of law triumph over the rule of impulse. Let civility triumph over confrontation. Let governance return to the path of dialogue and procedure.

Nigeria cannot continue to oscillate between civilian bravado and military arrogance. Both impulses spring from the same insecurity — the fear of losing control. True leadership lies in the ability to trust institutions to do their work without coercion.

Those who witnessed the clash saw a drama of two gladiators. One in starched khaki, one in well-cut suit. Both proud, both unyielding. But a nation cannot be built on stubbornness; it must be built on understanding. Power, when it meets power, should produce order, not chaos.

We must resist the temptation to glorify temper. Governance is not warfare; it is stewardship. The citizen watches, the world observes, and history records. How we handle moments like this will define our collective maturity.

The confrontation may have ended without violence, but it left deep questions in the national conscience. When men of authority quarrel in the open, institutions tremble. The people, once again, become spectators in a theatre of misplaced pride.

It is time for all who hold office — civilian or military — to remember that they serve under the same flag. That flag is neither khaki nor political colour; it is green-white-green, and it demands humility.

No victor, no vanquish only a lesson for a nation still learning to govern itself with dignity.

By; King Onunwor