Iyobosa Uwugiaren writes that Nigeria’s future will be brighter not with any military coup, but with true democracy
Some faultfinders said it was a thoughtful and premeditated script by agents of the federal government to divert public attention from the swelling oppositions against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu-led government. To them, the recent stories of alleged coup plots don’t make sense.
Indeed, one of the opposition parties, African Democratic Congress (ADC) in a recent statement said that the government was only ‘’exploiting the coup story to divert attention from the real issues of misgovernance’’ in the country and to curry sympathy.
“Subsequent unattributed media reports purportedly implicating unnamed politicians in the so-called plot now provide a pretext for the government to clamp down on opposition figures or mount undue surveillance on them,’’ the spokesman for the party, Bolaji Abdullahi said.
Some reliable online media platforms had reported that the 16 officers the Defence Headquarters said were picked up for certain “unprofessional conduct,’’ were being questioned over an alleged plan to overthrow President Tinubu-led administration.
Some of the detainees, according to the reports, included a Brigadier-General, a Colonel and others below that rank – reportedly attached to the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA).
The latest report – by one of the dailies, suggested that a former governor from one of the southern states is said to be under investigation for his alleged link to the army officers detained over the alleged coup plot. It is being suspected that the former governor financed the alleged plot, which was said to have been scheduled for October 25.
However, there were conflicting signals from the Defence Headquarters (DHQ). Contrary to the coup rumour, the DHQ stated that 16 senior army officers were undergoing interrogation for ‘’professional misconduct.”
The Director of Defence Information, Brigadier-General Tukur Gusau, said the military never mentioned ‘’coup plot’’ in its earlier statement confirming the arrest of the officers.
He described the coup reports as “false and misleading.’’
“The attention of the Defence Headquarters (DHQ) has been drawn to a false and misleading report by an online publication insinuating that the cancellation of activities marking Nigeria’s 65th Independence Anniversary was linked to an alleged attempted military coup,’’ DHQ stated.
“The report also made spurious references to the recent DHQ press release announcing the arrest of sixteen officers currently under investigation for professional misconduct. The claims by the said publication are entirely false, malicious, and intended to cause unnecessary tension and distrust among the populace,’ it added.
The statement further stated that the ongoing investigation involving the 16 officers is a routine internal process aimed at ensuring that discipline and professionalism are maintained through the ranks. It added that an investigative panel has been duly constituted, and its findings would be made public.
However, some security experts have argued that the official response by the Defence Headquarters may be an “unspoken admission”.
According to them, something actually went wrong. They also argued that shopping for reasons for the arrest of over 16 military officers fuels the suspicion.
It might be politically correct for the army not to admit the attempted coup. But, like the common saying, “there is no smoke without fire.”
What may be at stake most critically – going by the tension or mistrust the story has created in the land, is the future of democracy in the country.
There is a popular belief that military regime is no longer fashionable in Nigeria, due to the long offensive memory of the activities of the military junta – which ought to make the coup exceptionally ugly in the nation’s political discourse.
However, the possibility that some elements within the military still view civil rule as unattractive should not be ruled out.
This calls for a comprehensive investigation, because the recent return of military regimes in some African countries have been motivated by a combination of international and domestic undercurrents.
As many experts in international politics have argued, the post-Cold War agreement against coups has weakened globally. The argument is that Western powers that were once unswerving to sanctioning unconstitutional power grabs have become more wary and selective, putting more emphasis on their economic, military and diplomatic interests, and Nigeria must watch out.
At the regional level, the effectiveness of African institutions, like African Union (AU) and ECOWAS, has weakened. The failure of AU to sanction coups in Burkina Faso and Chad, is a sad indicator of the weakness of the institution.
For example, ECOWAS – once a steadfast guardian/defender of constitutional order, struggled to respond to the 2023 coup in Niger Republic, facing internal divisions and opposition from neighbouring military juntas.
But, there is near consensus among Nigerians – that with the long-stay of the military regime in Nigeria, the military junta had lost its credibility – largely due to authoritarianism, corruption and economic mismanagement.
That is why the return of democracy in 1999 was compelled by popular demands for accountability, transparency and better living conditions. Sadly, a few years later, dissatisfaction with the political elite began to grow.
There are those who have argued – rightly so, that several elections in the country – from 1999 to date, have failed woefully to deliver noticeable improvements, coupled with huge poverty, unemployment and growing insecurity across the country.
But in the middle of these socio-political and economic challenges, is military rule an option? Obviously no. Military leaders usually come to the offices, typically with a huge promise to restore order and resuscitate the economy, fight corruption and good governance. But do they deliver? Records show that the economic effects of military rule are calamitous.
To be sure, in over three decades of military regime in Nigeria, the traditional agricultural-based economy was abandoned, and the nation’s economy became tremendously dependent on exports of oil, which due to frequent fluctuations in oil prices led to an unstable economy.
For years, Nigeria witnessed a situation where fundamental human rights and civil liberties were severely curtailed, with freedom of speech, association, and press being restricted. Dissent voices were brutally crushed, and opposition figures were either jailed/exiled or murdered.
Many experts believe that the prevailing socio-political and economic challenges: High levels of corruption, low productivity, poor standard of living conditions, infrastructure neglect, inflation, and unemployment are products of the institutions created by the military juntas before they left in 1999.
Indeed, frequent coups and changes in military leadership led to a lack of continuity in government policies in the country, thereby hampering development.
In particular, the retired Gen. Ibrahim Babangida-led regime was considered grossly incompetent in all sectors, especially the neglect of non-oil sectors and misplaced priorities.
Perhaps so. Records show that as a result of the military economic policy of the 1980s, almost 70 % of foreign-exchange earnings were going into debt servicing and there was very little growth. This created huge poverty, crime, disease, institutional decay and urban dislocation.
The volatility as well as discontent caused by these policies was one of the causes of the consistent shape of coups, an indication that military rule is not a shortcut to development.
Agreed that the political elite has not done well – Nigeria currently hosts a huge population living in extreme poverty; socio-economic development over the last decade have been limited and unquestionably disappointing. In this context, the temptation to embrace authoritarian solutions is understandable – but many believe it is ill-advised.
It has been established solidly over the years that military coups are not a quick way to development. Past experiences have shown that they dislocate good governance, destabilise economic performance and grind down democratic institutions, and even when democracy returns, the damage often hangs back.
It might be safe to argue that the route to development lies not in circumventing democracy, but in consolidating it. What this means is that erecting institutions that are both responsible and operative can help foster real policy enhancements, growth and development.
The oft-heard assurance of ‘’better days are coming’’ through the military regime remains just that – a mere promise. There is strong prevailing evidence, which suggests that Nigeria’s future will be brighter not with any coups, but with more democracy.
However, to advertise democracy and make it attractive to the people, governments at all levels have plenty of work to do: They need to increase the security of the state by refocusing attention to the well-being of citizens, especially those who serve the public.
President Tinubu, in particular, must promote inclusiveness – making every part of the country feel a sense of belonging, he must do away with his seemingly nepotism.
He needs to implement all inclusive policies and services that support good education, economic stability, housing, and overall quality of life, particularly for the weak and marginalised populations.
Governments at all levels should implement more sound policies and programmes that stimulate economic growth, create jobs, and increase access to education and skills training to improve the economic well-being of Nigerians.
They must simulate support-programmes for vulnerable populations, providing targeted support to susceptible populations, such as those in rural areas, women, and children, to ensure they have access to basic necessities of life like healthcare.
Leave a Comment