Connect with us

Opinion

 Buhari Fails Again In Sudan

Published

on

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

Continue Reading

Opinion

One Attack Too Many 

Published

on

Quote: “Ogoniland does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create more opportunities, empower youths and build a better future.”

The latest attack by Chief Gani Topba on the President of KAGOTE and Chief Executive Officer of Giolee Global Resources Ltd, Chief Lesi Maol, appears to have opened another troubling chapter in the politics of leadership and influence in Ogoniland. While disagreements are inevitable, the frequency and manner of attacks directed at individuals or organisations contributing to Ogoni development should concern every stakeholder. The concluded extraordinary meeting of Ogoni stakeholders in Bori was convened to deliberate on challenges confronting the people, including insecurity, farmers-herders clashes, youth disunity, education and development. It also considered harmonising the numerous youth organisations operating across Ogoniland under a strong and representative umbrella capable of giving Ogoni youths a more coordinated voice. One would have expected such an initiative to attract constructive contributions, especially from those with reservations about it.

Instead, the gathering and its organisers have come under criticism, raising a fundamental question: what exactly is wrong with Ogoni stakeholders coming together to discuss problems affecting their people? If there are legitimate concerns about the meeting, its organisers or resolutions, such concerns should be supported by facts and subjected to constructive engagement rather than personalised attacks. Leadership is demonstrated through service, sacrifice, participation and results. If Chief Gani Topba believes the stakeholders’ meeting was unnecessary or lacked legitimacy, nothing prevents him from convening another meeting and demonstrating that he can attract traditional rulers, professionals, academics, clergy and youths. Different approaches to development should therefore be allowed to compete on their merits.

The proposal for a unified youth platform should equally not be presented as an attempt to silence Ogoni youths. Rather, it should be examined against the reality of numerous organisations claiming to represent different segments of Ogoni youths. Too many competing organisations can create confusion, weaken collective bargaining power and make it difficult for genuine concerns affecting young people to receive coordinated attention. A credible umbrella body, if properly constituted and broadly accepted, could strengthen the voice of Ogoni youths and provide an organised platform for employment, education, skills acquisition, security and governance. Ogoniland has experienced enough institutional fragmentation. Its history contains painful lessons about divisions that allow personal interests, leadership struggles and competing platforms to overshadow collective objectives. The present generation should learn that destroying institutions one does not control damages society.

The question should be: who benefits when Ogoni youths remain divided and every attempt at unity is interpreted as rivalry? Against this background, KAGOTE deserves objective scrutiny rather than blanket condemnation. Any organisation with influence must be accountable, but accountability is different from a campaign aimed at delegitimising initiatives associated with its leadership. Chief Lesi Maol’s activities through KAGOTE and Giolee Global Resources Ltd have attracted attention in areas including skills development, education, youth empowerment and community support. Such interventions should be assessed on their impact and encouraged where they serve the public good. Those who believe Chief Maol is not doing enough should not stop at criticism. They should show Ogoni what they can do better. Where are the alternative skills programmes? Where are the educational interventions? Where are the youth empowerment schemes? Where are the community development initiatives?

It is easy to criticise someone who is building; it is harder to mobilise resources and sustain programmes that benefit ordinary people. This is not to suggest that Chief Maol or KAGOTE should be immune from criticism. No leader or institution should be beyond scrutiny, and legitimate questions about accountability must be welcomed. But responsible criticism should be based on facts, evidence and alternative ideas. Personal attacks and attempts to destroy initiatives simply because their leadership is not controlled by particular interests cannot provide the solutions Ogoniland needs. What is unfolding is bigger than one meeting, one statement or even two individuals. It reflects a broader contest over influence and leadership. If anyone believes KAGOTE is taking Ogoni in the wrong direction, the response is to present a better direction. If anyone believes Lesi Maol is not doing enough, the answer is to demonstrate what more can be done. Ogoni does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create opportunities, improve education, promote security, empower youths and contribute to development.

The people are looking beyond rhetoric. They are examining records, observing programmes and measuring results. No individual owns the permanent right to speak for Ogoni or determine which organisation must survive or collapse. Ogoni must replace the politics of personal control with a culture of ideas, service, accountability and measurable achievement. Differences should produce better alternatives, not destruction. Every Ogoni leader and stakeholder should ask whether his actions are strengthening the region or deepening divisions. Ogoni needs people who can build bridges, institutions, opportunities and hope. Those who genuinely love Ogoni should support what is good, correct what is wrong and offer better alternatives. The future of Ogoni will not be secured by destroying its builders, but by encouraging more people to build.

onest people can reach different conclusions based on different experiences and information. Public debate should therefore remain respectful, evidence-based and open to correction. Truth is strengthened by honest examination, not insults, suspicion or personal attacks. The phrase “Truth has no agenda” carries a powerful message. Truth does not belong to any political party, ethnic group, religion or ideology. It cannot be permanently owned or manipulated by those in power. Governments change, institutions rise and fall, and public opinion shifts, but truth remains indifferent to popularity.The real test of character comes when speaking honestly threatens influence, privilege or personal advantage. It is easy to defend justice when there is nothing to lose. It is far more difficult when the truth may cost us something. That is when conscience must rise above convenience.

Society must therefore cultivate a culture where integrity is valued more than comfort and accountability is welcomed rather than feared. Leaders should learn to accept criticism without hostility, while citizens should express disagreement responsibly. Progress becomes difficult when honest questions are treated as acts of disloyalty. Ultimately, every society must choose the future it desires. A nation built on silence cannot sustain justice, while a community where comfort consistently outweighs conscience risks making injustice ordinary. But people committed to truth, even when inconvenient, lay the foundation for stronger institutions, trustworthy leadership and lasting progress. The call is not to condemn those who succeed or to glorify perpetual criticism. It is to remember that privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good. Truth has no hidden agenda. It seeks neither applause nor favour. It simply asks to be spoken, defended and lived. When truth is silenced by comfort, everyone eventually pays the price.

By:  King Onunwor
Continue Reading

Opinion

When Comfort Silences The Truth  

Published

on

Quote: “Privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good.”

There is an old saying that truth does not fear investigation. Genuine truth neither depends on applause nor seeks permission to exist. It remains constant whether celebrated or rejected, defended or ignored. Yet, in today’s society, truth often competes with comfort, convenience, loyalty and personal interest. This raises an important question: Can a person remain objective after beginning to benefit from the very system he once criticised? Throughout history, reform movements have been driven by courageous individuals willing to challenge injustice despite personal risks. Their commitment to truth sometimes cost them popularity, comfort, freedom and even their lives. History has also recorded instances where influential voices became quieter after receiving appointments, promotions, contracts, political favours or other advantages.

While motivations cannot always be known, such patterns remind us that personal benefit can sometimes influence public conviction. Human beings naturally seek security, stability and opportunities for themselves and their families. There is nothing wrong with success or advancement. The concern arises when personal comfort replaces public responsibility, or privilege becomes a reason to ignore problems affecting others. One of the greatest dangers facing society is not only corruption or poor governance but the normalisation of silence. Systems rarely collapse overnight. They deteriorate gradually when people who know better decide that speaking the truth is no longer worth the personal cost. Every society therefore depends on citizens willing to ask difficult questions, demand accountability and defend justice, regardless of who benefits or feels uncomfortable.

A person who benefits from a broken system may become less inclined to challenge it. This is not true of everyone, and individuals should not be judged without evidence. Many principled people continue to advocate reform while working within imperfect institutions. Nevertheless, personal interests can sometimes soften criticism, dilute conviction or redirect attention from uncomfortable realities.Perhaps the greatest threat to truth is not open opposition but quiet compromise. Censorship is easy to recognise; silence purchased through convenience is harder to detect. When people gradually stop asking questions, demanding transparency or defending principles they once considered important, society should ask whether something has changed. Perspectives may genuinely evolve with new information, but incentives can also influence what people say—or choose not to say.

This is why citizens should not place blind trust in personalities. Ideas, principles and actions should be examined independently. Loyalty to individuals must never exceed loyalty to truth. Political affiliation, professional status, financial success or social influence should not exempt anyone from accountability. A healthy democracy depends on independent thinking, not unquestioning allegiance.The responsibility to speak truth does not belong only to journalists, activists, judges, religious leaders or opposition politicians. It belongs to every citizen. The teacher who refuses to manipulate facts, the public servant who rejects corruption, the business owner who acts with integrity, the parent who teaches honesty and the young person who chooses principle over popularity all contribute to a more just society. However, defending truth also requires humility.

We must not assume that everyone who disagrees with us has been compromised.

By: Michael  Abraham

Continue Reading

Opinion

Poor Federal Roads: The Oshiomhole’s  Outburst

Published

on

Quote:”Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat”

The recent outburst by the lawmaker representing Edo North Senatorial District, Senator Adams Oshiomhole, over the deplorable condition of federal roads in Edo and Delta states has once again drawn national attention to one of Nigeria’s most persistent infrastructure challenges. During Senate plenary last Wednesday, Oshiomhole criticized the Minister of Works, David Umahi, accusing the Federal Ministry of Works of neglecting major federal highways in Edo and Delta while prioritizing new road projects. According to him, the government should focus on rehabilitating existing roads that have become impassable before embarking on new construction. He identified the Benin-Warri, Benin-Asaba, Benin-Auchi and Auchi-Okene highways as strategic economic corridors that have deteriorated to alarming levels, making travel difficult for commuters and motorists while increasing the cost of transporting goods and services.

The senator also alleged that road projects affecting Edo and Delta states were repeatedly omitted from budgetary provisions and that some interventions were only undertaken following directives from President Bola Tinubu. Ironically, the Federal Government has consistently reiterated its commitment to reconstructing and rehabilitating federal roads across the country. The Minister of Works has repeatedly assured Nigerians that the government is deploying reinforced concrete technology to build more durable highways capable of withstanding the country’s climatic conditions. Despite these assurances, vast sections of federal road across the country remain in deplorable condition. The consequences are enormous. Federal highways serve as the backbone of the nation’s economy, carrying more than 90 per cent of passengers and freight.

They connect ports, airports, industrial centres, state capitals and agricultural belts, facilitating the movement of food, fuel, cement and manufactured goods. When these roads fail, the entire economy suffers. Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat. The result is a recurring cycle in which newly completed roads quickly deteriorate while existing ones are left to collapse. The economic consequences are severe. Bad roads increase transportation costs, contribute to food inflation, delay the movement of goods from ports to markets, increase vehicle maintenance expenses and lead to avoidable road crashes that claim countless lives every year.

To address these challenges, the Federal Government has introduced initiatives such as the Highway Development and Management Initiative (HDMI), which seeks to attract private investment into road maintenance through concessions and tolling. While the initiative holds promise, public acceptance will depend largely on visible improvements in road quality and transparent management of toll revenues. Similarly, the Road Infrastructure Tax Credit Scheme is designed to encourage companies to finance the reconstruction of strategic highways in exchange for tax credits. While the scheme has shown promise, its ability to address road infrastructure challenges equitably across the country remains to be seen. Other countries facing similar infrastructure challenges have demonstrated that sustainable road management requires a different approach.

Rwanda and Morocco, for instance, have prioritized dedicated road maintenance funds, performance-based contracts that reward quality rather than kilometers constructed, and policies that allocate a significant proportion of road budgets to maintenance instead of new construction. Nigeria can draw useful lessons from these experiences. Maintenance funding should be increased and protected because preventive maintenance is far cheaper than complete reconstruction. Public-private partnerships should be expanded with adequate safeguards, transparent tolling policies and independent monitoring. Development finance institutions should support contractors with affordable financing to minimize disruptions caused by delayed government payments. Road designs should withstand heavier rainfall and flooding, while compensation and right-of-way issues must be resolved before projects begin to avoid unnecessary delays.

FERMA should also prioritize durable, high-quality road maintenance over the shoddy repairs that have become all too common. Ultimately, Nigerians are not asking for perfect roads; they simply want roads that are safe, durable and properly maintained. While new highways are desirable, a well-maintained five-kilometer stretch is often far more valuable to road users than a much longer road that quickly falls into disrepair. The media, civil society, the National Assembly and Nigerians must continue to hold the government accountable by monitoring road projects and demanding better results. Good roads are not a privilege but a right of every citizen. With tax credit schemes, concessions and other funding mechanisms already in place, what is now required is political will, transparency and consistent implementation. However, Senator Oshiomhole’s criticism also invites legitimate public reflection. 

Many Nigerians have asked what the condition of these same federal roads was during his eight-year tenure as Governor of Edo State. Several governors, including those of Rivers State at different times, undertook repairs on critical federal roads within their states and subsequently sought reimbursement from the Federal Government. It is therefore fair to ask whether similar interventions were pursued during Oshiomhole’s administration. Public officials, whether serving or former, should be judged by the same standard. Constructive criticism is essential in a democracy, but it carries greater weight when matched by a demonstrable record of action. Nigerians expect those entrusted with public office to address pressing challenges while they have the authority to do so, rather than becoming vocal critics only after leaving office

By:  Calista Ezeaku
Continue Reading

Trending