Elliot Ugochukwu-Uko
Once upon a time, in a land not far away, lived a great people, whose dexterity in trade and commerce, remarkable success in advancement and ubiquitous presence all over the land elicited not a little interest to all.
They came out seriously scared from a brutal war, marked and monitored, their further progress, a subject of keen interest to everyone.
Decades after the war, the educated, the skilled and the noticeably gifted amongst them, found a way around the subtle marginalization applied dutifully by the state to check their advancement. The unskilled, ill-educated and the younger population, bore the brunt of the ceiling placed on their advancement as a people.
In the year, 1999, a smooth-talking fellow, began mobilizing the vulnerable population with sweet talk of a new nation, where they’d be treated right and all their rights and privileges guaranteed. Excited and trusting, the mostly young folks began an agitation that would grow beyond what the state and international observers could imagine.
First, the political class from the said region were only interested in acquainting themselves with the leader of the agitators, for protection and for partisan purposes. They had no idea a new leadership would emerge a decade later, sidelining the earlier leader they invested so much in befriending. This new leader whose regular radio broadcasts from overseas, captured the imagination of the masses, had his own ideas and strategies. It took the political leadership of the region a while to actually grasp the import, dynamics and tempo of the agitators.
Moreover, political soothsayers misled the authorities to believe that the agitators were miscreants, deviants and hustlers, manipulated by the opposition party that just lost elections. Valuable time was wasted, the wrong strategy was deployed while the agitation only grew stronger and deeper.
Knowledge barrier, coupled with totally false information, inspired a hard, but the wrong approach that only earned the agitators huge sympathy from the ambivalent population, who earlier weren’t sure of what to make of the agitators and their quest for a separate state.
Every effort by concerned activists to plead with the authorities to engage the agitators fell on deaf ears. An early meeting with the agitators, demanding their grievances and promising to look into the same, would have easily quietened the agitation, but some people would not have it. Every attempt to share the truth with the political leaders, that the issue was misdiagnosed a wrong treatment applied, failed.
Key facts were either ignored or misinterpreted. The facts were:
1 The agitation was born out of deep frustrations over the unceasing dichotomy that hurts the pride of the people suffering therefrom. This key element was disregarded and disbelieved by the authorities who seemed to believe the false narrative that the agitation was sponsored by certain disgruntled leaders, who lost political power, in order to discredit the government.
2 The drivers of the agitation, were the bitter diaspora population, who remain abroad against their choice because they believe that situation back home was hostile or at least not conducive for them to thrive, as the obvious marginalization against their ethnic group, greatly limits their potentials. The government found it hard to understand this unambiguous truth.
3 The regional leaders from the region, careful and cautious of offending the central government, played the ostrich for a very long time, waiting for such a time, things will get terribly out of hand, before showing any interest in the resolution of the crisis, to avoid being roped in or recriminated for the crisis. They needed to wade in only when it is safe to do so. Their situation is understandable, as finger-pointing, blackmail and influence peddling of an unkind streak, had long been elevated to the national pastime.
4 That the agitators and their leadership, mostly resident overseas, felt hurt and humiliated by the refusal by the state to at least enquire the reason for their anger. They took the disinterest of government to engage them, to mean a determination to perpetuate eternally the same discrimination, that inspired the agitation. A humiliating situation the agitators are unwilling to hand over to their children.
5 The bitterness in their hearts, deepened their resolve, strengthened the agitation and offended the state more and more, while regional leaders, continuously preferred treading very carefully, by looking up to the central government for action.
6 Grave and surprising developments, embarrassing to the authorities occurred in succession. One, the agitators’ ability to carry along the masses during shutdowns. Two, the resolve and determination exhibited by the agitators, even in the face of fatalities. Three, the uncanny ability of the agitators to sustain the goodwill of the masses, even in the face of difficulties.
These self-evident facts, could not move the authorities to review the strategy of ignoring the agitators. Then the grave error by the agitators to defend themselves and their land, according to them. The decision to form a security network, though wrong and sensitive, seemed to enjoy the support of the masses of the region, especially, rural farmers.
This mistake marked the beginning of a new and dangerous phase. The centralization of leadership by the agitators inhibited the availability of good counsel, one would think. The situation got fluid, fear gripped the land. The upsurge of violence redefined the situation. The arrest of their leader changed the dynamics. The ensuing tension, gave the opportunity to regional leaders to regain their voice. The central government determined to stamp its authority, moves to pacify the land. Who carries the blame. The search for a scapegoat intensify.
Word has it, they may have found one. The activist who stridently screamed that listening to the grievances of the agitators, was the pathway to resolution and closure, may have been labelled the scapegoat. The agitators spoke to him. He once brokered a peace meeting between the agitators and the government. He must be blackmailed, accused of every problem in the land. He should be made the scapegoat.
But the truth is: IT HAD TO BE THIS WAY. Couldn’t have been any other way. The regional leaders waited for things to get very bad before they find their voice. They smartly reasoned that the central government will not listen to wise counsel unless things get this bad. It couldn’t have been any other way.
The courage to present the grievances of the region for the very first time could only come when the situation gets so bad. It was the only time and only way to get the attention of the central government. It had to be this way.
IT COULDN’T HAVE BEEN ANY OTHER WAY.
The reality is a little complex to grasp. As prayers are made that the good Lord should kindly touch the hearts of those in power, who obstinately refused to listen to the pleas of committed activists, crying for years, that the grievances inspiring the agitation be addressed, now that the situation has regrettably degenerated to this avoidable point, may the Lord move them to finally begin the right thing.
The right thing that would have healed the land long ago.
It couldn’t have been any other way. It had to be this way. A scapegoat must be found. Someone will have to be blamed. A committed activist who sustained his message of engagement, offending the authorities and the politicos in the process, maybe the perfect scapegoat.
In this land that holds so much promise, the folks pulling the levers of power, are averse to any structural changes. Advocates of structural changes, are identified as mortal enemies, who must be blackmailed and dealt with.
Remember: IT HAD TO BE THIS WAY. COULDN’T HAVE BEEN ANY OTHER WAY.
