fbpx
Connect with us

Opinion

North, Shiites and Quest for Tolerance

Published

on

 

By Adamu Tilde

Today in northern Nigeria, we live in critically challenging times, with our cultural harmony rapidly disappearing and our political unity fast disintegrating, leaving social and political vacuums that are now hotly contested by two mutually-rejecting, nihilistic tendencies, each equally vicious and destructive. One does not require a Mensa IQ to conclude that our society is dangerously tethering on the edge of the precipice, heading inexorably towards a disaster. Our culture, our history, and our civilization are under threat. The way we handle those existential challenges today determines how posterity will treat us tomorrow.

This piece is conceived in fear and borne out of desperation. Fear over the north’s steady descent into sectarian abyss, and the desperation to arrest this slide before it is too late, before we are all consumed by it. Therefore, in diagnosing our problems and proffering solutions, I do not intend to surrender ourselves to the self-imposed tyranny of political correctness that often characterize discussions such as this.

The recent sectarian mob violence targeted against the northern Shia minority should enrage any believer in justice and freedom. That appalling display of lawlessness and barbarism must be unreservedly condemned by everyone. It is bereft of any legal, moral or social justification. Those angry mobs who cheerfully lynched their fellow citizens and torched and looted their properties have desecrated the very religion (or values) they are claiming to protect, and the clerics who silently or loudly abetted such travesty have betrayed their calling as men of peace.

It is beyond the scope of this piece to trace the historical root of the Sunni-Shia antagonism in Nigeria, but the Shia-military clashes of 2014 that led to the death of Zakzaky’s three children is a watershed in the timelines of events that led us to where we are today. That tragic encounter set the stage for a more tragic one the year after, that saw hundreds of Nigerians perished and billions worth of properties damaged, further deteriorating the already fragile sectarian stability and bringing our peoples closer to sectarian civil war.

I do not intend to make light of the Shiites crimes and transgressions, both real and imagined. Granted therefore, that the Shiites stand guilty of sectarian incitement, provocation, road blockage and wanton disregard for law and order, but no Nigerian sect or party can claim innocence on all those charges, and under our laws and norms, none of those crimes carries the price of a death penalty. Human life, according to all secular and religious conventions, is sacred, and no one has the right to take any life without recourse to law, to judicial due process, except in cases of obvious self-defense. But in Nigeria, putting the sacred tag on each soul does not prevent the next Shiites from being lynched in our streets, or the next petty thief from being lynched in our markets. Extrajudicial killings have become a Nigerian hobby and our failure to do anything qualifies as acquiescence, as an indictment on our collective humanity and pretend religiosity.

More disheartening however, is the tendency of Nigerians to view crimes through partisan and sectarian prisms. The Shia clashes of 2014 and 2015 are two cases in points. Our partisan social media commentators found it politic to describe the tragic Shia clashes of 2014 as a Jonathanian massacre of defenseless Shiites by the genocidal Jonathanian army, but the more tragic one of 2015 as a Shia provocation against the almighty Nigerian army. To them, justice and fairness is directly proportional to the prevailing political reality and not facts on ground. And therefore, those who condemned the tragedy of 2014 become the staunch legitimizers of the travesty of 2015. Nothing can be more absurd!

If the political partisans are guilty of reducing human life to a political commodity based on defined exigencies, the sectarian partisans are even worse, for they not only legitimize the violence against the Shia minority, they also equate every sympathy for the victims and any criticism against the perpetrators to a sin resembling apostasy. In doing that, they succeed in silencing every dissenting voice for justice and fairness and provide a veneer of popular support to their acts of treacherous inhumanity. Many have tried to strike a balance between condemning the Shiites and the actions of the military by drawing an imaginary ethical equivalence between alleged lawbreakers (the Shiites) and constitutionally mandated law-enforcers (the security agencies). But there is no moral equivalence nor ethical symmetry. There is only one denominator here, which is that of Nigerian lives being wantonly wasted without any recourse to judicial process or rule of law, and that a sizeable majority of Nigerians are either happy or indifferent. And the fact that such violence finds support among educated northerners speak volumes about our appalling bigotry and intolerance.

This culture of hate, intolerance and inter-sectarian suspicions bodes ill for interfaith and intrafaith relationships. As Sunnis, our children are taught to hate the Shiite-other, and Shiites are taught to hate the Sunni-other. Those indoctrinations subliminally paint the other as violent, conspiratorial and demagogic, and therefore incapable of peaceful coexistence and undeserving of our respect, tolerance and understanding. By doing this, we forget or negate one of the basic principles of our own faith where diversity is seeing as a manifest of a divine design and guidance as a function of divine will.

The Shiites, like every other religious sect, have their peculiar problems and shortcomings. Their contempt for secular authorities and open disregard for law and order are affronts to their constitutional obligations and to the fundamental rights of other citizens. However, to shun all other sides and tell the world that the Shiites are the most violent and intolerant speaks well of our ideological hypocrisy. Because, statistics have shown that violence against the Shiites are more than those perpetrated by the sect. But because of our inherent bias, there is the tendency to underreport violence against them and amplify those perpetrated by their adherents, and thereby exaggerating their villainy and watering down the facts of Shia victimhood.

It is easy to condemn the Shiites as being misguided, forgetting that religious text and injunctions are subject to interpretation. The solution therefore, lies in scholarly discourse and not scholarly scorn because the problem is rooted in the erroneous belief that it is only our interpretation that is correct and legitimate, foreclosing the chance of further dialogue.

We can achieve this by practicing our religions with “… Lakum dinukum wa liya deen: To you your way, and to me mine” on our mind, by believing in what we believe without calling each other names and declaring each other heretics/apostates or wanting them dead, by living in peace, harmony and understanding with one another, through mutual respect, and without belittling each other’s belief system.

We should let our education and training not only reflect our social media profiles and professional citations, but also reflect our character and behavior. Because, education is meant to free us from our own prejudices, from our own insanities. Education should not only make us employable and rich, education should make us a better, loving, and peaceful people. Education should help us embrace and respect all humans regardless of race, ethnicity, ideology or religion; we should work towards making the world a better place, not ruining it by our actions and inactions.

Therefore, we must all rise up against this sectarian challenge. We must dismantle all barriers to dialogue and eliminate all those factors that promote sectarian tension and radicalization, especially for our youth. De-radicalization, like charity, must begin at home, with the very clerics whom their respective sectarian adherents look up to for guidance and inspiration. With dissension and rebellion being part of the Shia DNA throughout its troubled history, the IMN, as the largest representative of Nigerian Shiites must re-evolve itself and commit to conducting its activities in a legally responsible and socially constructive manner.

Above all, government should be concerned about the types of ideologies openly preached. We must strike a balance between fundamental human rights and collective national interests, by working towards entrenching justice and respecting and protecting the fundamental human rights of all Nigerians, irrespective of the God they worship or ideology they profess, in a way that does not harm the collective peace and stability of our people. Unless we achieve this, Northern Nigeria will be on the path to sectarian chaos, the path of Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. Through education and dialogue, agreeing with Nelson Mandela, we can be able to achieve that peaceful, accommodating, developing, flourishing and promising [Northern] Nigeria. Like minds, let us embark on this mission in every possible way we can. It will take a long time to complete, but let us remember Lao Tzu’s epic one-liner: a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

First published October 2016.

– Adamu Tilde can be reached at adamtilde@gmail.com

Opinion

Desecrating Arewa’s rich cultural heritage

Published

on

 

By Tahir Ibrahim Tahir Talban Bauchi.

The imbroglio in Kano Emirate is serving as the crucible in which arewa’s rich cultural heritage is being desecrated. The biggest loser in the game of thrones in Kano is the Northern Emirate system, its pride, prestige, and rich traditional/ cultural heritage. Its dignity is being decapitated, its aura being eroded, and all it has stood for are being belittled into a chessboard for politicians to flex their war of attrition, with the traditional institutions as ready pawns for their never ending political vendetta. The Northern Emirate system was a highly revered institution which was respected by the colonial masters, placing Northern Nigeria on a very rich pedestal of ancient civilisation. It was a stabilising institution that ran the entire region with a system of governance, along with a taxation regime similar to the British monarchy. That was the genesis of the warmth and camaraderie that the colonial masters extended to the Northern Emirates, as against other regions in Nigeria. Today, all of the grandeur, color and influence of the Northern Emirate system is fast fading away, with the tossil for the Emirship of Kano almost serving as comic relief to the very hard economic conditions faced by the Nigerian populace.

‘Kanon dabo’, ‘Kano jallabar hausa’, ‘Kano tumbin giwa’, ‘Kano ko da me kazo an fika’: are all slogans that have exuded Kano’s excellence as a leading State in Northern Nigeria, be it in trade, education, or the prestige of its traditional institutions, that have towered above all of its contemporaries, both in the Sokoto Caliphate and the Kanem Borno Empire. In its prestige and glamor, it has also served as the hotbed of Emirate tussles from time immemorial. Most memorable is the deposition of the Emir of Kano Sanusi I by the Sardauna of Sokoto, and the creation of new Emirates of Gaya, Dutse, Rano and Auyo in Kano by Gov. Abubakar Rimi, and the upgrade of Kazaure, Gumel and Hadejia to first class emirs, equal in status with then Emir of Kano, Alh. Ado Bayero. The most recent was the removal of Emir Sanusi by Governor Ganduje, along with the creation of 5 other Emirates in Kano, of equal status.

The present storm was created by the removal of the Emir of Kano, Alh. Aminu Ado, and the installation or reinstallation of Emir Sanusi as the present Emir of Kano. The tussle has been made more complex by the roles of the Legislature and the Judiciary in the State, acting at cross-purposes, intruding in their seperate constitutional roles, making a mockery of both arms of government. As against popular opinion, the Executive arm of government in both the states and Federal Government, appear to be more clear-headed in actions and deed, compared to the ambiguity and controversy generated by the Legislature and the Judiciary. Statements and counter statements by the NBA Chairman, Kano State chapter, and other officials of the NBA, clearly defines that there is an encroachment of the duties and obligations of the two arms of government, and unless there is a clear disentanglement over who does or decides what, going by the rule of law, the Kano game of thrones would go on for a while. The court judgement, whether ‘jankara’ or not, has to be settled, for the pronouncement of the law by the State Assembly to finally rest. However, the frivolities of these kinds of court actions must be reigned in by the National Judicial Commission, NJC, so that courts do not entertain cases they have no jurisdiction over, or cases that seek answers that have already been provided by the Legislature, and the constitution. Most of such cases are judicial exercises in futility.

The APC led government of Kano used its powers to dethrone Emir Sanusi, and install Emir Aminu Ado. In the same manner, the NNPP led government of Kano used the same powers to reinstate Emir Sanusi and remove Emir Aminu Ado. Each of the emirs sided with the political party that gave them the throne and that is no secret. Once APC lost Kano in the Supreme Court Judgement that ushered in Gov. Abba Kabir Yusuf into power, it was a no brainer that ultimately, he would seek to reverse all the reversibles of the Ganduje led APC. This of course includes the reinstatement of Emir Sanusi. If the APC really needed to have Emir Aminu Ado on the throne, then they ought not to have lost the battle in the Supreme Court. Losing at the Supreme Court meant losing Kano, losing the government, and also losing out in the emirship tussle.

As it is now, the situation can best be described by the hausa proverb, ‘haihuwar guzuma, ya kwance uwa kwance’, directly translating as, ‘the delivery of an old cow is not an easy one, with both the calf and cow in critical condition’. The Northern Emirate system’s nose has been greatly bloodied, once more soiling its identity and heritage. The Judiciary and the Legislature have also been bloodied and ridiculed, with each taking obvious sides with no pretences. Both Emirs’ experiences of being enthroned and dethroned are debacles they’d rather not have in their reigns as emirs. Does it now foretell that once there is a change in the party that wins the elections, there will inevitably be a new Emir as well? Or perhaps worst still, if the Emir and the governor supporting the same party do not agree, then we should expect a new Emir within the same party? Kano and all interested parties should allow this matter to rest. It is an unnecessary distraction from the troubles bedeviling the North. Our energies should be channeled towards using the Emiral system to fight insecurity, as against being used as a weapon for political vendetta.

Tahir is Talban Bauchi.

Continue Reading

Opinion

US-Israel Decades Strategic Partnership

Published

on

Idris Sani Dagumawa

 

Idris Sani Dagumawa

The relationship between the two countries started 75 years back, where America declared their support for Israel 11 minutes, after the official declaration of Israel State. America supported since from the start. The idea of the formation of a Jewish state started in the late 1800, where it is called “Zionism”, a movement believed that providing a safe space for the Jewish community will bring the end of the suffering they faced around the world, fueled by the events in World War II. In 1948, the declaration of a Jewish state came to life, on the land that was previously own by the Palestine under the British control. America was one of the front liners to accept Israel as a state, because US at that time doesn’t have a defendable ally to do its bidding in the 1990s, so they needed an ally in the Middle-East, in that case having a strategic partner at that time has become imperative. And so far, the relationship has proven effective to the both countries and also serves their national interest, America has a major strong hold in the Middle-East where it can obtain its information from in the region and Israel has build its self to the one of the strongest country in the region in terms of economy, elite military personnel, science and technology, agriculture and many more, and I don’t see it ending in the nearest future.

Israel started gaining its momentum during the cold war, where the fight for influence between US and the former Soviet Union in the region emerges. After the declaration of Israel state 5 of the Arab League countries went to war with Israel, which it manages to engage while still lobbying for support from the Western state. It finally gets the support it needed in 1962 during President Kennedy’s administration, which in 6 days it regains its lost territories and concur some regions from Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. After that, Israel builds a fortress of information gathering, and obtained information from its neighboring countries and channel it back to America, which compensate the US handsomely.

Another gain for Israel is, they made alot of money from the US since the second World War, America gave money to Israel more than any other country. About 260 Billion Dollars in total which Includes economic aid, but now it gives money only for military purposes, 3.8 Billion Dollars is given annually as part of a deal sing by the Obama administration, it helped Israel build one of the strongest military in the world. But funds are given out with an agreement of, it has to be spent on American own companies in that way the money keeps going back to the US, it is kind of a gift given with right hand and collecting it back with left hand. But what makes the deal more favourable to Israel is, no any regulations so far is attached to how they use those military gears, we all know that there are rules and regulations surrounding how America’s fighting gears are to be used on only defensive purposes, but for Israel, it is a different approach where we seen alot humanitarian crises, war crimes, and human right abuses happening between them and Palestine. Israel is basically given a free pass on how it chooses to use it is military resources be it in a good way or otherwise.

Another factor to be considered is the internal politics of America, which basically a politician being a pro-Israel gives you an upper hand in getting elected into office. The existence of America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and others, which are pro-Israel lobby groups, and happens to be the one of the major campaign donors and sponsors for the US public elected officials. They promote policies that helps shape the future of Israel. What normally happens is when a policy is brought up, it is normally weight against America’s foreign policy if it favors, then they go for but if it is the opposite? it has to be dropped.

Lastly religious beliefs contributed alot in making the relationship better, where America’s big portion of voters are Evengelicans or “Born Again” Christians and they made up of quarter of the Americas population. Which in their believe, the issue of of Israel existence is not politically motivated but rather a religious one. But the recent October 7th war on Gaza, has started to change how Americans view Israel, and started to feel sympathy for the people of Palestine. Even the standing order of giving Israel free money to defend itself has started to see some resistance, because the tax payers are questioning the processes. Israel existence reduces the work load of the US in the Middle-East, they do almost all the heavy liftings.

Idris Sani Dagumawa is a Civil Engineer and he writes from Kano

Continue Reading

Opinion

Return of Sunusi: The dilemma ahead

Published

on

 

Mohammad Qaddam Sidq Isa (Daddy)

The return of Muhammadu Sunusi ll as Sarkin Kano is yet another manifestation of the influence of politics on the traditional Masarauta establishment, which, after all, has always been used and abused by politicians.

Since the British conquest of the Usman Dan Fodio Islamic sultanate in what subsequently became part of today’s northern Nigeria, the enthronement and dethronement of emirs (Sarakuna) have always been motivated by underlying political interests.

Throughout the colonial era, the British would only enthrone aspiring princes deemed the most loyal to the British colonial establishment as leaders of their respective emirates. This practice enabled them to maintain their colonial grip through those proxy-Sarakuna. And since then, successive generations of military and civilian administrators have followed suit, enthroning and dethroning Sarakuna literally at will.

The only shift in this regard is that, in the past, the influence of political leaders would mostly come to play only when a throne became vacant mainly due to the death of the Sarki, when the incumbent governor would influence the emergence of his successor, as it happened in 2014 in Kano that led to the enthronement of Sunusi. However, now that the trend is becoming systematic, it will indeed, if left unchecked, render the reins of Sarauta effectively tenured, subject to the tenure of the governor behind it.

After all, just like his enthronement in 2014 by then-Governor Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso and his subsequent dethronement in 2020 by then-Governor Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, Sarki Sunusi’s return to the Kano throne remains politically motivated within the context of the power struggle in Kano politics between Kwankwaso and Ganduje, two provincial vindictive enemies hell-bent on finishing off each other.

By the way, as a subservient Kwankwaso ‘boy’, Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf himself is a mere fighting tool in the hands of his godfather in the struggle.

Interestingly, Kwankwaso has tactically put his vengeful mission against Sunusi on hold for now, pending finishing off Ganduje and his legacy.

Sunusi incurred then-Governor Kwankwaso’s wrath as a then-Lagos-based bank executive when he kept dishing out disparaging criticisms against Kwankwaso and his government. For instance, in an article he titled “The Kwankwaso Phenomenon”, Sunusi described then Governor Kwankwaso as a “rural aristocrat” who “surrounds himself with provincials and places key posts in the hands of rural elite”. He also compared Kwankwaso’s government to “the classic comedy of the Village Headmaster in a village council”.

Kwankwaso got mad at Sunusi and demanded his sacking by his then-employer, United Bank for Africa (UBA). He threatened to stop his government’s dealings with the bank in case of non-compliance.

Anyway, now that Sunusi is back, it remains to be seen how it plays out between him and Governor Abba, considering Sunusi’s penchant for publicity stunts involving controversial utterances against government policies and wrongdoings.

As much as Sunusi is excited about his return to the Kano throne, the development represents a tricky dilemma for him that also tests his supposed commitment to outspokenness against government wrongdoings.

On the one hand, Governor Abba won’t tolerate his stunts in the name of outspokenness; no governor will, either. And unless he (Sunusi) has, this time around, decided to desist from his stunts to keep his throne, Governor Abba, under Kwankwaso’s influence, won’t hesitate to go to any extent, including dethronement, to deal with him.

On the other hand, his desistance from his stunts would undoubtedly mean the end of the reputation he has somehow earned as an outspoken critic of government wrongdoings.

Continue Reading

Trending