Features

Who Is Afraid Of The Middle Belt?

Published

5 years ago

June 16, 2020

By Obadiah Mailafia

Last week a bill was presented to the House of Representatives, entitled “Geo-political Zones of the Federation Bill 2020”. It was sponsored by Kpam Sokpo (PDP, Benue). It aims essentially to enshrine the Six Geopolitical Zones in our Constitution, with “North Central” being renamed “Middle Belt”.

The Six Geopolitical Zones were first proposed by the late Chief Alex Ekwueme and were accepted by the Abacha junta for the purpose of allocating positions and preferments by the Federal Government. They were an arbitrary creation, in the sense that the area that forms the core Middle Belt was designated as “North Central”. This means that the Old North was left intact for purposes of administrative reference. All sorts of abuses and discriminatory practices have been visited upon us under an Apartheid North.

The Middle Belt is both a geographical expression as well as a political identity. It is also a state of mind. Like the English constitution, the Middle Belt exists in the hearts and minds of the Middle Belt peoples.
Everyone that feels and knows he or she is Middle Belter, such a one belongs to the Middle Belt. A Middle Belter is anyone who was historically never defeated by the Fulani Jihad. We are who we are because we were never defeated by the Fulani Jihad. A Middle Belter is also anyone who does not subscribe to Caliphate ideology and the hegemony of the Fulani-dominated emirate system. Thirdly, a Middle Belter is anyone in the former North who does not wish to live under Sharia.

The Middlebelt region of Nigeria

The Middle Belt geographically encapsulates the area normally referred to as “North Central”. But it is much more than that. It extends from Southern Borno to Southern Adamawa, Southern Bauchi, Southern Gombe, Southern Yobe, Southern Kaduna and Southern Kebbi.
The peoples of the Middle Belt are also defined by history. We had one of the greatest civilisations that ever flourished in ancient Africa, namely: the Nok civilisation that was older than Benin and older than Ile-Ife. From what we know of its artefacts, the people had spiritual and cultural linkages to the Egypt of the Pharaohs. The successor to the ancient Nok culture was the great Kwararafa Kingdom that is today symbolised by the Aku Uka of Jukun land. The Kwararafa ruled Kano and many parts of Hausa land for more than 200 years. The small size of their population did not allow them to impose their hegemony over their conquered subjects. But their historical role is one of the pillars in the construction of modern Middle Belt identity politics.

The area comprising the Middle Belt today has a landmass of 300,000 square km, with an estimated population of 40 million peoples. It is the largest of any region, with the most fertile farmlands and the highest endowments in terms of minerals and natural resources. The Middle Belt is an ethnic federation of over a hundred ethnic communities. We are a tolerant and accommodating people. Our moral conscience is shaped by Christianity and the humane traditions of ancient Africa.

The struggle of the Middle Belt peoples did not start yesterday. As a matter of fact, it goes as far back as the 1900s. The subject of the creation of a Middle Belt region for the non-Muslim populations of the North was heavily debated in the British Parliament. Journalists and intellectuals and experts on colonial administration strongly urged the Colonial Office in London to consider creating an autonomous region for the non-Muslim peoples. Missionaries like Dr. Karl Kumm of the old Sudan United Mission also made strong submissions for that cause. The tribal chiefs from the Kilba, the Lunguda in Adamawa and the Baju and Atyap in Southern Kaduna also made strong representations to the colonial overlords to create a Middle Belt region.

The Willink Minority Commission 1957 advocated creation of an autonomous region for the Middle Belt, but the matter was unfortunately overtaken by geopolitics. The British considered it to be in their long-term strategic interest to ensure that the North would remain the dominant region and would continue to rule in perpetuity. Dame Margery Perham, a leading authority on colonial administration, described it as “tripod”, which was programmed to fail. One of the laws of federalist theory is that none of the federating units should be large enough to threaten the others. The British clearly sowed the seeds of catastrophe which has continued to haunt our country to this day.

Joseph Sarwuan Tarka
Championed the Middlebelt cause

The fathers of the modern Middle Belt struggle are well known. They include Rev. David Lot, J. S. Tarka, Patrick Dokotri, J. D. Gomwalk, Solomon Daushep Lar, Dan Suleiman and the late Bala Takaya, among several others. The millions of Middle Belt youths today are demanding a separate identity for themselves. They are tired of being lumped together as part of a monstrous behemoth called the North. We do not want to be associated with the Almajiri system, Emirate feudalism, begging, Sharia, poverty, mindless divorce and broken families, Global jihad, child marriage and vaginal Vesico-fistula, VVF; Boko Haram, genocidal herdsmen, oppression and violence.

The Middle Belt sacrificed more than anyone else to keep this country together. We are the bridge that links North and South. Without the Middle Belt, Nigeria would not exist. The greatest regret of our people is that General Yakubu Gowon used our conscripted youths to fight against the fledgling republic of Biafra. Most of them had never seen a rainforest terrain before. They were mowed down like grass. Never again will the Middle Belt ever allow itself to be used in that way.

Over the last decade, the Middle Belt Forum has been engaged in dialogue with Afenifere of Yoruba land, PANDEF of the South-South and Ohaeneze Ndigbo of the East. We have discovered our common destiny. We are working together to build a New Nigeria with a new constitution and a re-engineered federation in which all our communities will have a fair and equal voice.
We are resolved never to be part of the Old North, where our people are daily being killed, maimed and raped. During this lockdown alone, hundreds of innocent people – children, women, the elderly – have been killed by marauding bandits in Southern Kaduna, Plateau and Benue. Boko Haram has targeted Christian communities in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa. More than 3,000 churches have been destroyed and more than 400 clergy have been martyred. Their trade mark is beheading, disembowelment of expectant mothers, hacking of infants, rape and forced marriages of under-age girls. There are more than three million internally displaced persons in Nigeria today as a consequence.

We are not hostile to Islam or Muslims. We have our own indigenous Muslims with whom we live in peace and harmony. We want good rapport with the North, but never accept the status of dhimmi second-class citizens in the land of our ancestors. After almost 60 years of feudal injustice, structural violence and oppression, we demand self-determination within a New Nigeria.
In July 2018, the Middle Belt peoples held a Summit in Makurdi, Benue State. The famous Makurdi Declaration that ensued sets out our principles, goals and vision for our people and for the New Nigeria of our dream. That clarion call to freedom rang throughout the world.

Its essence is a rejection of the fraud underpinning the 1999 Constitution. It begins with: “We, the people”. But that is a capital LIE! That fraudulent contraption was designed and handed-over to us by a military dictatorship without the full consent of our people. It is therefore, ipso facto, bereft of moral legitimacy. We demand nothing less than a new constitution with a referendum that ensures that all the peoples of Nigeria decide which region they will belong to, without fear or favour.

We also take strong exception to the gerrymandering of the structure of our federation in such a manner that favours some while short-changing others. We envision a two-tier federation, with federating units of no more than five Regions:North, Middle Belt, West, East and South-South. Each Region will be free to create its own municipal councils as it deems fit. We envisage Regions that shall be economically and financially viable; able to meet their basic obligations in terms of operating elected government, civil service and local police.

Ever since Aristotle, a system of checks and balances exists in constitutional government because men are not angels. The presidential system and our current fraudulent federalism have proven to be a monstrous Leviathan that sucks the blood of our people. The Middle Belt stands for a decentralised parliamentary system that devolves more powers to the people and allows them to participate in the governance process that shapes their lives and the future of their children.
Freedom beckons, and we shall not wait!

Economy

Economic Implications of Oil Subsidy Removal on Nigeria’s Rural Population

Published

7 months ago

October 26, 2024

Sunrise

By James Aduku Odaudu

Introduction

The intricate relationship between economic policy and the living standards of rural populations often reveals itself through pivotal changes in subsidy programs. In the context of Nigeria, the recent discourse around oil subsidy removal has sparked critical debates regarding its potential ramifications on rural communities, which predominantly rely on affordable fuel for agricultural and economic activities. Subsidies have traditionally served as a buffer against the volatility of global oil prices, providing essential support to an economy deeply intertwined with crude oil production. However, the potential elimination of these subsidies invites an exploration of alternative economic frameworks and the possible socio-economic repercussions that could arise, particularly for those at the grassroots level who may lack the resilience to absorb sudden increases in fuel costs. This essay will delve into the multifaceted economic implications of this policy shift, examining both immediate impacts and long-term consequences on Nigeria’s rural populace, ultimately arguing for a nuanced understanding of subsidy reform in the broader context of economic development.

* Oil subsidies in Nigeria and their historical context

The historical context of oil subsidies in Nigeria is deeply intertwined with the country’s quest for economic stability and development. Initially implemented in the late 1970s as a response to volatile global oil prices and domestic inflation, these subsidies aimed to shield consumers from the adverse effects of fuel price fluctuations. Over the years, they evolved into a critical aspect of Nigeria’s socio-economic fabric, often being justified through the lens of providing affordable essential goods to the populace. However, this well-intentioned policy also cultivated a dependency that distorted market dynamics led to inefficiencies, and exacerbated corruption. By the early 21st century, the financial burden of these subsidies became increasingly unsustainable, consuming a significant portion of the national budget. This unsustainability has prompted discussions on the necessity of subsidy removal, sparking concerns about its potential economic repercussions, particularly for Nigeria’s rural population that relies heavily on subsidized fuel for transportation and agricultural activities.

* Economic Impact on Rural Livelihoods

The removal of oil subsidies in Nigeria has profound implications for rural livelihoods, particularly regarding income stability and access to essential goods.
When subsidies are eliminated, the immediate effect is an increase in fuel prices, which disproportionately impacts rural communities that depend on affordable transportation for both the movement of goods and access to markets. This heightened cost of living exacerbates existing vulnerabilities, leading to a decline in purchasing power for rural households whose income is predominantly derived from agriculture and informal economies.
Consequently, rural producers face higher operational costs, ultimately jeopardizing food security as agricultural outputs decline due to reduced investments and higher transportation expenses.
Furthermore, the ripple effects within local economies amplify these challenges; diminished income for farmers can lead to decreased demand for services and goods in rural areas, creating a vicious cycle of economic stagnation. Thus, the removal of oil subsidies serves not only as a structural shift in fiscal policy but also as a catalyst for heightened economic precariousness among Nigeria’s rural population.

* Changes in household income and expenditure patterns

The economic landscape in Nigeria is undergoing transformative changes, particularly in rural areas, as households navigate the ripple effects of oil subsidy removal. As these adjustments unfold, a noticeable shift in both income sources and expenditure patterns can be observed.
Rural households, previously reliant on government subsidies for affordable fuel, are now compelled to reassess their budget allocations in response to increased fuel prices. This reassessment often results in a reallocation of funds, diverting resources from non-essential goods and services—such as education and healthcare—towards more pressing needs such as transportation and food. Furthermore, a significant portion of the rural population may explore alternative income-generating activities, seeking to compensate for diminished purchasing power.
The interconnections between household income fluctuations and expenditure patterns underscore a broader socio-economic challenge, suggesting that adapting to these economic changes may ultimately exacerbate existing vulnerabilities and inequality within rural communities. Such dynamics warrant close examination to inform effective policy interventions.

* Effects on Agricultural Production and Food Security

The removal of oil subsidies in Nigeria is poised to create both challenges and opportunities for agricultural production and food security. On one hand, the increased cost of essential inputs such as fertilizers and fuel could lead to higher production costs, exacerbating existing vulnerabilities among smallholder farmers. These farmers, who often operate on thin margins, may struggle to absorb increased expenses, potentially leading to reduced crop yields and a decline in overall agricultural output.

Conversely, the subsidy removal could encourage a shift toward more sustainable agricultural practices, as farmers are forced to innovate and adopt efficient resource management strategies. As the market adapts, investments in alternative energy sources and improved agricultural technologies could emerge, fostering resilience in food systems. Ultimately, the net effect on food security will hinge on the government’s ability to implement supportive measures, such as providing targeted assistance and promoting access to credit for rural farmers, enabling them to thrive in a more competitive economic landscape.

* Relationship between fuel prices and agricultural productivity

Fluctuations in fuel prices directly influence the cost structures within the agricultural sector, significantly affecting productivity levels. High fuel prices increase operational costs for farmers by raising expenses associated with machinery, transportation, and inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides. Consequently, these elevated costs can deter investment in essential agricultural practices, leading to decreased yields and reduced profitability. As farmers struggle to adapt to this financial strain, shifts toward less fuel-intensive methods or even the reduction of cultivated areas may ensue, further exacerbating food insecurity.

Additionally, the cyclical nature of fuel price increases can create an unpredictable environment, making long-term planning challenging for agricultural stakeholders. This volatility undermines not only individual productivity but also broader market stability. Therefore, understanding the intricate relationship between fuel pricing mechanisms and agricultural output is crucial for policymakers, particularly in contexts like Nigeria, where rural populations heavily rely on agriculture for their livelihoods. A strategic approach to addressing these challenges could foster more resilient agricultural practices and enhance rural economic stability.

Conclusion

The culmination of this analysis highlights the intricate relationship between oil subsidy removal and its economic ramifications on Nigeria’s rural populace. By eliminating subsidies, the government aims to redirect funds towards infrastructural development and social services, ostensibly fostering long-term economic stability. However, this shift presents immediate challenges for rural communities, which heavily rely on subsidized fuel for transportation and agricultural activities. As fuel prices surge, the cost of goods and services inevitably escalates, disproportionately affecting the livelihoods of rural households already grappling with limited income and access to resources.

Furthermore, the anticipated benefits of subsidy removal, such as improved public services, may take considerable time to materialize, leaving vulnerable populations in a precarious position during the transitional phase. Ultimately, careful consideration of the socio-economic dynamics at play is essential to ensuring that the policy shifts do not exacerbate existing inequalities but rather promote equitable growth for all segments of Nigeria’s diverse society.

• Dr James Odaudu is a development scholar/administrator and a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Public Administration of Nigeria. Email: jamesaduku@gmail.com

Features

PRESS FREEDOM AND AGGRAVATED HAZARDS OF JOURNALISM

Published

1 year ago

May 4, 2024

Nats Odaudu

*By Paul Ejime

The more than 100 journalists and media workers killed as of 3^rd May 2024 in the ongoing Israel-Gaza conflict, ignited by Hamas’ unprecedented attack against Israel on 7^th of October 2023, makes it the deadliest period for journalists since the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) began gathering data in 1992.

This year alone, 25 journalists and media workers have been killed, including 20 in Gaza alone, according to the U.S.-based CPJ, a non-profit organization, that advocates for press freedom and the protection of journalists worldwide.

The Committee also says that it is investigating numerous unconfirmed reports of other journalists being killed, missing, detained, hurt, or threatened, and of damage to media offices and journalists’ homes.

Globally, more than 35,000 Palestinians have been reported killed in Gaza and the West Bank, and 1,200 in Israel since the Hamas attack and Israeli retaliations.

Every death in a conflict is one too many, journalists are not special.

However, the CPJ Programme Director Carlos Martínez de la Serna posits that: “Journalists are civilians who are protected by international humanitarian law in times of conflict. Those responsible for their deaths face dual trials: one under international law and another before history’s unforgiving gaze.”

CPJ’s President, Jodie Ginsberg, put it more succinctly: “Every journalist killed is a further blow to our understanding of the world.”

Speaking on behalf of all advocates of press freedom she said: “(We) must work collectively to ensure that journalist killers are brought to justice … and that the public’s right to be informed is protected from those whose power is threatened by the scrutiny of reporting.”

In his speech to mark this year’s World Press Day or World Press Freedom Day, Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights paid tribute to the “countless, fearless individuals daring to question,” including “71 journalists and media workers killed and the 320 imprisoned, in 2023, the highest number ever.”

Describing 2023 as “a devastating year for journalism,” the senior UN official said: “It was a year characterized – again – by impunity. Only 13% of the murder cases have been investigated, he said, adding: “When we lose a journalist, we lose our eyes and ears to the outside world. We lose a voice for the voiceless.”

The 2024 World Press Freedom Day focuses attention on the climate and the environment under the theme “A Press for the Planet: Journalism in the Face of Environmental Crisis.”

Türk said the occasion was being marked “in an era of acute global turmoil and the profound fragmentation and polarisation of humanity,” with “conflict boiling over in many places – from Myanmar to Sudan, Ukraine, Gaza, and several other parts of the world – causing intolerable human suffering.”

According to him: “Disinformation is infecting our media and digital landscapes, fuelling hate and division. And as climate change batters our fragile planet, the lives and livelihoods of future generations are under the gravest threat this world has ever known.”

He acknowledged “journalists around the world who are working to hold polluters accountable for the damage and the devastation. They are driving open debate and critical thinking,” the UN official affirmed.

“And by separating facts from lies and propaganda, they are pushing for evidence-based policy decisions on the climate crisis that the world so urgently needs.

Environmental journalists need stronger commitments from their governments and their employers to protect them. Better and safer working conditions…

The dramatic consequences of inertia and inaction on the climate crisis are unfolding as we speak. This doesn’t have to be the case,” Türk added.

The World Press Freedom Day is observed annually on May 3rd. It was established by the UN General Assembly in 1993, following a recommendation adopted at UNESCO’s General Conference in 1991.

The day celebrates the fundamental principles of press freedom, evaluates press freedom around the world, defends the media from attacks on their independence, and pays tribute to journalists who have lost their lives in the exercise of their profession.

The date was also chosen to commemorate the Windhoek (Namibia) Declaration, on free press principles put together by African newspaper journalists in 1991.

It emphasizes the importance of freedom of the press and reminds governments of their duty to respect and uphold the right to freedom of expression enshrined under Article 19 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

As part of the commemoration, the UNESCO/Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize is conferred on deserving individuals, organizations, or institutions that have made outstanding contributions to the defence and promotion of press freedom worldwide.

The prize is named after Guillermo Cano Isaza, a Colombian journalist who was assassinated in front of the offices of his newspaper, El Espectador, in Bogotá in 1986.

Cano’s writings offended Colombia’s powerful drug barons, and journalists in other parts of the World face similar threats today.

According to the 2024 World Press Freedom Index, Norway ranks the highest in press freedom, while Eritrea ranks the lowest.

According to the CPJ, of the 320 journalists and media workers imprisoned as of December 1, 2023, China with (44), followed by Myanmar (43), Belarus (28), Russia (22), and Vietnam (19), rank as having the highest number of jailed journalists.

*Ejime, a former War Correspondent, is a Global Affairs Analyst and Consultant on Peace & Security and Governance Communications

Environment

Nigeria at COP28: Separating the facts from fiction

Published

1 year ago

December 4, 2023

Nats Odaudu

By Temitope Ajayi

The number of delegates from Nigeria attending the ongoing Climate Summit in Dubai otherwise called COP28 has generated a lot of controversies and strong social media conversations in the last 24 hours. It is important to set the record straight and provide some clarity. To begin with, the Summit is tagged COP which means Convention of Parties. The ongoing Summit in Dubai with over 97,000 delegates from more than 100 countries around the world is the 28th in the series since the issue of climate change and action took preeminent stage in global affairs. COP27 took place at Sharm El-Sheikh in Egypt last year.

When the world comes together to take actions on achieving a common goal and proffer collective solutions to a nagging global concern, there are parties involved from government, private sector, civil society, media and multilateral institutions. The people coming together to advance their different agenda and interests from governments, businesses and civil societies are the parties to the convention who represent various shades of opinions and pushing for various mitigating actions.

In Nigeria like so many other countries, interested parties comprising government officials from both the Federal and sub-national governments, business leaders, environmentalists, climate activists and journalists are present in Dubai. Also participating are agencies of government such as the NNPC and its subsidiaries, Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs, NIMASA, NDDC. Many youth organisations from Nigeria especially from the Northern and Niger-Delta regions whose lives and livelihoods are most impacted by desert encroachment and hydrocarbon activities are also represented. The President of Ijaw Youth Council, Jonathan Lokpobiri, leads a pan-Ijaw delegation of more than 15 people who registered as parties from Nigeria. Among delegates from Nigeria are also over 20 journalists from various media houses.

Their participation is very important. It is not for jamboree as it is being mischievously represented on social media.

It is important to state here that delegates from all countries whether from government, private sector, media and civil society groups attend COP summits and conferences as parties and the number of attendees are registered against their countries of origin. This does not mean that they are sponsored or funded by the government. It must be said also that the fact that people registered to attend a conference does not mean everyone that registered is physically present.

As the biggest country in Africa, biggest economy and one with a bigger stake on climate action as a country with huge extractive economy, it is a no-brainer that delegates from Nigeria will be more than any other country in Africa.

Among the delegates from Nigeria are UBA Chairman, Tony Elumelu, Abdul Samad Rabiu, Chairman of BUA group, and other billionaires whose businesses are promoting sustainability and climate actions through their philanthropies. These businessmen and women and their staff who came with them to promote their own business interests are part of the 1,411 delegates from Nigeria. Their trip to Dubai is not funded by the Federal Government.

United Nations Climate summit, by its very nature, commands attendance of big names from across the world – statesmen and women, politicians, lawmakers, corporate titans, journalists and activists, etc who promote big global agenda. So, people attend the summit for many reasons. And because climate issue is the biggest global issue of the moment, it is not surprising that over 97,000 people including Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India, King Charles of United Kingdom, Prime Minister of Netherlands, Mark Rutte, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris, US Special Envoy on Climate Change and former Secretary of State, John Kerry, President Bola Tinubu, United Nations Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, World Bank President, Ajay Banga, International Monetary Fund President, Kristalina Georgieva, World Trade Organisation Director General, Ngozi Okonjo Iweala, Africa Development Bank President, Akinwumi Adesina, former US Vice President and Nobel Peace Prize Winner, Al Gore and almost 100 Heads of States and Governments converged on Dubai for COP28. It is the first of its kind in the history of the summit because of the importance of climate change to global well-being.

After the opening and national statements by Heads of States which began from November 30 when the summit opened and up until Saturday December 2, 2023, the real work of COP28 which are the technical sessions and negotiations, financing, etc will begin from Monday, December 4 till December 12 where agreements will be reached on many proposals for consideration and ratification by the parties.

Those with sufficient understanding and knowledge on climate matters know that issues around the subject have layers and multiplicity of factors that require experts from various fields. There are lined-up technical sessions on financing climate actions at sub-national levels, regions and local governments. State Governors from Nigeria such as Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu of Lagos, Dapo Abiodun of Ogun, Umo Eno of Akwa-Ibom have been really busy with their officials at COP28, making presentations, speaking at panel sessions and pitching some of their sustainability projects to development partners and investors.

Multifaceted stakeholders from different countries including Nigeria are on ground in Dubai because they don’t want decisions that will affect them to be taken without pushing their own agenda. It is the reason delegates from China and Brazil are over 3000 respectively. China is one of the world biggest polluters and Brazil is at the centre of global climate debate with her Amazon rainforest. These two countries know important decisions that will affect them will be taken and they have to move everything to be fully on ground and ensure they are fully represented by their best brains at every level of discussion and negotiation.

Like former President Muhammadu Buhari and other African leaders who demanded fair deal and climate justice for Africa at previous UN Climate summits, President Tinubu is leading the charge at COP28 on behalf of Nigeria and the rest of the continent, demanding from the West that any climate decision and action must be fair and just to Africa and Nigeria in particular, especially the debate around energy transition.

President Tinubu has been unequivocal in his position that Africa that is battling problems of poverty, security and struggling to provide education and healthcare to her people can not be told to abandon its major source of income which is mostly from extractive industries without the West providing the funding and investment in alternative and clean energy sources. President Tinubu and other officials on the Federal government delegation are in Dubai for serious business not jamboree.

Our President has been very busy representing our country well. Since Thursday morning when he arrived Dubai, President Tinubu has spent not less than 18hours daily in attending very important sessions, pushing our national agenda whilst holding bilateral and business meetings on the sidelines.

-Ajayi is Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media & Publicity