July pathfinder international

PATHFINDER International Lifting up the standard for African nationalities

VOL. 1, NO. 2

Obama, where are you? — Page 6

FREE

ISSN 2573-6523

Back in the day: Fundamental causes of Page 9 19th Century Yoruba Wars

Decolonizing African Biblical Studies (1)

Israel’s secret Program to get rid of African refugees

Page 5

July 2017

Rehabilitation of Africa’s most isolated Dictatorship Page 9

— Page 7

Somalia: The Watson files (2) — Back page

n Benjamin

Netanyahu

Nigeria: Arewa youths — Page 10 write Osinbajo

How democratic is the Nigerian 1999 Constitution? (1) — Page 13

2 | PATHFINDER International, July, 2017

NEWS

Tribute: Botswana’s model leader dies at 91

K

etumile Masire, a cattle herder turned statesman who, as president of Botswana from 1980 to 1998, helped solidify his country's standing as one of the most richly thriving nations in Africa, died June 22 at a hospital in the capital city of Gaborone. He was 91.

His death, announced in a statement by his family, was reported by the Associated Press. The cause was not disclosed.

Masire was widely heralded as a model leader in a model nation on a continent where poverty, corruption and violence had crushed many hopes for stability and prosperity. “ We h a v e s e e n t h e promise of a new Africa whose roots are deep here in your soil, for you have been an inspiration to all who cherish freedom,” U.S. President Bill Clinton declared to Masire during a visit to Gaborone in 1998.

Clinton noted that in 1966 when Botswana — then known as Bechuanaland — obtained independence from Britain, it had two miles of paved roads and a single public high school.

Its chief export was beef.

The discovery of diamond reserves transformed the country's prospects, and under Masire and his predecessor, Seretse Khama, the nation used its revenue to build roads and schools, to improve health care and

expand access to clean water, to advance farming techniques and to extend life spans.

Khama, who had been the first president of independent Botswana, was featured in last year’s film “A United Kingdom,” starring David Oyelowo, with Rosamund Pike portraying the white Englishwoman Khama married in defiance of British authorities.

Masire — a self-described “farmer who has been drawn into politics” — was credited with leading his landlocked nation through a drought that dragged on for much of the 1980s. In 1989, he shared the Africa Prize for Leadership, valued $100,000, from the charitable organization the Hunger Project in recognition of the food distribution efforts that helped the country avoid starvation during the crisis.

He navigated a delicate relationship with South Africa, Botswana’s neighbour to the south. While South Africa was Botswana’s major economic partner, Botswana opposed the apartheid system of racial segregation under which South Africans were ruled for decades before its dismantlement in the early 1990s.

“He had to walk a line [in] a really rough neighborhood,” said Chester Crocker, a Georgetown University professor and

l Ketumile Masire and wife

former assistant secretary of state for African affairs.

“He had to get along with everybody, without sacrificing his principles.”

While many other African nations suffered under dictatorship, Botswana featured a robust democracy with little if any noticeable corruption. The “political inclusivity” Masire fostered, Crocker said, “is a magic formula, and it's too rare in Africa and elsewhere.”

The stability of Botswana allowed its tourism industry to flourish in times of

economic prosperity, with many visitors coming to witness its wildlife.

Masire — often known as Quett — was born in Kanye, in southern Botswana near the South African border, on July 23, 1925. In his youth, he was a herder before enrolling in a primary school at 13, according to a statement from Botswana's government announcing his death.

Crocker said Masire worked the land in a country that may go years without rain and learned a profound sense of self-reliance. He

received a scholarship to attend a secondary school in South Africa that was said to have trained many leaders of the first government of independent Botswana.

After both of his parents died when he was in his early 20’s, he suspended his education to become a teacher to support his siblings. He was a headmaster before saving enough money to purchase a tractor and pursue farming, distinguishing himself with modern agricultural techniques.

Equatorial Guinea’s VP with a taste for luxury on trial By: Kevin Sieff

E

ven before the corruption trial of Equatorial Guinea’s vice president began this week, there was no shortage of publicity about the lavish lifestyle of Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue.

News reports say he has enjoyed the use of two yachts worth an estimated $250 million — about twice his country’s annual education budget in recent years.

There was also a $200 million mansion in Paris — worth more than double the n a t i o n ’s p u b l i c h e a l t h expenditure.

Then there was his $10 million car collection — worth an enormous multiple of the country’s median income. In 2011, 77 percent of citizens in Equatorial Guinea lived on less than two dollars per day.

In a number of Africa's poorest countries, those close to power have become rich even as their fellow citizens remain mired in poverty. But Obiang, who is the son of oilrich Equatorial Guinea’s longtime president, stands out.

Activists are hoping that Obiang’s trial will help prove that corruption comes with consequences, even for Africa's political elite. Obiang is accused of using millions in

Teodoro Mangue public funds to bankroll his ostentatious lifestyle in France, charges that carry a sentence of up to 10 years.

“By squandering enormous wealth the government has already missed opportunities to invest in health and education,” said a Human Rights Watch report this month.

But when the trial began on Monday, Obiang, also known as Teodorin, did not appear in court — nor is he expected to travel to France for the proceedings. His lawyers say that he is immune from prosecution because of his

position in government.

“It would be unprecedented in France, unprecedented in the world, to try a sitting vice president,” Thierry Marembert, one of Obiang’s lawyers, told the court. The defense attorneys have said that Obiang’s financial dealings were legitimate under his country’s laws, and defended his luxurious tastes.

After the Dutch government seized the $100 million yacht Ebony Shine in December, acting on a request from Swiss prosecutors who suspect Obiang of money laundering, the vice president’s lawyers

a rg u e d t h a t t h e v e s s e l belonged to the government of Equatorial Guinea, according to the Maritime Executive, a trade publication. A second yacht linked to Obiang, the Ice, is also owned by that country’s government, the publication reported. Obiang's attorneys have also argued the Paris mansion is a diplomatic mission — a claim the court has upheld.

In France, the trial is part of a series of inquiries known as the cases “of the ill-gotten gains.” Obiang’s case is the first to be heard in court, but other politicians from Congo, Angola and Burkina Faso face similar accusations.

Yet the alleged scale of Obiang’s spending — particularly compared to the development indicators in Equatorial Guinea — sets him apart. Even after oil was discovered in the West African country in the 1990s, the government used hardly any of its revenue to improve the lives of its citizens, analysts say.

In 2015, only 25 percent of newborns in the country were immunized for polio and measles, one of the lowest rates in the world. Life expectancy hovers around 57.

About half the population lacks access to potable water.

In 2012, 40 percent of children in Equatorial Guinea were not in school, according to Human

Rights Watch. Statistics on government spending are limited, but the 2011 health and education budgets were a mere $92 million and $140 million, respectively, according to the Human Rights Watch report — a small fraction of national income.

In 2014, Obiang settled a civil forfeiture case with federal prosecutors in the United States, agreeing to “relinquish more than $30 million of assets purchased with corruption proceeds,” according to a Department of Justice press release.

“Through relentless embezzlement and extortion, Vice President Nguema Obiang shamelessly looted his government and shook down businesses in his country to support his lavish lifestyle, while many of his fellow citizens lived in extreme poverty,” said Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the department's Criminal Division.

Aside from the mansions and cars and yachts, Obiang also kept an expensive memorabilia collection, including the jacket worn by Michael Jackson in the “Thriller” music video and one of the singer’s crystalstudded gloves. He was forced to sell them after the U.S. case. n

He also worked as a newspaper journalist, an activity that along with his community involvement helped draw him into politics. He served on tribal and regional councils and was a founder and secretary-general of the Botswana Democratic Party, now the country's dominant political party.

According to the Encyclopaedia of World B i o g r a p h y, h e o n c e traversed 3,000 miles of the Kalahari desert to attend two dozen meetings over two weeks.

Before becoming president, Masire had served in roles including minister of finance and development planning and vice president.

After leaving office, he advised other African leaders and chaired an international panel that probed the Rwandan genocide of 1994. Crocker credited him with making important contributions to peace efforts in Congo and, m o r e r e c e n t l y, Mozambique.

In his retirement, Masire established the Sir Ketumile Masire Foundation, a nongovernmental organization that seeks to improve agriculture, governance and children’s health in the region. He also tended the cattle on his ranch.

Masire’s wife, Gladys Olebile Molefi Masire, whom he married in 1958, died in 2013. They had six children. A complete list of survivors was not immediately available.

“We have a saying in Botswana: A man is never strong until he says what he believes and gives other men the chance to do the same,” Masire once told The Washington Post. “I am proud to say without a doubt ... we are a strong democracy.” n

PATHFINDER International, July, 2017 | 3

Wars and conflicts in Africa — “Black Man’s Dilemma”

T

he specter of mindless violence was raised in Nigeria when some groups in the northern parts of the country, describing themselves as “Arewa Youth Council” and backed by a number of northern Nigeria leaders under the auspices of Northern Elders Forum, issued an ultimatum to all the Igbo people living in Northern Nigeria to leave their places of residence on or before October 1, 2017. This ultimatum immediately brought to memory the 19671970 war between Biafra and the rest of the country, a war ostensibly fought to achieve Biafran dreams anchored on the insecurity of Igbo lives and property mainly in the northern Region which itself was a reaction and response to perceived Igbo intention to take over the country via the lopsidedness in the killings that accompanied the January 15, 1966 military coup where political and cultural leaders of the North and West were summarily executed while sparing all of the Igbo political and cultural leaders, in a military mutiny engineered by mainly Igbo officers.

This is the background to the fears raised by the ultimatum and as usual in Nigerian politics, everyone, from the central government to northern emirs to Igbo political office holders started talking about “peace” and “unity” without directly addressing the fundamental

EDITORIAL BOARD Publisher/Editor-in-Chief Femi Odedeyi

Managing Editor Gbenga Gbesan Production Editor Soji Amosu Graphics / Design Mikaiil Akinlawon Published by Pathfinder Media LLC P. O. Box 1256, Greenbelt, MD20768, USA Tel: 240-838-4466 1-240-602-3802 Website: www.ooduapathfinder.com

E-mail: editor@ooduapathfinder.com advertising@ooduapathfinder.com

causes of the perennial rift between the Nationalities that make up Nigeria and whether the architecture of the State, as created by Europe, in the course of her own history, can actually develop a working and peaceable relationship between the different African nationalities.

The Arewa Youths have gone ahead to make a formal presentation of their demands to the Nigerian Government and it is reproduced here in full, in the Magazine section; alongside an analysis of the fundamental defects of the Nigerian Constitution by RopoSekoni, which defects appear to be the root cause of all the demands and violence and underdevelopment of the country.

Is the indivisibility of the Nigerian post-colonial state an existential necessity or merely an attempt at addressing symptoms while ignoring the disease? Our columnist LeyeIge takes this up in an in-depth analysis of President Buhari's idea of indivisibility situating it within the context of the African Nationality coming into being in and of itself or being recreated in the image of another, which now seem to be the lot of African Nationalities.

On July 7, 1998, Chief MoshoodKasimawoOlawale Abiola, the presumed winner of the June 12, 1993 Presidential elections in Nigeria died in military

Editor’s Note Because of this man, there is both cause for hope and certainty that the agony and protests of those who suffer injustice shall give way to peace and human dignity. The children of the world shall know the great work of this extraordinary leader and his fervent mission to right wrong, to do justice, and to serve mankind. captivity, having refused to abandon his electoral mandate in what was described as the freest and fairest election in Nigeria at the time. Leaving aside all of the intrigues and political opportunism that characterized that period, it is instructive to note that MKO Abiola was one of the champions for reparations for African-Americans, one of the reasons why the Congressional Black Caucus said this of him in their tribute: “Because of this man, there is both cause for hope and certainty that the agony and protests of those who suffer injustice shall give way to peace and human dignity. The children of the world shall know the great work of this extraordinary leader and his

fervent mission to right wrong, to do justice, and to serve mankind. The enemies which imperil the future of generations to come: poverty, ignorance, disease, hunger, and racism have each seen effects of the valiant work of Chief Abiola. Through him and others like him, never again will freedom rest in the domain of the few. We, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus salute him this day as a hero in the global pursuit to preserve the history and the legacy of the African diaspora.”

“June 12” was supposed to be a pan-Nigerian electoral mandate, but it is now being remembered and celebrated only within the Yoruba Nation in Nigeria with other Nationalities looking askance as if the event and its

remembrance is of no consequence, even as that epochal election ultimately forced the military to cede power. This is not happenstance. “June 12” had been regarded as a “Yoruba affair” especially among those who proclaim their “Nigerianism” loudest; and it actually fell on the Yoruba to see to the conclusion of that contradiction when the military eventually abandoned power.

Because of M.K.O Abiola's commitment to the idea of reparations for Africans, Femi Ojo-Ade takes a look at the real deal of the Africans in America, in this age of “The Donald” just as Segun Gbadegesin reviews ”Black Man’s Dilemma” originally written in 1976 by one of Nigeria’s prominent journalists, Areoye Oyebola and the book written about his own stewardship at Howard University in commemoration of his retirement from the HBCU’s Department of Philosophy.

The totality of all of these are expressed in the column on Faith, adapted from the Delta State University, Nigeria, Inaugural Lecture titled “Decolonizing African Biblical Studies” delivered

by Reverend David Tuesday Adamo; exploring how E u r o p e a n o r We s t e r n “Christianizing” Mission almost always end up in diverting the African Christian mind from directly addressing their own conditions of existence in their true image. n

4 | PATHFINDER International, July, 2017

BOOK REVIEW

Black Man’s Dilemma: Forty Years Later B lack Man’s Dilemma by Chief Areoye Oyebola, veteran journalist and former editor of Daily Times, was first published in 1976 on the eve of the Second World Black and African Festival of Arts and Culture (FESTAC). With its sweeping indictment of the black race, it was an unpleasant rain on the parade of black folks demanding recognition and respect from a hostile world. The review was mixed. While some commended his objectivity, others wondered how a fellow black can be so dismissive of his kind?

Chief Oyebola revised the book in 2002, and shortly after, he kindly sent me a signed copy with his compliments. I carefully read through several times, and each time different emotions consumed me: bitterness, resentment, sadness and shame. While I felt like screaming aloud at several points in protest of chilling statements, I soldiered on till the end.

Black Man's Dilemma came up again last Saturday when a thoughtful and intelligent political activist, Architect Abiodun Adepoju (Abbey), paid me a visit.

As with almost every private and social conversations of Nigerians in the diaspora, our social evening soon turned on the state of the nation. “What is going on with NASS? Why is APC working against its interest? Why is the President's anti-corruption war suffering defeat?

What is the matter with our oligarchs that they cannot

REVIEWER: SEGUN GBADEGESIN

mobilize their financial resources to revamp the educational system?

In the face of serious recession and acute foreign exchange shortage, must we send young children to expensive schools abroad and get them exposed to all kinds of abuses and cultural deprivation?

Why are our mega churches in the business of for-profit educational ventures when missionaries who had no biological relationship with us gave us good education at substantially subsidized rates?

We went back and forth, diving into the history of our villages and our ethnic nation, the fratricidal wars that our forebears fought, and

their unwitting facilitation of the barbaric trade in humans, the European partition of Africa and the ensuing colonial imposition, the struggle for and achievement of flag independence and the inability to run the affairs of the state justly and fairly. The question is “Is it in the genes we inherited or in the choices we made?” If the former, what hope is there unless there is a bright prospect for genetic modification? If the latter, can we collectively change the doomed course we are on by changing the choices we make?

Out of the blues, Abbey recalled Black Man's Dilemma. He had

read it many years ago and was beginning to appreciate the thesis of the book. For as it turned out, the problem of Nigeria is the problem of black people in general.

Oyebola asked several biting questions, all of which can make the soul of black folk groan in pain.

If humanity originated from Africa, and “all races, including the black race, have behind them a past of approximately equal length, why must our own remain behind in material progress?”

Ouch!

While some assumptions, for example, of black people loitering around while others were making progress, appear to underestimate the impact of enslavement and colonialism on the course that we might have taken, there can be no denying the fact that, all things considered, “we have wasted our time while others were battling day and night to conquer nature and make their environment better than they found them.”

We may romanticize and congratulate ourselves on our so-called relationship of mutuality with nature. We do not approach nature as conquerors, only as cosojourners in God’s vineyard. But the extent to which this posture is a genuine choice rather than a forced one must be determined.

In both the 1976 edition and the revised edition of 2002, Oyebola identified “three intriguing facts about the black race.” First, “no Black Country has ever made a breakthrough to modernity.”

Second, about 20 million black Africans were captured and transported to the Americas as

slaves. Third, the black race is relatively backward “vis-a-vis other races of the world.”

For the author, “black people have no country to be proud of in terms of its great inventions and discoveries, its technical equipment and political power.” This is obviously sweeping. Oyebola himself referenced the great kingdoms of Mali, Songhai and Ghana. To this we may add the Oyo empire and the Sokoto caliphate.

And we must not forget the impact of enslavement and colonialism on what might have been.

But Oyebola's thesis is inescapable: “the point that has always made me sad is that after so many years of political independence, there is still very slim possibility of a black country making a breakthrough to modernity.” If this is a fair assessment, the question remains why is it so and what can be done about it?

Taking Nigeria as an example, Oyebola lamented that the hope he had about her taking “giant steps towards technological, economic and socio-political development, has turned out to be a misplaced hope.” Why? I think there are many reasons.

First, the structure bequeathed to the new nation by her erstwhile rulers was inimical to genuine development and perhaps it was deliberately meant to be so for their obvious self-interest.

Unfortunately, the inheritors of the structure failed to avoid the land mine. They walked straight into it. n

PATHFINDER International, July 2017 | 5

FAITH

Decolonizing African Biblical Studies (1)

T

h e V i c e Chancellor, The Principal Officers, Deans of Faculties, Professors, Archbishops and Bishops, Men and Wo m e n o f G o d , T h e Military Officers, Hon. Commissioners, The Royal Highnesses, The Counselors, Members of Academia, Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen.

INTRODUCTION I give thanks to God for the opportunity to deliver the first inaugural lecture from the Department of Religious Studies, the second in the Faculty of Arts, and the 7th in Delta State University, Abraka. I know that the Lord has been good to me because I thought I would have been buried long time ago. I say, “His mercy endures forever” (Psalm 136).

This title looks 'somehow' but I deliberately chose it because of my experience during my training and my practice of scholarship. I have chosen this topic as a result of a close examination of my theological training in Nigeria and the United States. I felt that all the theological training that I received in those universities have great elements of colonization. I felt dissatisfied with the colonization of my thought and the thought of my people and the methods of biblical interpretation imposed on us. During the period of my training, I struggled with this fact and tried to find out ways to make a difference in decolonizing biblical studies inAfrica.

The process of this did not start until I was at the final stage of my doctoral training. I insisted, despite all threats and rejection, on doing my doctoral research on “Africa and Africans in the Old Testament and Its Environment”. In my academic career, I have been trying to pursue this aim of decolonizing African biblical studies in Africa. In this paper therefore, my aim is to demonstrate the ways in which the study of the Bible in Africa has been colonized and various ways of decolonizing African biblical studies. My purpose is also to work out some proposal of how African biblical studies can be decolonized. I also hope to challenge my academic

“

An African biblical study is the biblical interpretation that makes “African social cultural context a subject of interpretation.”

”

The 7th Inaugural Lectures of Delta State University, Abraka, delivered by The Rev. Prof. David Tuesday Adamo, Department of Religious Studies.

“

Like the Third World biblical Hermeneutics, African biblical studies have two main characteristics: It is “liberational, and culturally sensitive.

”

colleagues on the necessity of decolonizing African biblical studies.

WHAT IS AFRICAN BIBLICALSTUDIES? Is there anything that can be distinctively called African Biblical Studies? If so, what is African Biblical Studies?

An African biblical study is the biblical interpretation that makes “African social cultural context a subject of interpretation.”

It means that an Africa biblical study is contextual since interpretation is always done in a particular context. Specifically, it means that analysis of the text is done from the perspective of African world-view and culture. It is the rereading of the Christian scripture from a premeditatedly Africentric perspective. The purpose is not only to understand the Bible and God in our African experience and culture, but also to break the hermeneutical hegemony and ideological stranglehold that Eurocentric biblical scholars have long enjoyed. This is a methodology that reappraises ancient biblical tradition and African world-view, culture, and life experience with the purpose of “correcting the effect of the cultural ideological conditioning to which Africa and Africans have been subjected.” A casual glance at the history of biblical hermeneutics will reveal that there has never been an interpretation that has been without references to or dependent on a particular cultural code, thought patterns, or social location of the interpreter.

There is no individual who is completely detached from everything in his or her environment or experience and culture so as

to be able to render one hundred percent objectivity in everything done. The fact is that every interpreter is biased in some ways.

What I am trying to say is that there is an African biblical study because persons who are born and raised in African culture will normally interpret scriptures in ways that are unique to them and different from western interpreters.

Therefore, to talk of uniform, unconditional, universal, and absolute interpretation or hermeneutics is unrealistic.

Such does not exist anywhere in this world. One who interprets tends to bring his or her own bias to b e a r, c o n s c i o u s l y o r unconsciously, on the way in which the message is perceived.

Like the Third World biblical Hermeneutics, African biblical studies h a v e t w o m a i n characteristics: It is “liberational, and culturally sensitive.” It also has some other methodological characteristics such as n a r r a t i o n , o r a l i t y, theopoetic, and imagination. What it does is that it uses liberation as a crucial hermeneutics and mobilizes indigenous cultural materials for theological enterprises.

Despite the Eurocentric interpreters’ claims to universality, the African biblical study is “postmodern, post colonial in its aim to celebrate the local,” and challenge the reigning imported western theories. The African biblical studies, using African cultural hermeneutics, is hardly known, heard and acceptable in western academies because such African modes of interpretation “seek to acquire and

celebrate their God-giving identity by delving into their indigenous resources and rejecting the superintending tendencies of western intellectual tradition.”

This is not popular in western tradition, not because it is incomprehensible, untranslatable to indigenous languages, but because they employ the ground rules, which differ from the normal western rules set by the Eurocentric academy. They address issues closer home to their own people. What they did was that they “learnt and borrowed ideas and techniques from external resources but reshaped them, often added their own indigenous texture, to meet their local needs.”

In African biblical studies, God is not considered a oneway track God. His mode of revelation to the world cannot be limited. God is p e r c e i v e d d i ff e r e n t l y, depending on who you are and where you are. We are made differently. What makes sense to one person may not make sense to another. The real issue therefore, is how to use our finite human knowledge and experience, and communication to speak about God who is all embracing. The fact is that no one has yet been able to invent such language to e n c a p s u l a t e G o d ’s completeness.

It looks like an impossible task, but we must keep on trying. In African biblical studies, the Christian Bible is crucial, since this is the book or collection of books that contributes towards a disclosure about the nature of God. The fact of different translations, and versions within these translations illustrates that there are differences of interpreta-

tions as far as biblical studies and message are concerned.

The contention is that in Africa, some distinctive interpretation of scripture has emerged and is emerging. This is called African cultural hermeneutics.

Most African biblical scholars are trained in the West. Those who are even trained in African higher institutions are trained and are still being trained in the Western tradition. After going back to Africa those of us who were trained in the western tradition soon discovered that the very western methodological tradition to which we were well schooled did not satisfy the need inAfrica.

The result of this is to find other satisfactory ways or methodologies that will meet the need and the understanding of African people at home and abroad.

It is therefore very remarkable that African biblical scholars have tried to “forge a biblical interpretation strategy that is significantly different from that of the western interpretation.”

This concerns relating specific biblical issues to the situation in Africa. This method is different from the western methodology in that the particular focus is not only the historical and literary context of the passage read, but also African context. Although western critical tools and training are used, the context and the conclusion arrived at are always different from that of the western scholarship. In these African biblical methods, there are various methods employed to achieve this purpose.

These methods are

“Comparative studies, Evaluative studies, African presence in the Bible, Inculturation, Liberation, B l a c k t h e o l o g y, a n d Feminist Hermeneutics.

Several terms then appear synonymous to the method of African biblical studies: inculturation Hermeneutics, liberation hermeneutics, contextual hermeneutics, Africentric hermeneutics, and vernacular hermeneutics. From the above, African biblical studies is not done in absolute exclusion of western biblical methodology. It can be complimentary.

Conditions for African Biblical Studies In my book, Exploration in African Biblical Studies, I suggested five main conditions for practicing African biblical studies successfully.

1. The interpreter must be an insider. This means that the would-be interpreter must either be an African or live and experience all aspects of African life in Africa. It is difficult to do African biblical studies without living in Africa and going through, the joy, p r o b l e m s o f p o v e r t y, e t h n i c i t y, h u n g e r, communalism and other palatable and unpalatable aspects of the African culture.

2. He or she must be immersed in the content of the Bible. It is not enough just to know the contents; it is absolutely necessary to believe the stories and the event of the Bible as a life of faith. In other words, the biblical events are reflections of our own present individual and communal life. The interpreter must be a person of faith. There must be a firm belief in the power of God's word.

3. Understanding African indigenous culture is absolutely important in doing African biblical studies. This is because African culture is part and parcel of African cultural hermeneutics. Despite the semblance in the biblical and African cultures, there are still some distinct aspects of African culture.

These distinctive aspects of African culture influence or dominate the interpretation of the Bible.

To be contd. in the next edition.

6 | PATHFINDER International, July, 2017

FEATURE

Obama, where are you? (1) By Femi Ojo-Ade

A

nd so, dear brothers and sisters, he won, The Man won in a landslide, according to his law of lies whereby there would be a vast ocean in the Sahara Desert, and a black ghetto would be discovered on the moon. He won apparently against all odds. Desperate to deny reality, some vowed to go into exile (away from paradise on earth?). Some threatened to renounce their citizenship (from the land of the free?). Others promised to deny themselves the free pass of the green card and never return to almighty America (away from the home of the brave?). And thus came an avalanche of negative and traumatic reactions to a totally unexpected loss by progress against retrogression. Now that the nightmare is revealing itself to be what one suspected, living hell, one can begin to adapt to, or deal with it in the best possible way.

Yes, indeed, Trump has triumphed, apparently against all odds. He has trumped America and the world with his tactical tantrums and terrible humor, by trumpeting his self-proclaimed exceptional business acumen, by taunting his opponents to trade genuine opinions against his overtly egregious, groundless generalizations. He gambled and won. He, symbol of hollow success, big of mouth but small in concrete terms.He, billio-naire that avoids paying taxes. He, tycoon amassing his wealth by bullying and bilking friends and foes that probably trusted him simply because his name is Trump. He, fiery detractor of the media that, ironically, defended him endlessly, lapping up his every lie like dogs voraciously munching filthy food from their master’s dirty palms. He, accused sexual predator reveling in m i n d - b o g g l i n g transgressions that he recounted in that infamous Access Hollywood video, and various acts of debauchery described by some dozen bombshells in the glare of civilized television cameras even as the man himself, infinitely confident and unscathed, America’s ultimate hero, sneered at the women’s materialistic intentions and dubious character. The women came on screen one by one. Just as quickly, they disappeared into oblivion.

Call it Trumpist magic. The man waved his despicable wand of dehumanization and that was it; the women

Barack Obama faded away, the media went into mesmerized silence, and the bandwagon of white supremacism kept rolling along.

No one seemed to believe that it would ever reach their White House. But there it is, a sight to behold, every day, that nearly all lily-white tapestry reminding whoever cares to ask that they have taken back their America made great again by the color of their skin. Executive orders are rolling out with gusto.

The way things are moving, one would not be surprised if the owners of the White House decided to raze the structure to the ground because the immediate past tenants might have stained the sacred premises. And, indeed, millennial slaves would build the new structure and, yes, pay for it, too. Why not? Call it patriotism or gratitude to the masters for saving then from the savagery ofAfrica.

Before we continue to dissect this new, exciting American era, let us comment on the choice of the word, black in this socio-political context. Let us be clear about this: we believe that all descendants of Africa, on the continent and in the Diaspora, are Africans. The controversy and division have emanated from the experience and ideas of those of the Diaspora, that is, descendants of the slaves forced into perpetual exile by masters of afro-pessimism claiming to civilize savages when they themselves were the real barbaric beasts of inhumanism. In that process of disintegration, the masters succeeded in embedding in the exile’s psyche the belief that “the best and brightest” were taken across the Atlantic while the worst and uncivilized were left behind. The wounds of that divide have never been fully healed.

Thus, when Africa is the point of reference, may in the Diaspora would quickly swear their total distanciation from a continent and culture alien to them. Of course, the undercurrent of thought is that the said culture is barbaric and backward and beastly, a disgrace to humanity, a shame to the world of the living. Ain’t got anything to do with Africa.Ain'tnoKuntaKinte.

Such are the snide remarks made by comedians and other jokers insistent upon leaving behind any and every thingAfrican.

One can therefore understand why there is so much contention in nomenclature where Blacks are concerned. Blacks in America are arguably the only community on earth always engaged in arguments over naming. It all dates back to the arrival of slaves on these shores, and the masters of the plantation fueled the fire of discord. The names have been long and dirty: African, Congo, Colored, Of Color, Negro (Nigra, Nigger), Afro-American, black American, African (-) American, Brown, Biracial, and others being created and cultivated out of the desire to give value to individualism while running scared of the stigma of savagery. Go back toyour jungle! Notwithstanding the history of mutual engagement between continentals and diasporics (the civil rights movement), there remains the urge to “save” the self. The source is simple:America.

Note that the task of restoring Africa's humanity is made all the more arduous by the great Western enterprise called globalization whereby every effort is made to keep us at the bottom of the ladder, both those on the continent and in the Diaspora. African expe-

Donald Trump rience in America is of particular importance here.

Sadly enough, the descendants of those forced into exile here are, in large measure, fixated upon their Americanity. This is the United States of America; I am an American. The singsong, strikingly strident, strikes a chord of disaffection underlying how far we still have to go to forge a relationship capable of realizing necessary renaissance of our culture bastardized and beaten down over the years. The combination of African and American in African American (with or without a hyphen?) –name made famous by Jesse Jackson – has remained a matter of debate and dissent simply because, to some people's mind, they have nothing to do with Africa. They prefer black American or one of the lately popular terms, such as brown. How much debate has there ever been over the term, Irish- or Italian-American?

Under these daunting circumstances, we have found it expedient to use the term, black; for, after all, the color black, visible and binding, is what immediately stands out. It does bring us together even if in a superficial and shallow way. When the police stop and search, when they shoot in defense and kill us, when they arrest and throw us in jail, they do not make any distinction of nationality, cultural background, or blood percentage. They see black as a threat shining and blinding in the summer sun and in the cool wind of winter. Amadou Diallo, Renisha McBride, James Byrd, Trayvon Martin, Trayon Christian, Eric Garner, Emmett Till, and all other victims of police brutality were black before being anything else. In the eyes of the killer beholder, they all represented a race

unfit to be considered human in these United States ofAmerica.

In essence, what our black experience has shown is American society’s racism, systemic and social, public and personal, overt and covert, as we struggle to survive the raging fire meant to consume us. And Trump's triumphant ride across the wild, wild West of Americana serves as good an example as any of our condition as victims of supremacist hate and hypocrisy.

Interestingly enough, when candidate Trump was campaigning for votes, he addressed Blacks in the restricted sense of African Americans: Your community is filthy, you have no education, no infrastructure, your homes are drug and crime infested, you kill one another… So what the hell have you got to lose?

Vote for me! Now as president, he has used similar rhetoric of doomsday condition of “carnage” in “our inner cities” to attack perhaps the most charismatic and respected civil rights activist, Representative John Lewis, a constant presence at the side of MLK, Jr. Here again, Trump's love of concrete, logical facts is nil: Lewis does not live in the ghetto; his middle class community in his native Atlanta is bubbling with wealth and upscale decorum. Another case of “alternative facts”?

That is the latest in the new administration's strategy for foisting blatant lies on a society apparently too scared to stand up to him. Trump's reference to African Americans, excluding other Blacks in America, may be viewed as part of a larger agenda by a tacit, ill-defined coalition of white extremists, such as the KKK, the infamous ALT-RIGHT, neo-Nazi groups and others, to “take

back [their] country”. And that would mean restoring the history of slavery as living reality and putting Blacks back “where they belong”, as scary as that could be. Note that the history in question witnessed the deep collaboration and commitment of Blacks from all over the world in the civil rights movement on this side, and in the antiapartheid struggle in South A f r i c a . To d a y, w h i t e America discourages such come-together, preferring instead an ultra-nationalist program of antagonism among Blacks in order to attain better control of the modern plantation. One doubts whether Blacks, and in particular, African Americans, recognize this unfortunate fact. Often enough, they are too quick in affirming their Americanity as proof of superiority to their “foreign” brothers and sisters and to remind their white compatriots that they, too, are America (remember the poem by Langston Hughes), legit, born and bred, civilized, worthy of trust, different from “them,” that is, the summarily excoriated Other largely fromAfrica.

Remember the Access Hollywood video mentioned above? The zealous and graphic description of free grabbing, groping and grinding without any resistance by the woman because the actor is a star?

That “locker-room banter,” as the perpetrator claimed it all was, no doubt exposed the heat and soul of the hypocritical underbelly of nationalist culture. And one could make a list of dichotomies with Americana proudly parading the negative like the old red, white and blue. Lack of decorum and decency; lack of honor and honesty; lack of respect and responsibility; and absolute absence of humility. That video displayed to the world astounding braggadocio, blissful carelessness, a demeanor steeped in the brash obstinacy of a spoiled child with a golden spoon in his mouth. Worse still, those that know better, hopefully, say with a shrug that that's just him. They pander to his whims, that he symbolizes the new normal of political incorrectness. He can say anything at any time, the filthiest of things, and nothing would happen besides a sneer here and there. He himself said that he could kill someone on the streets of New York and his followers, solidly behind him through hell fire, would still see him as their savior and messiah. But why, one may ask.

To be contd. in the next ed.

7

PATHFINDER International

Magazine Vol. 1, No. 2, July, 2017

Israel’s Secret Program to get Rid of African Refugees

BY ANDREW GREEN

T

he man picked Afie Semene and the 11 other Eritreans on the flight from Tel Aviv out of the stream of disembarking passengers as if he already had their faces memorized. He welcomed them to the Rwandan capital, Kigali, and introduced himself as John. He was a Rwandan immigration officer, he explained. He was there to help smoothen their arrival. He collected the travel documents each of them had been issued in Israel and led them past the immigration counter where the rest of the passengers from their flight queued. Nobody stopped them. Nothing was stamped.

They paused briefly at the luggage carousel to scoop up their bags. In the nearly seven years Semene had lived in Israel, he filled an apartment with furniture and kitchen supplies. But when officials there summoned him to a detention facility for asylumseekers, he had distributed much of what he owned among his friends, unsure if he would ever return. Now his suitcase contained little besides clothes.

The group exited the airport into

... they were promised asylum somewhere closer to home. Then they were discarded — often in a war zone. the humid Rwandan night and crowded into a waiting pickup.

The luggage followed in a second truck. The small convoy wound its way through lush, hilly Kigali, past the fenced campus of the regional polytechnic, and into a quiet neighborhood several miles south of the airport. They came to a stop in front of a house the color of a pistachio nut, its second story ringed with white-trimmed porches. Dawn was already breaking as the new arrivals were shown to bedrooms inside. As he fell asleep, Semene still remembers the feeling of relief wash over him. John would return the next day to help them begin their asylum applications, he thought. Maybe he would arrive with the papers granting them refugee status already in hand.

“There would be no visas. No work permits. No asylum. None of the things Israeli authorities had promised the 12 Eritreans when they had agreed to relocate to Rwanda a few weeks prior”.

Instead, the next day brought new despair: There would be no

visas. No work permits. No asylum. None of the things Israeli authorities had promised the 12 Eritreans when they had agreed to relocate to Rwanda a few weeks prior. Instead, John offered to smuggle them into neighboring Uganda, which he told them was a “free nation.” “If you live here, you can't leave,” Semene recalled John saying of Rwanda. “It's a tight country. Let me advise you, as your brother, you need to go to Uganda.”

They would need to sneak across the border, since they had no proof of legal entry into Rwanda. (The Israeli laissezpassers had gone unstamped at the Kigali airport the night before, an oversight that now felt suspicious.) But John told them not to worry; he could easily get them into Uganda for a fee of $250. “I have everything,” he said.

“Contacts with the government over there. Contacts with the Israeli government. If something happens, I call the Israeli government and they do something for you.”

The alternative, John said, was to remain in the Kigali house, where they would be under constant surveillance. They would have to pay rent, but without documentation, they would not be allowed to work. Semene and the others understood that John was not really giving them a choice.

Everyone agreed to the plan.

Afew hours later, a van pulled up outside the house and the Eritreans piled in. Several miles from the border with Uganda, the vehicle came to a stop and John urged them out onto the side of the road.

It was the last they would see of him.

Semene had made an even more treacherous crossing once before, paying smugglers to ferry him across the Sinai Desert from Egypt into Israel. Under fire from Egyptian border guards, he sprinted the final yards to safety.

He had hoped it would be the last time he would ever have to cross a border illegally. But seven years later, feeling betrayed by an Israeli government he had once turned to for safety, he slipped quietly and

unofficially into Uganda.

For decades after its founding in 1948, Israel welcomed refugees from outside the Jewish faith. The country was an early signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention. In his first official act as prime minister in 1977, Menachem Begin granted refuge to 66 Vietnamese who had been rescued at sea by an Israeli ship. During a visit to the United States later that year, he recalled the St. Louis — a ship loaded with more than 900 European Jews who attempted to flee Germany in 1939 — to explain his decision. The St. Louis's passengers were denied permission to disembark in Cuba, the United States, and Canada and ultimately returned to Europe. A quarter of the passengers are thought to have died in the Holocaust.

“They were nine months at sea, traveling from harbor to harbor, from country to country, crying out for refuge. They were refused,” Begin said. “We have never forgotten the lot of our people … And therefore it was natural that my first act as prime minister was to give those people a haven in the land of Israel.”

Turn to page 8

8 | PATHFINDER International, July 2017

MAGAZINE

Israel’s secret program to get rid of African refugees Contd. from page 7

The alternative, John said, was to remain in the Kigali house, where they would be under constant surveillance.

They would have to pay rent, but without documentation, they would not be allowed to work. Semene and the others understood that John was not really giving them a choice. Everyone agreed to the plan.

In 2007, then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert echoed Begin's act when he granted temporary residency permits to nearly 500 Sudanese asylum-seekers. But as the number of African migrants swelled in subsequent years, Israel's receptiveness began to flag. The vast majority of the new arrivals were fleeing longstanding authoritarian regimes in Eritrea and Sudan. They chose Israel for many reasons: because it was a democracy, because it was easier to reach than Europe or — for many Sudanese — because it was an adversary of their own government. They hoped that the enemy of their enemy would look kindly on them.

But Israeli authorities soon became overwhelmed. According to the Ministry of Interior, nearly 65,000 foreign nationals — the vast majority from Africa — reached Israel between 2006 and 2013. As the government struggled to accommodate the newcomers, many languished in poor and overcrowded neighborhoods in southern Tel Aviv. Dozens squatted in a park across the street from the city's main bus station for weeks on end.

A handful of high-profile incidents — including the alleged rape of an 83-year-old woman by an Eritrean asylum-seeker in 2012 — dominated media coverage and fueled unease among Israelis, many of whom already fretted that refugees were taking their jobs.

By the time Benjamin Netanyahu secured a third term as prime minister in 2013, the tensions had hardened into outright hostility. That year, Israel sealed off its border with Egypt and implemented a raft of policies aimed at making life more difficult for asylum-seekers already in Israel. Then it began secretly pressuring Eritreans and Sudanese to leave for unnamed third countries, a shadowy relocation effort in which Semene and thousands like him are now ensnared.

Israeli officials have kept nearly everything else about this effort secret, even deflecting requests for more information from UNHCR, the U.N. refugee a g e n c y. B u t a y e a r - l o n g investigation by Foreign Policy

that included interviews with multiple Eritrean and Sudanese asylum-seekers as well as people involved at various stages of the relocation process — including one person who admitted to helping coordinate illegal border crossings — reveals an opaque system of shuffling asylumseekers from Israel, via Rwanda or Uganda, into third countries, where they are no longer anyone's responsibility.

It begins with furtive promises

by Israeli authorities of asylum and work opportunities in Rwanda and Uganda. Once the Sudanese and Eritrean asylum-seekers reach Kigali or Entebbe, where Uganda's international airport is located, they describe a remarkably similar ordeal: They meet someone who presents himself as a government agent at the airport, bypass immigration, move to a house or hotel that quickly feels like a prison, and are eventually pressured to leave the country. For the Eritreans, it is from Rwanda to Uganda. For Sudanese, it is from Uganda to South Sudan or Sudan. The process appears designed not just to discard unwanted refugees, but to shield the Israeli, Rwandan, and Ugandan governments from any political or legal accountability.

While a handful of the Eritreans and Sudanese have managed to maneuver or mislead their way into asylum in Rwanda or Uganda, and dozens more live in a stateless limbo in the Ugandan capital of Kampala, most have given in to the pressure to leave those countries, making dangerous illegal border crossings that leave them vulnerable to blackmail and physical abuse at the hands of smugglers and security forces. Some have continued north to Sudan or Libya in an effort to reach Europe. A few have been captured and killed by Islamic State fighters or drowned on the treacherous Mediterranean crossing.

Officials across several relevant ministries in Israel, Rwanda, and Uganda all issued denials or refused repeated requests for comment. But the nearly identical experiences of asylum-seekers arriving in Rwanda and Uganda, as well as their ability to bypass standard immigration channels

and occasionally procure official documents from their handlers, suggests a level of government knowledge, if not direct involvement, in all three capitals.

Semene fled Eritrea in 2007, after four years in the country's military. Service there is compulsory and it can stretch on indefinitely. Instead of training, conscripts are often forced to work on their commanders' private farms or for state-owned businesses. The conditions are so restrictive and the compensation so negligible that in 2016 a U.N. Human Rights Council report on the country determined that “Eritrean officials have committed the crime of enslavement … in a persistent, widespread and systematic manner.” During his four years of service, Semene, a small, slight man with an easy smile, was allowed to visit his family only once.

Semene is a pseudonym. Life under military dictatorship instilled in him a deep sense of caution, and he is hesitant to share too many details about his past in case security forces target his family members who still live in Eritrea. Risking imprisonment and possible execution there, he ran — first to a refugee camp in Sudan, where he faced constant shortages of food and water, and then to Egypt. Finding the environment for refugees there only marginally better, he paid smugglers $2,800 to take him across Sinai into Israel. He knew little about the country, except that it was a democracy. “Simply, I try my luck,” he said.

And finally, luck seemed to be on his side. In 2008, Israeli authorities issued him a visa that was renewable every six months.

He found a job stocking groceries at a Tel Aviv shop, and applied for official refugee status. “I adopt the place,” he told me, including learning Hebrew. “I adopt their food. I know the language. I see Israel as my country.”

Thousands more asylumseekers like Semene continued to arrive — mostly from Eritrea, but also from Sudan, including hundreds fleeing a governmentperpetrated genocide in the country's Darfur region. By 2012, a leading Israeli politician was

denouncing the asylum-seekers as “a cancer in our body” and residents of south Tel Aviv were organizing protests against them.

That same year, the minister of interior suggested making “their lives miserable” in order to dissuade even more from coming.

One way the Israeli government did just that was by erecting a sprawling detention center for asylum-seekers in the middle of the Negev Desert. Operated by the Israel Prison Service (IPS), Holot — which means “sand” in Hebrew — now holds more than 3,000 male asylum-seekers, who had previously been allowed to live and (unofficially) work while they awaited a decision on their refugee applications. Most detainees said they learned they had been randomly chosen to relocate to Holot only when they attempted to renew their visas. They were given days to report to the facility, where they can legally be held for up to a year. Some politicians are pushing to make the sentence indefinite.

Semene was summoned to Holot in early 2014. “It's really a prison,” is how he described what appears on the outside to be a beleaguered tent city. I made two visits to the facility, though I was not allowed to enter. Instead, I sat with detainees outside the chain-link fence topped with razor wire, as they described conditions inside.

They live 10 to a room and though they can come and go from the facility, they are required to check in with authorities once per day.

Failure to do so earns a short stint in a nearby maximum-security prison. Residents are not allowed to work or even to bring food brought by friends or family members into Holot. With the nearest town hours away, they spend most of their time sitting at the makeshift restaurants they have constructed near the entrance to the camp. IPS authorities regularly tear them down, but the detainees keep rebuilding them.

To Semene, the restrictions of Holot, combined with the monotony of life there, seemed designed to break the occupants — men who had previously survived murderous raids, the deprivations of refugee camps, and, in some cases, torture. There is limited assistance for people managing

chronic health conditions or in obvious need of mental healthcare. Instead, they are left to wander the desert, overseen only by their fellow inmates. (IPS did not respond to multiple requests for comment.) Semene remembers becoming so distressed by the treatment one day that he began pleading with a guard: “We are human. Treat us as a human,” he said.

Then, after he had been locked away for seven months, the authorities seemed to offer him a lifeline: Leaflets from the Israeli Population and Immigration Authority started to appear within the facility, saying that Israel had secured an arrangement with other countries willing to accept asylum-seekers. Anyone who agreed to a transfer would receive travel documents, a free one-way plane ticket to a yet-unnamed country, and $3,500. “On the first day of arrival in the country, you will be placed in a hotel.

Everything that you need — work and living permit — will be given to you,” the flyer read, according to a translation provided by the UNHCR office in TelAviv.

Soon, the guards at Holot began whispering to the asylum-seekers that the third countries were Rwanda for Eritreans and Uganda for the Sudanese. There was no explanation for the division. The Israeli government has never officially confirmed the two countries involved, explaining in various legal settings that the agreements prevent them from doing so. “We do not comment in the media on those issues or on our relations with third countries,” a spokesperson for the Ministry of ForeignAffairs said in an email.

Semene was among those who jumped at the opportunity. “You close your eyes and choose,” was how he explained it to me. In the weeks leading up to his departure in late 2014, he was summoned to meet with an Israeli immigration officer, who presented him with an Israeli travel document filled out with his name, date of birth, and — though he had no passport — a passport number. The laissezpasser was valid for two weeks, from Dec. 14 to Dec. 28, 2014.

The official also showed him a letter, allegedly from the Rwandan government, guaranteeing that he To be contd. in the next edition.

Officials across several relevant ministries in Israel, Rwanda, and Uganda all issued denials or refused repeated requests for comment. But the nearly identical experiences of asylum-seekers arriving in Rwanda and Uganda, as well as their ability to bypass standard immigration channels and occasionally procure official documents from their handlers, suggests a level of government knowledge, if not direct involvement, in all three capitals.

PATHFINDER International, July 2017 | 9

MAGAZINE

Isaias Afwerki — Eritrean President

Rehabilitation of Africa’s most isolated Dictatorship: Eritrea’s coming ...

BY Tom Gardner ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia

T

wo recent and seemingly incongruous events may one day be seen as symbolic turning points for Eritrea, an authoritarian, one-party state often referred to as Africa's hermit kingdom. The first was a bloody clash on Eritrea's border with Ethiopia in June 2016, which left hundreds of people dead and brought back memories of the devastating 1998-2000 war between the two archenemies. The second was an academic conference in the Eritrean capital of Asmara in July, the first of its kind in 15 years. Visiting academics were shocked by the relative freedom for debate — on everything from women's rights to foreign policy — in the notoriously repressive state.

“It was as much a political event as an academic event,” said Harry Verhoeven, an assistant professor at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service in Qatar who attended the conference. “It was remarkable — by regional standards and certainly by Eritrean standards.”

These apparently contradictory episodes were in fact both subplots of the same story: Eritrea's gradual emergence from more than a decade of international isolation and the uncertain attempts to come to terms with that shift by its rival n e i g h b o r, E t h i o p i a . T h e conference indicated that the Eritrean government is coming tentatively in from the cold; the border war showed that Ethiopia is worried that a rehabilitated Eritrea could threaten its regional dominance. Together, the two events demonstrated that the 17year-old status quo of “no peace, no war” is coming undone.

In April, Ethiopia announced that it is working on a new policy toward its Red Sea neighbor. The details are still emerging, but one thing is clear: The government recognizes that its strategy of containment, imposed on Eritrea after the end of the border war in 2000 and ratcheted up with a U.N. arms embargo in 2009, has failed.

For the first time in years, there is serious talk of a change of course inAddisAbaba.

The U.N. sanctions regime is dependent on support from the international community, which is

Could that spark a shooting war with Ethiopia? gradually eroding. The sanctions were always controversial for singling out Eritrea as a uniquely bad actor in a region of bad actors.

Now there is growing consensus at the United Nations that the main justification for the sanctions no longer applies: There is no evidence that Eritrea is still supporting al-Shabab militants in Somalia, and though it continues to support armed opposition groups in the region — notably in Ethiopia — its neighbors do as well.

Ethiopia may be able to stave off a softening — or lifting — of the sanctions until the end of 2018, when its term as a nonpermanent member of the U.N. Security Council is slated to end. Tensions between Eritrea and Djibouti, which have spiked in the past week following Qatar's decision to remove its peacekeepers from the troubled border between the two countries, may well strengthen Ethiopia's case in the short term. But in the long run it will struggle to persuade other members to continue the status quo without the backing of the United States, which now that President Barack Obama — and in particular his national security

advisor, Susan Rice, who was seen as implacably hostile to the Eritrean regime — has departed may be less inclined to keep Asmara in the penalty box.

“They didn't have an inch of space when she was there,” Bronwyn Bruton, the deputy director of the Africa Center at the Atlantic Council in Washington, D.C., said of Rice. Now that Donald Trump is in office, “all the African strongmen are rejoicing,” she added.

Wider winds are blowing in Eritrea's favor, too. The war in Yemen, which is less than 70 miles away across the Red Sea, has sparked a rush on Eritrean coastal real estate by Gulf states looking to base their troops there. For example, the United Arab Emirates has been leasing the port of Assab since 2015 and is reportedly building a military base there. Meanwhile, some 400 Eritrean troops are reportedly fighting as part of the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen, in return for which Asmara has received fuel and finance.

“The Gulf countries have repositioned Eritrea in the geopolitical context of the Horn in quite a remarkable way,” said

Kjetil Tronvoll, a senior partner at the International Law and Policy Institute in Norway.

Meanwhile, the migration crisis has spurred renewed engagement by the European Union, which is desperate to stem the flow of refugees and migrants across the Mediterranean. Eritrea was Africa's largest single source of refugees to Europe from 2014 to 2016, a distinction that won President Isaias Afwerki, who has been in power since 1993, an additional source of income. In 2015, the EU approved a 200 million euro aid package for Eritrea, though it has yet to disburse all the funds. This came on top of promises of training for the judiciary and security services designed to combat trafficking.

Individual European countries and humanitarian agencies are also stepping up engagement.

Germany has resumed technical assistance programs while Britain's Department for International Development is planning to open an office in Asmara. U.S. State Department officials, who long avoided the country, have started visiting again. “The wall that the Ethiopians had carefully erected

has frankly crumbled,” said Martin Plaut, the author of Understanding Eritrea. “Everybody seems to be queuing up to love them.”

Most unnervingly from the Ethiopian perspective is Eritrea's strengthening relationship with Egypt, Ethiopia's historic rival and now the closest thing Eritrea has to a regional ally. Addis Ababa accuses Cairo of working with Eritrea to support armed groups that have attempted to sabotage the construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, the continent's largest hydroelectric project, which Egypt regards as an existential threat because of its dependence on the Nile River's downstream waters.

High-level exchanges between Asmara and Cairo have intensified in recent months.Afwerki traveled to Egypt in November to meet President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, and Eritrea's foreign minister held talks with his Egyptian counterpart in May. Multiple Egyptian delegations have descended on Asmara, fueling rumors of a potential Egyptian air base in Eritrea. Such a provocation

Turn to page 15

Back in the day: Fundamental causes of 19th Century Yoruba Wars

By J. F. Ade Ajayi in War and Peace in Yorubaland (1793-1893)

I

n the Chapter entitled “The Aftermath of the Fall of Old Oyo” in Vol.11 of the LONGMAN History of West Africa(ed. Ajayi and Crowder), it was suggested that although Yorubaland did not constitute a single political entity, it constituted a political system built around the ideology of a common origin of all Yoruba Obas at Ife, and the military power of the Old Oyo Empire; that the 19th century wars were essentially a chain reaction following not only the military decline of the Old Oyo Empire but the total collapse of the Old Oyo monarchy; and that the fundamental issue that needs to be explained is this collapse of the monarchy that had lasted some three centuries. It was this collapse that can explain why the revolt of Kakanfo Afonja became uncon-trollable, why the ritual

suicide of Awole, Adebo and Maku in quick succession led to an interregnum of almost 20 years after which the restoration of the monarchy became virtually impossible.

I have suggested that the external factors which used to form the basis of explanation — the involvement of Oyo chiefs in the slave trade and the intervention of Fulani Jihadists — cannot fully explain this internal collapse of the Old Oyo monarchy; that the collapse was not sudden and that a careful reading of Samuel Johnson's narrative shows that no Alaafin of the 18th century died a natural death; that only Ojigi at the beginning of the century and Abiodun at the end can be regarded as significant rulers; that gradually the real military and

political leaders became the Basorun such as YauYamba, Jambu and Gaha, and the Kakanfo and other Eso such as Oyabi and Afonja; and that the effort of Abiodun to stem the tide proved worse than unsuccessful.

The challenge in this paper is to attempt to go beyond the main historical events and try to identify fundamental issues that might explain the chain of events . That leads us into speculative and philosophical explanations which some will regard as outside the purview of historians and others will hail as the only effort worthy of the attention of serious historians. The inevitability with which one war provoked another, the helplessness of mortals as they wished to retain control over the events and yet saw again and again

their hopes on lasting peace come to naught until the external power of the new gods, foretold in fables and Ifa prescriptions, had to be invoked. Such events certainly call for a search for fundamental causes. A few lines of inquiry are suggested.

DEMOGRAPHY That perhaps in spite of the slave trade, the population of Yorubaland had been rising to a point of explosion relative to available agricultural technology, of slaves from outside, and a century or more of absence of devastating internal wars; that this increased the tension in the metropolitan province of Oyo and other places, and helps to explain the degree of urbanization, the Turn to page 15

10 | PATHFINDER International, July 2017

MAGAZINE In these days when Nigeria is faced with heightening tensions occasioned by challenges from the North East to North Central to the East to the Niger Delta made more catastrophic by rampaging Fulani Herdsmen, be they Nigerians or not and solutions offered by way of secession or Restructuring, “Pathfinder International” reproduces Chief Obafemi Awolowo's Speech made to the Western Leaders of thought, in Ibadan, 1st May, 1967 at the time of an impending war against the Eastern Region. The solution suggested in the Speech, if adhered to, would not only have prevented the unnecessary war but also lay the foundation for peace and development of Nigeria. The Speech is as much relevant now as then, and provides a pointer towards a possible solution.

l

late Chief Obafemi Awolowo

Power and Politics In Nigeria

T

he aim of a leader should be the welfare of the people whom he leads. I have used 'welfare' to denote the physical, mental and spiritual well-being of the people. With this aim fixed unflinchingly and unchangeably before my eyes I consider it my duty to Yoruba people in particular and to Nigerians in general, to place four imperatives before you this morning. Two of them are categorical and two are conditional. Only a peaceful solution must be found to arrest the present worsening stalemate and restore normalcy.

The Eastern Region must be encouraged to remain part of the Federation. If the Eastern Region is allowed by acts of omission or commission to secede from or opt out of Nigeria, then the Western Region and Lagos must also stay out of the Federation. The people of Western Nigeria and Lagos should participate in the ad hoc committee or any similar body only on the basis of absolute equality with the other regions of the Federation.

I would like to comment briefly on these four imperatives. There has, of late, been a good deal of sabre rattling in some parts of the country. Those who advocate the use force for the settlement of our present problems should stop a little and reflect. I can see no vital and abiding principle involved in any war between the North and the East. If the East attacked the North, it would be for purpose of revenge pure and simple. Any claim to the contrary would be untenable. If it is claimed that such a war is being waged for the purpose of recovering the real and personal properties left behind in the North by Easterners two insuperable points are obvious. Firstly, the personal effects left behind by Easterners have been wholly looted or destroyed, and can no longer be physically recovered. Secondly, since the real properties are immovable in case of recovery of them can only be by means of forcible military occupation of those parts of the North in which these properties are situated. On the other hand, if the North attacked the East, it could only be for the purpose of further strengthening and entrenching its position of dominance in the country.

If it is claimed that an attack on the East is going to be launched by the Federal Government and not by the North as such and that it is designed to ensure the unity and integrity of the Federation, two other insuperable points also become obvious.

First, if a war against the East becomes a necessity it must be agreed to unanimously by the remaining units of the Federation. In this connection, the West, Mid-West and Lagos have declared their implacable opposition to the use of force in solving the present problem. In the face of such declarations by three out of remaining four territories of Nigeria, a war against the East could only be a war favored by the North alone. Second, if the true purpose of such a

war is to preserve the unity and integrity of the Federation, then these ends can be achieved by the very simple devices of implementing the recommendation of the committee which met on August 9 1966, as reaffirmed by a decision of the military leaders at Aburi on January 5 1967 as well as by accepting such of the demands of the East, West, Mid-West and Lagos as are manifestly reasonable, and essential for assuring harmonious relationships and peaceful co-existence between them and their brothers and sisters in the North.

Some knowledgeable persons have likened an attack on the East to Lincoln's war against the southern states in America.

Two vital factors distinguish Lincoln’s campaign from the one now being contemplated in Nigeria. The first is that the American civil war was aimed at the abolition of slavery — that is the liberation of millions of Negroes who were then still being used as chattels and worse than domestic animals. The second factor is that Lincoln and others in the northern states were English-speaking people waging a war of good conscience and humanity against their fellow nationals who were also English speaking. A war against the East in which Northern soldiers are predominant, will only unite the Easterners or the Ibos against their attackers, strengthen them in their belief that they are not wanted by the majority of their fellow-Nigerians, and finally push them out of the Federation.

We have been told that an act of secession on the part of the East would be a signal, in the first instance, for the creation of the COR state by decree, which would be backed, if need be, by the use of force. With great respect, I have some dissenting observations to make on this declaration. There are 11 national or linguistic groups in the COR areas with a total population of 5.3 millions.

These national groups are as distinct from one another as the Ibos are distinct from them or from the Yorubas or Hausas. Of the 11, the Efik/Ibibio/Annang national group are 3.2 million strong as against the Ijaws who are only about 700,000 strong.

Ostensibly, the remaining nine national Turn to page 11

“

l

Vice President Yemi Osibajo

On behalf of this coalition and all the peace-loving people of Northern Nigeria, we begin this letter by commending your efforts towards finding a lasting solution to the lingering Igbo-induced crisis that is undoubtedly overheating the polity.

We sincerely believe Your Excellency's good intentions as shown by your prompt and genuine actions towards ensuring peace and stability in holding talks with leaders of the North and the South-East.

Though we do not doubt Your Excellency's bona fide concerns for the peaceful resolution of the crises, we nevertheless have reservations as to the efficacy of this approach in ensuring lasting solutions.

Our doubts are informed by the following historical antecedents that have characterized the behavior and conduct of the Igbo in Nigeria and previous efforts at containing them.

Arewa youths write O Osinbajo n behalf of this coalition and all the peace-loving people of Northern Nigeria, we begin this letter by commending your efforts towards finding a lasting solution to the lingering Igboinduced crisis that is undoubtedly overheating the polity.

We sincerely believe Your Excellency's good intentions as shown by your prompt and genuine actions towards ensuring peace and stability in holding talks with leaders of the North and the South-East.

Though we do not doubt Your Excellency's bona fide concerns for the peaceful resolution of the crises, we nevertheless have reservations as to the efficacy of this approach in ensuring lasting solutions.

Our doubts are informed by the following historical antecedents that have characterized the behavior and conduct of the Igbo in Nigeria and previous efforts at containing them.

PAST EXPERIENCES 1. The Igbo of Eastern Nigeria manifested their hatred for Nigeria's unity barely five years after we gained our independence from the British when on January 15, 1966, their army officers carried out the first-ever mutiny that marked the beginning of a series of crisis which has profoundly altered the course of Nigeria's history.

2. By that ill motivated, cowardly and deliberate action, the Igbo killed many northern officers from the rank of lieutenant colonel upwards and also decapitated the Prime Minister and the political leadership of the Northern and Western regions but left the zenith of Igbo leadership at the Federal level and the Eastern region intact.

3. In line with the Igbo plan, General Aguiyi-Ironsi took advantage of the vacuum and, instead of returning power to the remnants of the First Republic government, he appropriated the coup and attempted to consolidate it for his people.

4. Army officers of the Northern Region were eventually compelled to execute a counter coup on July 29, 1966 following a coordinated series of brazen provocations from the Igbo who taunted northerners on

“

... if a war against the East becomes a necessity it must be agreed to unanimously by the remaining units of the Federation. In this connection, the West, Mid-West and Lagos have declared their implacable opposition to the use of force in solving the present problem.

Though we do not doubt Your Excellency's bona fide concerns for the peaceful resolution of the crises, we nevertheless have reservations as to the efficacy of this approach in ensuring lasting solutions.

”

”

northern streets by mocking the way leaders of the region were slain by the Igbo. This unfortunately resulted in mob action which resulted in the death of many Igbos.

5. And when Lt. Col. Yakubu Gowon, from the North took over as Head of State following the counter coup, the Igbo through Lt. Col. Ojukwu, characteristically refused to recognize Gowon.

5. Ojukwu declared the secession of the Igbo people from Nigeria and the formation of the republic of Biafra on May 30, 1967 resulting in a civil war that led to the tragic deaths of more than 2 million Nigerians.

6. It is important to note here that the Igbo eventually capitulated and conceded defeat in an unconditional surrender, not an armistice, on January 15, 1970 which renders any talk about Biafra at any other time, a repudiation of the terms of that surrender signed by Phillip Effiong and other Biafran leaders.

BIAFRA REINCARNATED 1. In a shot out of the blues, the Igbo have over the last 2 years regrouped and fiercely and openly started discussing Biafra again under Ralph Uwazuruike of the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State Of Biafra MASSOB. 2. This was given greater impetus by a more furious Igbo rogue group called the Indigenous People Of Biafra IPOB under Nnamdi Kanu who even operates an illegal radio station spreading hate and war messages across the nation, calling other ethnic groups all sorts of names and threatening them with violent extermination.

3. The activities of the Igbo under Kanu’s IPOB has grown exponentially ranging from ordering people of other regions out of the South East — particularly the Yorubas and Hausa /Fulani from the South West and the North respectively, to open declaration of the amassing of arms and forceful total shutdown of the entire South-East.

4. KANU and IPOB have declared full allegiance to a “Republic of Biafra” and continue to preach hatred and war virtually every day, and not for once did any Igbo leader call them to order. Instead, many of the leaders including Mr Ike Ekweremadu, the deputy senate president, the most senior elected Igbo, pay Kanu courtesy calls to prove that he is speaking for the entire Igbo.

It is glaring to all that Kanu has serially breached all the terms of his stringent jail conditions in total disregard to the sanctity of our justice system.

5. Even the latest statement by the SouthEast Governors Forum signed by Governor David Umahi of Ebonyi State in a response to the Northern reaction, did not condemn Kanu and Uwazuruike but characterised their action as “peaceful”.

Turn to page 11

PATHFINDER International, July 2017 | 11

MAGAZINE

Power and Politics In Nigeria Contd. from page 10 group number 1.4 millions. But when you have subtracted the Ibo inhabitants from among them, what is left ranges from the Ngennis who number only 8,000 to the Ogonis who are 220,000 strong. A decree creating a COR state without a plebiscite to ascertain the wishes of the peoples in the area, would only amount to subordinating the minority national groups in the state to the dominance of the Efik/Ibibio/Annang national group. It would be perfectly in order to create a Calabar state or a Rivers state by decree, and without a plebiscite. Each is a homogeneous national unit. But before you lump distinct and diverse national units together in one state, the consent of each of them is indispensable. Otherwise, the seed of social disquilibrium in the new state would have been sown.

On the other hand, if the COR State is created by decree after the Eastern Region shall have made its severance from Nigeria effective, we should then be waging an unjust war against a foreign state. It would be an unjust war, because the purpose of it would be to remove 10 minorities in the East from the dominance of the Ibos only to subordinate them to the dominance of the Efik/Ibibio/Annang national group. I think I have said enough to demonstrate that any war against the East, or vice versa, on any count whatsoever, would be an unholy crusade, for which it would be most unjustifiable to shed a drop of Nigerian blood. Therefore, only a peaceful solution must be found, and quickly too to arrest the present rapidly deteriorating stalemate and restore normalcy.

With regard to the second categorical imperative, it is my considered view that whilst some of the demands of the East are excessive within the context of a Nigerian union, most of such demands are not only wellfounded, but are designed for smooth and steady association amongst the various national units of Nigeria.

The dependence of the Federal Government on financial contributions from the regions? These and other such like demands I do not support. Demands such as these, if accepted, will lead surely to the complete disintegration of the Federation which is not in the interest of our people. But I wholeheartedly support the following demands among others, which we consider reasonable and most of which are already embodied in our memoranda to the Ad Hoc Committee…. l That revenue should be allocated strictly on the basis of derivation; that is to say after the Federal Government has deducted its own share for its own services the rest should be allocated to the regions to which they are attributable. l That the existing public debt of the Federation should become the responsibility of the regions on the basis of the location of the projects in respect of each debt whether internal or external. l That each region should have and control its own militia and police force. l That, with immediate effect, all military personnel should be posted to their regions of origin….

If we are to live in harmony one with another as Nigerians it is imperative that these demands and others which are not related, should be met without further delay by those who have hitherto resisted them. To those who may argue that the acceptance of these demands will amount to transforming Nigeria into a federation with a weak central government, my comment is that any link however tenuous, which keeps the East in the Nigerian union, is better in my view than no link at all.

Before the Western delegates went to Lagos to attend the meetings of the ad hoc

“

With regard to the second categorical imperative, it is my considered view that whilst some of the demands of the East are excessive within the context of a Nigerian union, most of such demands are not only wellfounded, but are designed for smooth and steady association amongst the various national units of Nigeria.

”

committee, they were given a clear mandate that if any region should opt out of the Federation of Nigeria, then the Federation should be considered to be at an end, and that the Western Region and Lagos should also opt out of it. It would then be up to Western Nigeria and Lagos as an independent sovereign state to enter into association with any of the Nigerian units of its own choosing, and on terms mutually acceptable to them. I see no reason for departing from this mandate. If any region in Nigeria considers itself strong enough to compel us to enter into association with it on its own terms, I would only wish such a region luck.

But such luck, I must warn, will, in the long run be no better than that which has attended the doings of all colonial powers down the ages. This much I must say in addition, on this point. We have neither military might nor the overwhelming advantage of numbers here in Western Nigeria and Lagos.

But we have justice of a noble and imperishable cause on our side, namely: the right of a people to unfettered selfdetermination. If this is so, then God is on our side, and if God is with us then we have nothing whatsoever in this world to fear.

The fourth imperative, and the second conditional one has been fully dealt with in my recent letter to the Military Governor of Western Nigeria, Col. Robert Adebayo, and in the representation which your deputation made last year to the head of the Federal Military Government, Lt. Col. Yakubu Gowon. As a matter of fact, as far back as November last year a smaller meeting of leaders of thought in this Region decided that unless certain things were done, we would no longer participate in the meeting of the ad hoc committee. But since then, not even one of our legitimate requests has been granted. I will, therefore, take no more of your time in making further comments on a point with which you are well familiar. As soon as our humble and earnest requests are met, I shall be ready to take my place on the ad hoc committee. But certainly, not before.

In closing, I have this piece of advice to give. In order to resolve amiably and in the best interests of all Nigerians certain attributes are required on the part of Nigerian leaders, military as well as nonmilitary leaders alike, namely: vision, realism and unselfishness. But above all , what will keep Nigerian leaders in the North and East unwaveringly in the path of wisdom, realism and moderation is courage and steadfastness on the part of Yoruba people in the course of what they sincerely believe to be right, equitable and just. In the past five years we in the West and Lagos have shown that we possess these qualities in a large measure. If we demonstrate them again as we did in the past, calmly and heroically, we will save Nigeria from further bloodshed and imminent wreck and, at the same time, preserve our freedom and selfrespect into the bargain.

May God rule and guide our deliberations here, and endow all the Nigerian leaders with the vision, realism, and unselfishness as well as courage and steadfastness in the course of truth, which the present circumstances demand. n

Arewa Youths write Osinbajo Contd. from page 10

6. While all this is going on, neither the Igbo political and cultural leaders nor other regional leaders of the North or West nor the international community or any religious body ever found it necessary to call these renegade groups to order or in the very least admonish their leaders to do so.

Furthermore, none of the Igbo leaders holding various positions in this government ever disowned IPOB or condemned its operations until lately with Governor Rochas Okorocha’s mild condemnation after the Kaduna Declaration by our Coalition.

GROUNDS FOR SUSPICION Given the unrepentant antecedents exhibited by the Igbo as highlighted above, we strongly believe that the gruesome picture that the Biafran agitation represents is beyond a few people showcasing to Your Excellency that the Igbo will eventually heed the call for peace and desist from their dangerous campaign against Nigeria.

The seed of hate planted in the name of Biafra is evidently so deep that the ongoing interaction between you and the leaders from the South East can not in our well informed opinion douse or address the underlying deep seated underlying problems.

We base our concerns on the following grounds.

1. Despite the fact that the Igbo have been the most accommodated and tolerated of all the ethnic groups of Nigeria, the renewed incessant, spiteful and vile threats and insults on Northern leaders and their people, culture and religions that are the targets of this venomous agitation for Biafra, can hardly be addressed through a series of two hours dialogues.

2. As if to prove this, barely hours after Your Excellency's meeting with the SouthEast leaders, the Biafran Igbo openly disowned the leaders and dissociated themselves from the meeting.

3. More disturbingly, Kanu has openly claimed that the Biafran agitators have amassed arms in readiness for a war of secession which is quite conceivable given the fact that since 2009, catches of dangerous weapons routinely smuggled into the country and occasionally intercepted by the Nigerian authorities , were all traced to Igbo sources.

4. The situation continues to be baffling and alarming and therefore unacceptable — especially with the Igbo political and opinion leaders openly legitimizing the violent comments, insults, threats, hate speeches and call to anarchy that the Biafrans led by Nnamdi Kanu are making against the North and the Nigerian state in general.

5. South-East leaders have instead, enthusiastically given Kanu the platform, patronage and symbolic legitimacy through an ignominious display of homage, reception and open embrace.

OUR CONCERNS 1. Concerned by the fact that the Biafrans have confessed to arming themselves for a violent breakup, we feel that it is risky for the rest of the country particularly the North to go on pretending that it is safe for us to cohabitate with the Igbos given how deeply they are entrenched in our societies .

2. And since evidently the Igbo have not been sufficiently humbled by their self imposed bloody civil violence of 1966, we are strongly concerned that nothing short of granting their Biafran dream will suffice.

3. And since the Igbo have virtually infiltrated every nook and cranny of Northern Nigeria where they have been received with open armsas fellow

compatriots, we strongly believe that the region is no longer safe and secure in the light of the unfolding threats and the fact that for a long time, the Igbo have gone to extra ordinary lengths to ensure that in their domain in the South East, Northerners and Westerners are as much as possible disenfranchised from owning any businesses whereas in Kano alone, they own not less than 100, 000 shops across all the business districts.

4. That since the younger generation of Nigerians makes up for more than 60 percent of the nation's population, it is our hope that they inherit this country in better shape so that they can build a much better future for themselves and their offsprings in an atmosphere that is devoid of anarchy, hate, suspicion and negativity that characterize the polarized, and clearly irreconcilable differences forced on us by the Biafran Igbos.

5. To make a bad situation even worse, their leaders have continued to show support for this treacherous cause and thus giving credence to our concern that what they say against us is what they truly mean and intend - “Kill everyone in the Zoo” (North). Your Excellency, we cannot afford to discard this as mere mischief as the utterances that caused the terrible Rwandan genocide still resonates in our minds.

6. Lastly Sir, it is quite impossible to expect that other nationalities would simply stand by and watch while a certain ethnic group perpetrates all the above heinous misconducts that involve threats, call to violence and extermination, insults and songs of war without responding.

OUR STAND While we unequivocally restate that we are not waging war or calling anyone to violence, we nevertheless are also not willing to continue tolerating the malicious campaign and threats of war that the Igbos have continued to wage against us.

Neither can we afford to continue giving the keys to our cities to a people whose utterances, plans and arrangements are clearly geared towards war and anarchy.

We therefore demand that the only enduring solution to this scourge that is being visited on the nation is complete separation of the states presently agitating for Biafra from the Federal Republic of Nigeria through a peaceful political process by: 1.

Taking steps to facilitate the actualization of the Biafran nation in line with the principle of self-determination as an integral part of contemporary customary international law.

2. The principle of self-determination has, since world war II become a part of the United Nations Charter which states in Article 1(2), that one of the purposes of the UN is “to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples.

Turn to page 12

“

The activities of the Igbo under Kanu’s IPOB has grown exponentially ranging from ordering people of other regions out of the South East — particularly the Yorubas and Hausa /Fulani from the South West and the North re s p e c t i v e l y, t o o p e n declaration of the amassing of a r m s a n d f o rc e f u l t o t a l shutdown of the entire SouthEast.

”

12 | PATHFINDER International, July 2017

MAGAZINE Arewa Youths write Osinbajo Statement Contd. from page 11 3. We submit that this protocol envisages that people of any nation have the right to self-determination, and although the Charter did not categorically impose direct legal obligations on member States; it implies that member States allow agitating or minority groups to self-govern as much as possible.

4. This principle of self-determination has since been espoused in two additional treaties: The United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and the United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 1 of both international documents promote and protect the right of a people to selfdetermination. State parties to these international documents are obliged to uphold the primacy and realization of this right as it cements the international legal philosophy that gives a people the right to self-determination.

4. As the Igbo agitations persist and assume threatening dimensions, we submit that there is need to ensure that they are given the opportunity to exercise the right to self-determination as entrenched under the aforementioned international statutes to which Nigeria is a signatory.

PRAYERS 1.

Aware that the right of selfdetermination in international law is the legal right for a “people” that allows them to attain a certain degree of autonomy from a sovereign state through a legitimate political process, we strongly demand for a referendum to take place in a politically sane atmosphere where all parties will have a democratic voice over their future and the future of the nation.

2. The Igbo from all over the country and in the Diaspora should be advised to converge in their region in the South-East for a plebiscite to be organized and conducted by the United Nations and other regional bodies for them to categorically to decide between remaining part of Nigeria or having their separate country.

3. That government should at the end of the plebiscite implement whatever is agreed and resolved in order to finally put this matter to rest.

4. Lastly, we pray His Excellency to study the references forwarded with this letter dispassionately and decide who is more in the wrong between those who openly pledge allegiance to a country other than Nigeria backing it up with persistent threats of war and those of us whose allegiance remains with the Nigerian state but simply urge that the secessionists be allowed to actualize their dream peacefully throw universally entrenched democratic options.

CONCLUSION Your Excellency, we want to reiterate our high respect for your office and acknowledge the efforts you are making to lower tensions. We assure you, as wellbrought up northerners, we listen to the advise and cautions of our elders, and in particular, their concerns that we do not create the impression that any Igbo or any Nigerian will be harmed in the North. We assure you that we will defend the rights of every Nigerian to live in peace and have their rights protected.

While we do not see this clamor for Biafra as an issue over which a single drop of blood should be shed, we at the same time, insist that the Igbo be allowed to have their Biafra and for them to vacate our land peacefully so that our dear country Nigeria could finally enjoy lasting peace and stability.

Long Live the Federal Republic of Nigeria. n SIGNED Amb.Shettima Yerima; Joshua Viashman; Aminu Adam; Abdul-Azeez Suleiman; Nastura Ashir Sharif

by Ola Oni Center in Commemoration of “June 12” “

This exercise of people’s power was given further and stronger expression with the unrelenting resistance put up by popular forces against the annulment of the results of that election by the Babangida led dictator-ship. The Shonekan led Interim contraption met a similar fate in the hands of our people who actively demonstrated their hostility on the streets and through other forms of political action. General Abacha’s bestiality was unable to break the resolve of determined sections of of our people who responded with a low intensity Warfare till the end!

”

l

Chief M.K.O. Abiola — Winner of the June 12, 1993 General Election

O

n this 24th Anniversary of the June 12,1993 Presidential elections, we salute the people of Nigeria and wish ourselves a happier and brighter future of Democratic life in an atmosphere of Justice, Fairness and Equity.

This year's edition of the commemoration of that historic event offers all lovers of democracy in our land a golden opportunity to reflect deeply on the State of the Union with particular focus on the clear danger to our Democratic existence as well as

“

We call on citizens of Nigeria at home and abroad to put on our thinking caps and begin to act as Subjects of History rather than Objects who are always at the receiving end of a manipulating ruling elite. We must remember that the historical significance of June 12 we are commemorating today lies in the Power of Citizen's Action which was demonstrated on that day by voters across the country who trooped out en masse to the polling booths to end military dictatorship

”

peaceful and progressive co-existence.

We have in recent times been hearing of rumors of dark plots by certain anti democratic forces against a dispensation that many advocates of genuine democracy correctly view as more civil than Democratic in content and practice.

We are also watching in alarm the rising tide of inter - ethnic acrimony and thinly veiled threats of bloodshed that may degenerate into yet another full scale civil war.

We call on citizens of Nigeria at home and abroad to put on our thinking caps and begin to act as Subjects of History rather than Objects who are always at the receiving end of a manipulating ruling elite.

We must remember that the historical significance of June 12 we are commemorating today lies in the Power of Citizen's Action which was demonstrated on that day by voters across the country who trooped out en masse to the polling booths to end military dictatorship.

This exercise of people’s power was given further and stronger expression with the unrelenting resistance put up by popular forces against the annulment of the results of that election by the Babangida led dictator-ship.The Shonekan led Interim contraption met a similar fate in the hands of our people who actively demonstrated their hostility on the streets and through other forms of political action. General Abacha’s bestiality was unable to break the resolve of determined sections of of our people who responded with a low intensity Warfare till the end!

Clearly then,the current Democratic

lease of life (limited as it is though) that we are enjoying was not handed down by a group of benevolent do-gooders ! It was the product of the sweat and blood of a people who refused to be conquered! It is therefore our historic duty to scrupulously and jealously guard it against any and all conspiratorial schemers that may want to drag Us back to a barbarous past. Our battle -cry must be: Never Again! Rather than acquiesce to its truncation, we must raise the bar by struggling for the deepening of Democratic Governance in our land!

Intimately related to the issue of Popular struggle for Democracy which the June 12 saga signifies is the yet to be resolved National Question. Again,we recall that one of the major injuries inflicted on our political architecture as a multi-ethnic country by decades of military rule was the de-federalisation of the polity.

While it is true that the Federal arrangement in place at independence was not without flaws as the Tiv Riots and the federal take-over of the government of The Western Region clearly proved,the Unitarisation of the country became complete under military rule which recreated Nigeria after its Unified command structure and total uniformity ethos. Gone with the democratic order was the relative autonomy of the regions each of which had it’s regional constitution and judicature that governed it's internal affairs. Gone also was the fiscal autonomy that allowed each of the constituent units to keep a substantial portion of resources derived from productive activities within its territories.

The central authority became virtually the sole authority.

Not surprisingly, on the two or three occasions, the military disengaged from direct exercise of political power, it did so on its own terms by handing over to its preferred party under a constitutional order authored by it but dishonestly prefaced with the claim that “We The People” gave it to ourselves! Yet this is a country of many nations lacking in a basic consensus arrived at vide several layers of engagement! It is the absence of this political and constitutional engagement or rather the failure or refusal of the elites and the ordinary people alike to confront this Imperative that is impeding our progress, and threatening to throw us into a meaningless and needless civil war.

This is the route we must take. It is the route to the peaceful! re-federalisation of Nigeria. n

“ ”

PATHFINDER International, July 2017 | 13

MAGAZINE

How democratic is the Nigerian 1999 Constitution? (1)

By Ropo Sekoni

T

here are basic issues if we want a strong Federal Government. The earlier we restructure the stronger we will be, and if we don’t restructure, or wait for too long, we are attempting disintegration — Chukwuemeka Ezeife The recent announcement that the 8th NASS is about to round up on its efforts to amend the country’s constitution has motivated a return to a topic that this column had discussed extensively in the past, especially during the era of Umaru Yar’Adua and Goodluck Jonathan. But the essays under this title are slightly different in style, and perhaps, in substance from those that appeared six years ago on this page. The controlling thesis for the series is that, given the historical, philosophical, political, and sociological evolution of the peoples that constitute today's Nigeria, the 1999 Constitution bequeathed to the country by the last of the country's military dictator in 1999 is not democratic enough to make the multination republic realize its huge potential.

If you are expecting to hear legal arguments in the following sentences, you should not bother to read them. Constitutional legalism is just one aspect of any country’s constitution. It has relevance after a documentary constitution has been duly established, not before it. In short, the series is not about constitutionalism but ‘constitutionalisation,’ the making of constitutions.

Several sharper minds had written ad nauseam from the perspective of lawyers about the 1999 constitution. One argument that undergirds the series is that Nigeria has not had a settled or agreed constitution in the 1999 one that has guided operations of government since the advent of the 4th Republic. Consequently, there is still a lot of space for discussion of politics of constitution making, such as the one that will preoccupy this column for the next few weeks.

I know that it will sound bizarre to many readers that this column has chosen to interrogate the 1999 Constitution, even after many citizens had accepted it as a given.

Of course, members of the current National Assembly now getting ready to finalize discussion on amendments to the constitution are likely to find this piece and others to follow cheeky for several reasons. One, it attempts to derogate from their concept of legislative sovereignty. Second, it seeks to draw the hand of their own legislative clock back. Since sovereignty rests ultimately with the people of any nation-space, it is fit and proper for any citizen who feels that a constitution that circumscribes his or her life to complain about a constitution that purports to represent his or her views without adequate consultation between representatives and citizens.

Other citizens in the last few weeks have been problematizing the constitution in different ways.

Some have been calling for disintegration of the country, to allow their regions develop much more than it could under a

A constitution is a thing antecedent to a government, and a government is only the creature of a constitution…. A constitution is not the act of a government, but of a people constituting a government, and a government without a constitution, is power without a right.—Tom Paine A documentary constitution normally reflects the beliefs and political aspirations of those who have framed it.—Nicholas Sunday We need to bring these nationalities around a conference table to discuss how we are going to live together as one country. As it is today, we are not a nation yet; we are a state — Ben Nwabueze

Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari suffocating constitution or endless complaints about the structure of the polity that the 1999 constitution creates, promotes, and protects. This in a way summarizes the perspective of Professor Ango Abdullahi of the Northern Elders Forum. Others, like the Emir of Kano, have warned their colleagues about the danger for the North in allowing Nigeria to break by continuing to increase the number of illiterate and disempowered citizens in the country. Even many legislators have boasted that they are the only authority that is charged with improving the constitution and in an attempt to silence those calling for a people’s constitution.

Even the Senator Ken Nnamani 24-man Constitutional/Electoral Reform Com-mittee or panel established by President Buhari has been acting as if citizens should be kept at a distance from its efforts. This observation was confirmed by the poorly publicized manner the Nnamani Committee conducted hearings a few weeks ago when it advertised invitation to public hearings on the constitution on the very day the committee was meeting in Abeokuta to receive memoranda from Ekiti, Lagos, Ogun, Ondo, Osun, and Oyo States.

The Buhari presidency will be the second administration during which members of the National Assembly have preoccupied themselves with constitutional amendment. Under Jonathan, they assembled some amendments that did not get Jonathan’s assent. And in the last two years, returning and

new lawmakers have been working at amendments which they now claim are nearing completion. Many citizens have observed that, with little interaction between lawmakers and citizens across the country on what type of constitution citizens prefer, legislators preoccupied with amendment may not be doing this for any reason other than to ensure that they upstage citizens calling for a people's constitution or restructuring.

Furthermore, apart from those who would rather have Nigeria go into fragments than countenance any form of restructuring, top members of the executive shy away from countenancing any demand for replacement of the constitution by General Abdusalaam Abubakar with a properly negotiated constitution by all the constituents of the federation. It will be recalled that the 1999 Constitution was an outcome of debates largely by 24 hand-picked citizens under the leadership of Justice Niki Tobi.

The establishment of Senator Nnamani Panel on constitutional/ electoral reform seems to have added to the culture that this column once described as Arodan (making citizens dissipate energy while giving the impression of doing something purposive).

Shouldn’t the activities of the House, Senate, and the Nnamani Panel in relation to the 1999 Constitution not be enough to make it superfluous for any other group to demand creation of a new constitution? This question will find answers when details of the

amendments carried out by legislators are unearthed and made available to citizens to compare with the duly negotiated constitution agreed to in 1960 and 1963.

The controversy about turning the local governments into autonomous units that are not answerable to the states suggests that limiting ratification of constitutional amendments to states and the president, without calling for people’s referendum on the amendments will amount to creating another elite document.

The original document was created largely in camera and only became public after the general elections of 1999. Citizens, particularly professional politicians in their rush to get out of military rule wound up inheriting a constitution the military had developed during the many decades of their rule.

But not many people ever believe that the claim in the preamble to the 1999 Constitution: “We the PEOPLE of the Federal Republic of Nigeria: Having firmly and solemnly resolved….” is a statement of fact. It was for this reason, among others, that late Abiodun Oki spent the last months of his life pursuing his litigation on the falseness of this claim.

The most basic element in the making of constitutions was absent in the assemblage of the provisions of the 1999 Constitution. Any effort to amend a constitution based on a false premise may not be enough to silence calls for restructuring, constitutional conference, constituent assembly, people’s constitution, etc. Any effort to amend the current constitution without referring it to a referendum will be tantamount to giving further legitimacy to a document that was designed by military dictators bent on saddling citizens with a constitution marked by military identity — unitary, commandstyle system.

The current constitution fails to meet the basic conditions identified

by Tom Paine in the epigraph overleaf: “A constitution is a thing antecedent to a government, and a government is only the creature of a constitution.” In the case of the 1999 Constitution under amendment by lawmakers, a government happens to be a thing antecedent to a constitution and a constitution is the creature of a military government that should not have existed in the first place, because it was never endorsed by the people. For as long as the most important rules governing government-citizen relations remains questionable, as the 1999 Constitution has been since it first came out into the open, there is the likelihood that so much energy will continue to be dissipated on debates about what type of Union the nationalities that constitute Nigeria prefer. Having a properly negotiated constitution remains, even in the 21st century, the core of democracy.

I predict that every multi-lingual or multi-national country with a unitary constitution must either eventually have a federal constitution based on the principles which I have enunciated, or disintegrate, or be perennially afflicted with disharmony and instability —

Obafemi Awolowo, The Peoples’ Republic, 1968.”

I am pleased to see that we are now all agreed that the federal system is, under present conditions, the only sure basis on which Nigeria will remain united. We must recognize our diversity and the peculiar conditions under which the different tribal communities live in this country – Tafawa Balewa, 1957.

Some of the world’s most intractable problems arise when primordial ties are politicized by attempts at national integration.

Minority security is a common good — good for the majority as well as the minority. By designing a constitution to allay the fears of defenseless ethnic subgroups, the framers of a regime-founding compromise can secure the national cooperation necessary for economic prosperity and military independence. Any nation split into “primordially defined groups” must discover a “form competent to contain the country's diversity.” This “form,” once again, is a political constitution in the broad sense — Stephen Holmes, Constitutionalism and Democracy, 1988.

The epigraphs above have been selected to remind readers of the awareness of the ramifications of cultural diversity in the country by some of its founding fathers. The focus of today’s piece is on how Politics of Omission or what Stephen Holmes has characterized as Gag Rule had led to creation in 1999 of a constitution that ignores the importance of consultation, consent, and consensus in respect of the normal nexus between constitution and the citizens it is designed to govern.

Politics of omission is often deployed by those in power. The process allows such groups to filter or shortlist items that can be discussed. It is not unique to constitution making as it can be applied to any political agenda. By keeping certain issues out of consideration by the ruled, members of the ruling group in charge of agenda setting sweep items they consider troubling or volatile out of national discussion.

One aspect of Nigerian polity that has been shaped by politics of omission is the 1999 Constitution although this choice of action had been an abiding aspect of constitution making in the country for a long time. Out of the six constitutions for the country before 1960, only that of 1951 under Governor Macpherson was relatively free from deliberate narrowing of the agenda by the ruling group. Extensive consultations were encouraged at the village, district, divisional, provincial, and regional subnational levels before the national conference that produced the draft of the 1951 Constitution, which became the template for the 1954, 1960, and 1963 constitutions.

The two constitutions written under the supervision of military dictatorship have been shaped by varying degrees of politics of omission or self-censorship.

But it is the current 1999 Constitution that has become a poster child for constitutions created without people’s input in modern times. n To be contd. in the next edition.

14 | PATHFINDER International, June, 2017

NEWS

Voices of Congo’s Girl Child Soldiers M By: Sandra Olsson

ultiple conflicts simmer across eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, further impoverishing already struggling rural communities, trapping children in a web of violence. The conflicts have destroyed communities and created thousands of child soldiers, serving directly on the front lines, or laboring as porters, cooks, and spies.

Up to 40 percent of them are girls.

In 2016, Child Soldiers International interviewed 150 girls formerly associated with some of the country’s multiple armed groups.

The interviews form the basis of our new report, What The Girls Say, released on 19 June — the UN's International Day For Elimination of Sexual Violence in Conflict. It gives a voice to former girl child soldiers, revealing testimo-nies that are rarely heard and often overlooked.

The hope of a better life Of the 150 girls we spoke with, two in three had been abducted by armed groups, while one third had joined ‘voluntarily’. “We heard that we could get money there,” 15-year-old Judith* told us. “I went because I wanted to get enough money to go back to school.” Similar accounts were given by dozens of girls we interviewed in South and North Kivu and Haut-Uéle, pushed into conflict because of financial hardships at home.

It is estimated that only 60 percent of girls complete primary school education (compared to eight in 10 boys). This inability to attend school was a factor in many girls’ decisions to join armed groups; self-defense militias (known locally as Mai-Mai), Joseph Kony’s Lord's Resistance Army and the M23 among them.

“I was pushed out of school because my parents could not pay,” 16-year-old Sara explained. “So instead of roaming aimlessly in town, it was better to go and help them in the bush.” For some though, their motivation for joining was to avenge the death of a friend or family member.

Others did so because their communities were threatened and they sought protection.

“The Mai-Mai were doing bad things all the time,” one girl explained. “They were looting and raping. It became so frightening and impos-sible to live at home.

To protect ourselves, me and five others, three girls and two boys, decided to join them. We walked for two days.”

Abused and exploited as “wives”. However, the hope

of earning money or being protected by armed groups would never materialize.

Physical and sexual abuse, combat, hard labor and constant fear of death are common realities for children and teenagers within Congo’s armed groups.

Girl’s roles are far from limited to the front line and direct fighting. Many are exploited as “wives” for soldiers, or used to carry out various domestic duties, such as looking after babies in the groups. Many will give birth to children of their own, often under very difficult circumstances.

“We were treated like toys,” a 15-year-old girl said. “Lucky were those who only had one man.”

The majority of the girls interviewed said they had suffered sexual abuse while in captivity.

“I was often drugged,” 17-year-old Jeanette recalled. “I would wake up and find myself naked.

They gave us drugs so that we would not get tired of all of them using us.” Such experiences are disturbingly common experiences for women and girls in conflict zones across the world.

The UN’s international day on sexual violence in conflict was launched in 2015. The 19th of June is the anniversary of the adoption of the UN Security Council’s resolution in 2008 that condemned sexual violence as a tactic of war, and a key date for raising awareness of this neglected area of conflict.

“Sexual violence is a brutal form of physical and psychological warfare rooted in the gender inequality existent not only in zones of conflict, but in our everyday personal lives,” UN SecretaryGeneral António Guterres said in a report published to m a r k t h e d a y. “ T h e persistence of such forms of violence undermines peace and security and shatters community and family ties.”

I n 2 0 1 6 , t h e U N ’s Congolese mission, MONUSCO, verified 514 cases of conflict-related sexual violence in Congo – more than a third of the victims were girls aged u n d e r 1 8 . T h e U N ’s Population Fund reported 2,593 cases of sexual violence in “conflict-

“

Freeing girls from armed groups can be an incredibly difficult task. Of the more than 9,000 child soldiers r e l e a s e d b y MONUSCO between 2009 and 2015 in Congo, only seven percent were girls.

”

Congolese Child Soldiers — What future?

affected provinces” during the same period.

MONUSCO has said that non-state armed groups, including various Mai-Mai groups, were responsible for almost 70 percent of the cases.

Freeing girls from armed groups can be an incredibly difficult task. Of the more than 9,000 child soldiers released by MONUSCO between 2009 and 2015 in Congo, only seven percent were girls. For returning girls though, life back among family and community members often brings more suffering.

Stigmatization and rejection is prevalent, with such treatment largely shaped by the fact that they have had sexual relations outside of marriage. “Not two days goes by without neighbors making us feel we have known men,” one girl said. “We are not allowed to associate with their daughters.”

Such discrimination leaves many ostracized in their communities, and deprives them of social and economic capital. As a result, some decide to rejoin the very armed groups that abused them. “If we leave the group, we're going to be targeted, rejected,” one girl told me. “So many girls accept and continue to live with their bush husband.”

Child Soldiers International’s research reveals these issues of stigma and community rejection as the main hurdles in reintegrating many girls formerly associated with armed groups in the c o u n t r y.

Changing attitudes and behaviors towards returning girl soldiers is vitally important.

As an organization, we are now working with the Congolese government, local partner NGOs, the UN, and community leaders to improve the treatment of girls and the assistance provided to them when they return home. We have outlined numerous activities that can be implemented at community level to transform the lives of former girl child soldiers

and the views of family and community members.

Education and economic empowerment Among the initiatives, we believe education can be a very efficient catalyst for such change. Many returning girls are deprived of education, while some don’t have the means to pay, and others are shunned by family members and thus not allowed to return to the classroom.

The desire to return to school was overwhelming among the girls we interviewed in eastern Congo.

One girl said: “If we could go to school, the community would be nicer to us, we would get some consideration. That would help a lot.”

The lack of educational opportunities, perpetuated by community rejection, is heightened by the fact that local NGOs are underfunded and unable to help reintegrate returning child soldiers. We spoke with several NGOs dedicated to assisting child soldiers in the region, but many of them said financial restrictions mean they were unable to help all.

One said they only had funds to help 19 out of 119 children they had identified, while another organization added: “We know that 273 children left armed groups in 2015, [but] we are still waiting for [funds].”

Providing education is costly and there is an urgent need to come up with innovative, low-cost alternatives to reach more girls, for example through literacy and numeracy classes that can be set up using a volunteer teacher after school hours. “A woman who has not studied has no value,” 14-year-old former child soldier Alice told us.

Allowing these children to return to the classroom would not only foster community acceptance but also drive long term economic development, as would providing greater opportunities and resources in agriculture, a predominant livelihood for many in a

region devastated by armed conflicts, where fields have been neglected, animals stolen, and agricultural tools pillaged.

Changing perceptions and helping improve the economic opportunities for Congo’s returning girl soldiers and their communities can hopefully prevent other school-aged children

being drawn into conflict and stop returning girls from rejoining armed groups.

Giving a voice to some of Congo’s girl soldiers also helps raise awareness of their too-often-overlooked role in conflict. By listening to what the girls say, we hope to help bring about change so that more girls in eastern Congo can be reached and successfully reintegrated back into their families and communities.

“I am very pleased to see that there are still people who care about our situation,” one girl added.

“Sometimes, we find ourselves alone without moral support. Thank you.” n *(Names of individuals in this article have been changed to protect their identities).

Sandra Olsson, Program manager at Child Soldiers International, a human rights organization that seeks to end the military recruitment of all children.

Black Man’s Dilemma: Forty Years Later Contd. from Page 4 Second, backwardness in material and moral terms is not in our genes, it is in our choices. And it has always been so even in our pre-slavery and precolonial times. Like other races and kingdoms, the founders of our various political enclaves craved greatness, with very little concern for their subjects.

And while they built great armies to defend their kingdoms and empires, the focus was the king and his coterie of loyal cabinet who enforced the inbuilt constitutional provisions against the excesses of the king. Therefore, the king and the cabinet only had to be in sync. Even this rudiment of protection against excesses was soon rendered obsolete by the colonial powers who needed an authority with effective powers as their proxy.

This model of strong executive with weak opposition led us to independence and it was embraced by the new regional and federal governments. If you can do what you want without the fear of an effective opposition, and if you understand power as an instrument of greatness, then you are most likely to approach your political power in terms of your egoistic interests. Whether in the civilian or military era, this has always been the sad story of our politics. It has not been any different in the last 16 years. It is, therefore, not a surprise that we are not having a breakthrough to modernity.

Oyebola observes that

while Asians, Europeans and Americans are “massively investing their human and material resources in the application of scientific, engineering and technological research, thereby transforming their production, industrial and social welfare systems, Nigeria and other black countries pay minimal attention to research.” The mindset is different here than there. Here Governor Wike prefers to set up “trust fund” for the welfare of pastors in a country where the constitution unambiguously separates church and state, even if the schools in his state are lacking essential equipment and infrastructure.

Chief Oyebola did not just criticize, he also offered suggestions on the way forward if Nigeria and the black race in general will make it to modernity.

Self-discipline, which is grossly lacking in both leaders and followers, is one of his many suggestions.

Corruption, the most dangerous enemy of development, is a cancerous outgrowth of indiscipline. Corruption drains the blood of the national economy, making it too unhealthy to invest adequately in education and research. Yet, originality of thought in governance and development, which Oyebola emphasized as essential for a break-through, can only be realized through heavy investment in human intellect. Choosing between mental revolution and collective atrophy should not pose a dilemma. Forty years later, the choice is clear. n

PATHFINDER International, July 2017 | 15

Back in the Day: Fundamental causes of the Yorùbá Wars Contd. from page 9

resulting population explosion, the pressure of desperate migrants on settled communities, the rise of total warfare, destruction and abandonment of some sites and the cultivation of other larger areas hitherto neglected for settlement purposes.

CLASS ANALYSIS Until the 18th century, politics in Old Oyo was in terms of competition between the major families(principally those of the Oyo Mesi) severally and collectively, and with their allies in the provinces against the families of the Alaafin. The rise of the cavalry force, and the professionalization of the military which it encouraged, deepened class distinctions that cut across the old family rivalries. The rivalry between supporters the power that was based in the old established families, and supporters of the shift of power to the hands of the new professional warriors had an economic dimension, but in no clearly specific manner some of the warriors were more interested in a northern policy protecting the sources of the horse, while others were more interested in the southern trade and access to European goods.

MODE OF PRODUCTION Perhaps the growing pressure of population and the increasing class distinctions were further complicated by the growing inadequacies of the political economy based on household production and the export slave trade. The clear trend in the 19th century was for the warrior to keep his slaves as cheap labor for farming, and for producing and transporting palm oil and kernels.

The transition from household as the basic unit of production to capture slaves for export, to one in which every household aspired to own slaves or be part of extended families that owned slaves was a

feature of the 19th century wars.

ABORTED REBIRTH From time to time, societies seek rebirth and restructuring.

This starts from widespread disillusionment in the existing religious, social, economic and political arrangements. Internal population pressure, external threats or interventions suggesting alternative routes and new models could produce revolutionary factors which became uncontrollable and gather momentum of their own. A society that retains control of its own destiny would still emerge from such turmoil with major structural changes and some new consensus as the basis for social interaction in the future.

The Yoruba in the 19th century were in such a ferment of revolution that the old norms and consensus were being challenged; Ifa was in certain cases advising conversion to Islam and predicting the coming of the white man. However, before resolving the crisis and evolving a new consensus, they temporarily lost control over their destiny. They appear to have been caught up in a cross current of ideas and pressures which ultimately frustrated this chance for a new rebirth and ended in an internal stalemate under a colonial regime.

CONCLUSION Detailed research along some of these paths might reveal new data and deepen our knowledge.

However, speculative history always leaves the little corner of doubt in the mind of the historian: what produced the collapse of the fabric that held the Oyo monarchy together, and led to such hatreds and bitter wars that even now, a century of peace later, the echoes of discord and rivalry can hardly be said to have died down? We may never know for certain.

Professor J.F. Ade Ajayi in “War and Peace in Yorubaland, 17931893”, edited by Adeagbo Akinjogbin. n

Scottish, Welsh frustration as Tories seek to block devolution funding

T

he billion pound deal for the Tories to gain votes from the Northern Irish DUP has caused consternation from political leaders in Scotland and Wales over a lack of equal funding.

Since the Tories were reduced to a minority government in the snap General Election, the DUP held out for weeks in negotiations to secure the support of its 10 MPs in crucial parliamentary votes. The eventual deal secured over £1bn in funds for Northern Ireland - but UK Government sources have refused to provide increased support for Scotland, Wales, or any city or region within England.

Welsh First Minister Carwyn Jones said the deal “further weakens the UK, and as currently drafted all but kills the idea of fair funding for the nations and regions”.

The “deal represents a straight bung to keep a weak Prime Minister and a faltering Government in office,” he added.

Criticism of the Barnett Formula - which allocates financial support across the UK and Northern Ireland - has long been an issue of frustration in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and England, for different political reasons.

However, the UK Government implement the formula on a non-

statutory basis through the UK Treasury. The ad-hoc deal with the DUP is not, as of yet, being considered as spending that would lead to consequential funding implications for Scotland, England, or Wales.

First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon called it a “grubby DUP deal”, and claimed the result proved the lack of influence for the 13 Scottish Tory MPs. Scottish Labor called for “an immediate guarantee that Scotland will receive extra cash to end

austerity”, while the Scottish Greens called for Tory minister David Mundell to resign over the DUP deal.

Mundell had claimed he “won't support funding which is deliberately sought to subvert the Barnett rules”. The DUP deal specifically included top-up funding for devolved issues including health and education.

Tory leader Ruth Davidson defended the funding decision, claiming it was similar to ‘city deal’ arrangements that take place outwit the Barnett Formula. n

Congolese Army detains Kalonji O

n Friday, June 23 at 4:30 PM Kinshasa time, the Coordinator of the youth group Quatrieme Voie/Il Est Temps, Jean-Marie Kalonji was detained by the Congolese armed forces.

On a visit to a family member, Congolese security forces stopped Jean-Marie in the Salongo neighborhood in the Lemba commune of Kinshasa. He was interrogated and then asked to produce identification. He did not have his identification with him.

The Congolese military personnel then whisked him away to camp

Bumba. No reason was given for his arrest.

When news about Jean Marie's arrest reached the QuatriemeVoie leadership, fellow attorney and QuatriemeVoie spokesperson, Sylva KabangaMbikayi went to see about his colleague. Upon arrival at camp Bumba, Sylva Mbikayi was also detained.

The two Quatrieme Voie leaders are currently being held by the Congolese armed forces at the Military Detection of Unpatriotic Activities (DEMIAP) without charge or cause. n

Rehabilitation of Africa’s Most isolated dictatorship Contd. from page 9 is highly unlikely, analysts say, but not impossible: Egypt has not ruled out the possibility of airstrikes against the dam.

Meanwhile, Eritrea has made its own efforts to rid itself of pariah status. It has begun courting foreign investors, especially in the mining sector. Three new mines are expected to be operational by 2018, joining the majorityCanadian-owned Bisha gold, copper, and zinc mine, which opened in 2011 and generated nearly $2 billion in revenues in its first four years of operation. (The mine has been dogged by allegations of forced labor and dangerous working conditions.)

The government also created a free trade zone in the port of Massawa in an effort to attract more investors.

This comes on top of small but symbolically significant measures by the government to improve its

terrible reputation on human rights. According to the Atlantic Council, some 50 foreign journalists were permitted to enter and report on the country between May 2015 and May 2016, and the U . N . O ff i c e o f t h e H i g h Commissioner for Human Rights was recently permitted to tour a prison.

Much of this is worrying to Ethiopia, which dislikes the prospect of Eritrea projecting its influence over the Red Sea littoral — a deep-seated anxiety tied to its own landlocked status. Addis Ababa also worries that Afwerki will use his growing financial resources to step up support for armed opposition in Ethiopia at a time when the country is already under a state of emergency following months of unrest.

Above all, Ethiopia fears encirclement by hostile regimes.

But so far it has struggled to craft a coherent response to

Eritrea’s rapidly changing circumstances. “Ethiopia was completely blindsided by what happened in Yemen,” said Cedric Barnes, the director of research and communications at the Rift Valley Institute. “They seem to have lost their way diplomatically.”

Unlike Eritrea, Ethiopia has only distant relations with the Gulf states, and its efforts to dissuade the UAE and Saudi Arabia from engaging with Asmara have apparently been unsuccessful. As a result, it has resorted to displays of military strength, including bombing the Bisha mine in 2015. In private, government officials in Asmara claim that scores of similar provocations have occurred in recent years.

Analysts are unsure what a new Ethiopian policy toward Eritrea might entail. Some suggest it will amount to little more than a

rearticulation of its existing approach, setting firm red lines and spelling out exactly what sort of military action their breach might warrant. Others wonder if the government is considering secret bilateral talks, perhaps including the offer of withdrawal from the border town of Badme, which Ethiopian troops have occupied illegally for the past 15 years. But war — to bring about regime change in Asmara — is not out of the question either, though military overstretch and fear of full-blown state collapse north of the border make this unlikely.

The problem is that domestic politics in Ethiopia makes bold thinking difficult. The ruling Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front is deeply divided, and the prime minister, HailemariamDesalegn, lacks the authority to make a bold move toward resetting relations with Eritrea. Whatever happens, hawks

in the military and intelligence agencies will need to be brought onside, which will mean avoiding anything that looks like a humiliating climb down from the country's aggressive stance.

Eritrea may have earned the title of Africa's North Korea, but it has no patron like China that can force it to the table. Afwerki still benefits from the status quo, which justifies keeping the country on a permanent war footing. Reports that Eritrean troops have occupied disputed territory following the withdrawal of Qatari peacekeepers from the Djibouti border last week serve as reminder that Eritrea can still play the part of regional spoiler. And though it's now less isolated, Asmara remains much weaker than Addis Ababa. In the end, movement must come from the Ethiopian side. “It's a high-risk, high-reward situation,” Verhoeven said. “But I’m cautiously optimistic.” n

PATHFINDER International Lifting up the standard for African nationalities

VOL. 1, NO. 2

FREE

JULY 2017

Somalia: The Watson Files (2) With his mop of curly hair, signature khaki vest, and a penchant for flying low over the savannah in his Piper Super Cub bush plane, Murray Watson had already made a name for himself in Africa, tracking herds of wildebeest in Tanzania and hippos in Zambia.

But it was Somalia that captured and held his fascination. Watson arrived in Mogadishu in 1978, just as the National Range Agency was starting its work.

Through much of the 1980s, he led a small team of scientists who, with international funding and Soviet maps, carried out the most comprehensive land and natural resource survey of Somalia ever completed.

Watson took his work seriously, and he expected diligence and even perfection from his researchers. In many ways, he was like a strict father: On the rare occasions they returned from the field to stay in Mogadishu — then a cosmopolitan hub known as the “pearl” of the Indian Ocean — cavorting with other expats was discouraged. But rather than alienate his team, Watson's dogged commitment won him their fierce loyalty.

There was also a lighter, irreverent side to him.

During the 1970s, he appeared on Jacques Cousteau's hit adventure television series, which featured Watson in his element, studying hippos in Lake Tanganyika in Zambia.

As the crew unveiled a lifesized hippo costume intended for the photographers who were attempting to get close to the animals, Cousteau asked Watson for his expert opinion on the suit. hippo appeared to be female. “If I was a hippo, at 10 meters, I'd consider this one of the more attractive specimens,” he said. “So whoever's in the back better be ready for action.”

Watson engaged easily with all types, possessing a kind of dynamism that won him a vast social circle. He was friendly with British commandos, with whom he loved to talk aviation; Somali elites including President Barre's son; and even the future militia leader Mohammed Farah Aidid, whom American soldiers would target in the infamous “Black Hawk Down” operation in 1993. But he was close to few aside from his researchers. Together,

“What if there were a blueprint for climate adaptation that could end a civil war? An English scientist spent his life developing one — then he vanished without a trace.”

Photo: Watson with his Piper Super Cub bush plane. (Courtesy of a friend to the Watson family) Watson and his team crisscrossed the country by Land Rover and airplane to document the environment in minute detail at some 1,400 sites. They divvied up tasks by specialization — flora, water, soil, wildlife — and produced intricate, hand-drawn maps of vegetation and topography, conducted a census of livestock, gathered thousands of samples of flora and soil, and took nearly 10,000 slides and photographs. Though they didn't know it at the time, they were creating a detailed record of a place on the cusp of calamity.

Abdirisak Ali was a 20something-year-old soil analyst at the National RangeAgency when he flew his first mission with Watson. Ali had never been on an airplane before, and his stomach leapt as Watson banked low along the Indian Ocean, snapping aerial photographs of the coastal vegetation on his Olympus OM-1 camera. The day was sunny and windy, and the Cessna bounced to a landing near the town of Hobyo.

There was no airport, just

acres of sand and scrub. The team set up camp and relaxed. But Watson didn't join them, recalled Ali, who at 61 is now a leading environmental consultant in Somalia. Instead, he worked late into the evening, using a ruler, a compass, and a Rotring technical pen to make detailed maps of the region they had just surveyed.

Ali was impressed with Watson's discipline, and he resolved to learn as much as he could from the senior scientist. They worked together on more missions, and Ali's admiration for Watson grew. He became a friend and a mentor, encouraging Ali to pursue a master's degree at New Mexico State University in the United States before returning to the National Range Agency in the late 1980s. Watson was also the rare foreigner whom even Somali elders respected.

After he and his team had surveyed a given region, they would always show local authorities their maps.

When Ali approached them, community elders would sometimes ask, “Who gave

you our names? How did you get our wells, our mountains, our valleys?”

When Ali would reply that a British man was doing this work, they were often stunned in disbelief: How could an outsider know the land as intimately as they did?

As the 1980s wore on, political turmoil began to overshadow the work of the National Range Agency.

Barre, whose reign had long been characterized by discrimination along clan lines and suppression of dissent, began a brutal counterinsurgency campaign to stamp out potential threats to his rule.

The government engaged in wanton bombings and indiscriminate killings of civilians. During this period, hundreds of thousands of Somalis fled their homes. As reports emerged of Barre's abuses, donors began pulling their support for his government.

The United States slashed its annual aid to Somalia from $100 million in the mid1980s to less than $9 million in 1989.

“Clearly the present

situation is a disaster-inwaiting,” Watson wrote in a typed memo dated Dec. 27, 1990, that he mailed to donor contacts in Western countries. A loosely aligned coalition of rebel groups was gaining against Barre's forces. Thousands of people had died in street battles in the capital. “The future holds little hope of a rapid return to proper g o v e r n a n c e , ” Wa t s o n predicted in the same memo.

Wa t s o n ' s p e s s i m i s m would prove an understatement. On Jan. 26, 1991, after a month of intense fighting, rebels stormed the presidential palace in Mogadishu and brought Barre's 21-year rule to an end. Watson, one of the few foreigners still in the country, called the BBC with an eyewitness report that aired the day after the coup. “You cannot imagine the carnage that the president … is wreaking on his own people,” he said over a rasping phone line. “I took some photographs of bodies in the street just now.

There are not so many bodies in the street because

the dogs have eaten most of them, but there's still hands sticking through the sand.”

Soon after the president fell, the rebels turned on one another and destroyed huge swaths of Mogadishu.

Footage Watson shot on his camcorder shows residential blocks reduced to rubble; pickup trucks loaded with heavily armed rebels careening past burned-out cars; a lone fighter wandering through the wreckage of a government building, documents littering the floor and blowing through its abandoned corridors. The National Range Agency — its elegant building nestled between foreign embassies in an upscale part of town — met the same fate. On the ground floor, the herbarium was looted and burned; Dahir's neat wooden boxes lay crushed.

“Nothing exists today,” Karani said. “Everything after the war, the civil war in Somalia, was…” He couldn't finish the sentence.

“That makes me very sad.

That's why I never talk about those things, because what we built was demolished.”

Somalia is often cited as the longest-running realworld example of anarchy, from the coup in 1991 until 2006, when a federation of Islamic courts took control of the southern half of the country and briefly imposed order. But the Islamic Courts Union, as the group was known, governed by sharia, or Islamic law — a shock to Somalia's more moderate Muslim sensibilities — and some of its elements had ties to al Qaeda. That made neighboring Ethiopia and the United States deeply uneasy. The United States backed Ethiopia's invasion of Somalia in 2006, plunging the country back into a civil war from which it has yet to emerge. Today, those elements of the Islamic Courts Union that most worried the United States continue to fight under a familiar moniker: alShabab.

The environmental work headed up by the National Range Agency has long since come to a halt. Karani fled Mogadishu in 1991. He made his way to a refugee camp in Kenya and eventually on to India, where his children reenrolled in school. Ali also ended up in a refugee camp in Kenya, resigned to the fact that environmental

To be contd. in the next ed.

Printed and published by: Pathfinder Media LLC, P.O. Box 1256, Greenbelt, MD20768, USA. Tel: 240-838-4466, 1-240-602-3802. E-mail: editor@ooduapathfinder.com advertising@ooduapathfinder.com Managing Director: Femi Odedeyi