Let me say upfront that I hold you in very high esteem. I spent my teenage years and youth, lapping up your writings; first as a hobby and later formally, in pursuit of a degree in English and Literary Studies. I have bought almost every book you wrote, including You Must Set Forth at Dawn, copies of which I gave out to some of my friends. Even beyond literature, I have often admired you. Your willingness to speak out in defence of human values, civil rights and good governance endeared you to millions of Nigerians. You have been a role model to many, a strong source of inspiration and a very weighty voice in defence of enlightenment.
But with every due respect to you, sir, I was alarmed and deeply saddened by the views you expressed during your recent lecture at the Hutching Centre, Harvard University, United States of America. Despite the creeping atmosphere of ethnic witch-hunt developing in Nigeria, I never expected that you could, under any circumstance, become part of the lynch mob. No, that is not you, certainly not the Wole Soyinka of The Man Died fame. Your conclusion on the voting pattern of the Igbo in the last general elections was not only wrong, it was incurably so.
By extrapolation, your general thesis on the voting pattern of Nigerians was also defective and lacked logic. I am appalled that an erudite intellectual of your calibre could make such fundamental mistakes. The incredulity yields itself to another explanation, which is rapidly emerging as the conventional wisdom among many commentators on the issue in the social media, i.e, that you deliberately contrived the facts in order to validate your pre-conceived opinion as part of a grand campaign to malign and demonise the Igbo. However, I am not going to be seduced by such a simplistic deduction. Obviously, I have too much respect for you and your pedigree to succumb to such easy analysis. I insist that such an act would be simply beneath you.
But the question then remains, how could you be so blatantly mistaken and then revel in it? Can this explain why you remained uncharacteristically silent after the Oba of Lagos issued the ‘fatwa’ against the Igbo?
Facts are facts
Prof., it is not true as you gleefully alleged that the Igbo are the only ones whose voting pattern can be easily predicted in Nigeria! The correct position is that all the three major ethnic groups (Yoruba, Igbo and Hausa-Fulani) vote in a predictable manner. In the First Republic, all these groups voted along ethnic hires, despite Dr. Nnamdi Azikwe’s valiant efforts in the Western Region and Obafemi Awolowo’s efforts to break the stranglehold of the NPC in the North. In the Second Republic, the Yoruba voted for Awo, the East for Zik and the North for Shagari in the main. Of course NPN’s “air slide, landslide and seaslide” captured Oyo, and for a spell of time Ondo, and Anambra. But in the end, everyone knows where the people stood. During the Third Republic, the Igbo voted mainly for Moshood Abiola’s SDP in line with the national trend, with the SDP winning the Anambra governoship election. In 2003, the Igbo supported Emeka Ojukwu massively, which explains the continued success of APGA despite its many challenges.
If you are honest, sir, you would agree that the Yoruba voting pattern has remained predictable. They always vote for their strategic interests, whether pecuniary or otherwise. From the 1959 federal elections, the Yoruba have always “put their votes where their mouth is”! Even in 2003, when it passed over its right to produce a presidential candidate and supported Olusegun Obasanjo’s PDP, it was all in furtherance of its strategic interest, otherwise called “stomach infrastructure” in your lexicon.
In 2011, the Igbo chose Goodluck Jonathan, not for stomach infrastructure as you mischievously alleged, but on principle. They repeated the same choice in 2015. What did the Yoruba do in 2011? They betrayed the presidential candidate of their preferred party, ACN, the hapless Nuhu Ribadu, and in a Nicodemus-like move, opted for pecuniary interests. You can’t claim to be ignorant of that, given your relationship with the architect of that move, Bola Tinubu.
One can argue that the reason the Yoruba didn’t betray Muhammadu Buhari again in 2015 was because a Yoruba, Yemi Osibajo, was on the ticket, as his running mate. It was not because of any high minded pontificating that you posture. In other words, they voted for their strategic interests which is totally acceptable. In the same manner, the Igbo are right to choose to vote for Jonathan and not Buhari. No one, not even you, has any right to question their choice or censure them. Such a move will be tantamount to a gratuitous insult at the least and extreme provocation at the worst, all of which are unbecoming of you or of the man you were.
As a humanist and advocate of freedom, one expects you to remain true to the canons of freedom. In democracy, the right to choose is sacrosanct. It is at the core of the democratic ethic. The day such rights become circumscribed, then we can all kiss democracygoodbye. For example, I was deeply disappointed that despite all you stand (or stood) for, you could endorse Buhari, in your infamous “leap of faith” public statement, but I conceded to you the right to your opinion.
Such rights are inalienable and sacrosanct. It is inconceivable that you can strut the global stage mounting off on those ideals, while harbouring such dreadful inclinations in the dark recesses of your mind. Simply put, sir, you were dead wrong in your analysis and rude in your conclusions. You have no right to censure the Igbo for exercising their right to choose. I admit you may not have intended to do so, but as you well know, intentions are intentions, actions are actions! Your lecture did grave injustice to the Igbo. It was grossly insensitive, rude and provocative. It fits a growing pattern of ethnic profiling, what we call stock characterisation or stereo-typing in literature. It boggles the mind that you could even be remotely associated with this insidious behaviour.
As a humanist, you are fully conversant with the wretched record of ethnic baiting in history. In Nazi Germany, in Turkey, (the Armenian genocide) in South Africa, Rwanda, Nigeria (the Igbo genocide), etc. History will record you as one of the few Nigerians of your status who has consistently maintained the truth that what happened to the Igbo in 1966 to 1970 Nigeria was genocide. However, it will be tragic if you become, wittingly or unwittingly, a catalyst in any further genocide of the Igbo, an eventuality which your tendentious lecture could catalyse.
Your views on the Movement for the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB)and Biafra were the most frightening. How could you, Prof.? How could you isolate the Igbo for such virulent condemnation without condemning the North West and North East, who in three successive elections voted along tribal and religious lines? How could you, Prof.? Could it be because the president-elect is Hausa-Fulani and you find it expedient and politically correct to defer to them? Or could it be because the Igbo are weak and vulnerable, so it is fair game to beat on them? Since when did you become such a bully? Our mutual friend, and your benefactor, Rotimi Amaechi, is Igbo.
Was it stomach infrastructure that made you to support his opposition to Jonathan and support for Buhari? I urge you to re-read that lecture and ask one or two of your fair-minded friends to also read it. Then follow the path of honour, apologise! That is the only way out of this penkele-mess. Otherwise, be on notice that history will reserve some of its darkest pages for you.
• Prince Obasi is Publisher of Hallmark
