Follow Us on Google
Let us commence with reiterating the maxim that military rule is an aberration. The principle further asserts that the worst form of civilian administration is better than the best form of military rule. The lesson is that democracy remains the best among other systems of government. To be sure, democracy may not guarantee good governance. It is not an assurance for perfection. But its beauty lies in its people-content. Democracy permits the people, the electorate, to have their say, hence, Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President of the United States, defined it as the government of the people, by the people and for the people. The moment the people-factor is in any way removed from the context, it could then pass for any other system of administration but certainly not democracy.
That informed my apprehension on Sunday, December 7, when news filtered out that some young military officers had seized the airwaves in neighbouring Republic of Benin and announced the overthrow of the civilian government of President, Patrice Talon. Following the coup announcement, real and artificially generated video clips of citizens of Benin heralding the short-lived era instantly flooded the social media space. My immediate reaction on the development was a recall of the excitement that seized some of us, then in secondary school, on April 12, 1980, when Samuel Doe, a master-sergeant, took over the reins of power in Liberia through a military coup. Our enthusiasm, obviously borne of naivety, had nothing to do with the real situation in Liberia, which we had no firsthand knowledge of. It , rather, in support of the coup that was then the fad in many African countries.
The reasons offered for the putsch and some of the initial actions by Doe and his fellow gangsters equally made us wish to be Liberians at that moment. The usurper regime had accused the civilian administration of William Tolbert, which it overthrew, of monumental corruption and holding down the future of the country. And in what seemed the best of intentions, Doe promptly embarked on what seemed moral and economic rebirth in Liberia. Part of the actions in that regard was the arrest of officials of the ousted administration and retrieval of alleged looted state funds from them.
While Doe rode on the crest of this cleansing mission, he was lionized. With time, however, he was cornered by sycophantic members of the ruling class and got carried away. Over time, Doe became more corrupt than the members of the Tolbert government that he booted out. To ensure that nobody pried into his activities, he resorted to repression, applying state apparatus to silence real and perceived opponents.
The same ululation that greeted Doe erupted here in Nigeria, three years after, precisely on December 31, 1983, when a group of soldiers led by General Muhammadu Buhari sacked the elected administration of President Shehu Shagari. Shagari’s National Party of Nigeria-controlled government had failed Nigerians in many respects. Apart from not delivering the axiomatic democracy dividends to the people, it had literally elevated corruption to the status of national philosophy. The leadership at all levels of the government engaged in wanton frivolities, while Nigerians suffered. At some point, scornful jokes of officials partying all night and even washing their hands with Champagne and other costly drinks made the rounds. Minister for Transport at the time, Umaru Dikko, even sniggered that talks of Nigerians suffering were unfounded since the people were not rummaging through the bins in search of food.
To cap it all, the 1983 general election, which many had waited for to vote out the government, was massively rigged in favour of the administration. The mood in the land was abysmal. For the people, therefore, anything that could sweep off Shagari and his men was readily welcome. It was in that despondent situation that the military guys struck and were hailed. Buhari, who was made the head of state, came into office as an angry general expressing disappointment that the politicians had wrecked the country and put the economy in a serious predicament.
In what seemed the needed assurance for the day, Buhari declared; “This generation of Nigerians and indeed future generations have no other country than Nigeria. We shall remain here and salvage it together.” For the people, that was a mantra for patriotism and rebuilding the nation. But a few months into the administration, it became obvious that the head of state had no clear-cut programme and policies at fixing the country. He, rather, alienated himself from the people. The economy sank deeper, inflation rose higher and basic food items became scarce. The ill-advised currency change, which seemed targeted at some people, further put pressure on the system. The human rights record of the regime was equally abysmal.
Liberia, Nigeria and other countries on the continent that were afflicted with that virus of military rule are yet to recover from the misadventure. It was, therefore, a huge relief that the attempts by the soldiers in Benin to truncate the country’s democracy failed. Nigeria and France have ever since been in subtle competition in claiming to have played the significant role in suppressing the coup. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu did well in ensuring that the coup did not succeed. Of course, he may just have intervened for reasons of self-preservation and regime-protection. The domino effects of a military takeover in Benin would have been quite disturbing to imagine, especially against the backdrop of the hardship in the land and recklessness of the leadership class. That must have informed Tinubu’s action.
More than that, a successful coup in Benin would have exerted enormous pressure on Nigeria’s sovereignty and national security. With Mali, Guinea, Burkina Faso, Chad and Niger under the jackboots, adding Benin into the mix would have opened access to Nigeria’s waterways to the military chaps from the Sahel Region. That would have added to the dangerous situation in the North East occasioned by the infiltration of insurgents from the Lake Chad area, the assaults from bandits and terrorists from the North West, North Central and other bands of criminals from the South. It was a strategic move to halt the uncertainties in Benin. Not minding that, strictly speaking, the involvement of Nigeria amounted to interference in purely internal affairs of another sovereign state, it was national interest at work. But what has been achieved so far in Benin, is a breather, not total victory.
There is need for the authorities in Nigeria to learn from the almost costly drama in Benin. Tinubu needs to do more to steer the minds of hungry and traumatized Nigerians from wishing that the attempt in Benin had succeeded and same thing happening here. It is only good governance that can change that extreme mindset. Incidentally, the President does not seem to be thinking in that direction. All that matters to him is the consuming drive for reelection in 2027. Governance does not for now, matter to him. Unfortunately, the languid governors at the states, are not helping matters.
