Politics
By Isibor Anthony
PROF. Jibrin Ibrahim, Senior Fellow, Centre for Democracy and Development, Abuja, has said that all Nigerians are marginalised.
Speaking “Setting Benchmarks for Enhanced Security and National Unity in Nigeria” at a Town Hall meeting, organized by Lai Mohammed, the minister of information and culture in Kaduna on Thursday, Prof. Ibrahim stated that political elites in all the six geo-political zones in the country have always argued that their zones are marginalised and the masses believe them.
He insisted that the use of the six geo-political zones as an expression of our diversity is in itself dubious and that cultural mapping is in itself a subjective exercise.
“It was a categorisation invented by British anthropologists brought in by the colonial authorities at the beginning of the 20th Century to map tribal and cultural differences and affinities within the Nigerian land areas.
“At the end of their research, they announced that there were six cultural zones in the territory – the Emirate states, Borno and environs, Middle Belt minorities, Yorubaland, Igboland and Southern minorities. In 2006, when under the leadership of late Enaharo, the Peoples’ National Conference, PRONACO, repeated the same exercise; they came out with 18 zones.
“The reality on the ground is that the mosaic of identity profiles in Nigeria is vast, complex and multi-dimensional. Ethno-regional identities in Nigeria have developed along a tri-tendential trajectory.
“The first is the North/South divide that emerged at the beginning of the colonial period. The second is the tripolar framework related to the three colonial regions and the majority groups that dominated each region. The third and maybe the most important tendency in Nigerian identity politics is a persistent multi-polarity which has been continuously repressed by regional, zonal and state hegemons who have always sought to dominate the nearest neighbouring minority group,” he said.
Ibrahim also said that the creation of more states has not been able to address these issues of marginalization in Nigeria, but has instead created more minority groups with each group believing that it is worst treated by the Nigerian state.
“Historically, the fears of domination of one zone over the others played a central role in convincing politicians of the necessity of a federal solution for the First Republic. The First Republic, which operated essentially as an equilibrium of regional tyrannies were, however, characterised by the domination of each region by a majority ethnic group and the repression of regional minorities.
“The relative autonomy enjoyed by the regions has been eroded during three decades of military rule and the creation of states from two regions to thirty-seven should have addressed the domination issue. It has not.
“The steady rise of ethno-regional tensions and conflicts has continued unabated. I believe that the reason for this has been the supplanting of Nigeria’s federal tradition by a Jacobin unitary state.
“The erosion of multiple poles of political power that have existed in Nigeria by military dictators and subsequently by an all-powerful presidency has exacerbated the spectre of the fear of domination in the country.
“The Nigerian state is no longer seen as a neutral arbiter. Negotiation and conflict resolution mechanisms have broken down and ethno-regional political actors have been taking maximalist positions and treating compromise with disdain. Each bloc believes it has the worst deal in the country.
“It is, for this reason, that marginalisation, is the most favoured word used by the Nigerian elite to describe their perceived political reality and above all to seek for more access to the national cake,” he said.
– Apr. 09, 2021 @ 16:52 GMT
A.I
Tags: Lai Mohammed PROF. Jibrin Ibrahim PRONACO
