All human beings are subject to decay.
And when fate summons, monarchs must obey.
– JOHN DRYDEN
IN October, 1955, when Ngo Dinh Diem became the President of Vietnam after decades of turbulence in the South-east Asian country, he told his countrymen: “Follow me, if I advance; kill me if I retreat; revenge me if I die!” Until he was toppled by the army in November, 1963, Diem was able to hold forte in the war against the Vietcong. His words, “Kill me if I retreat,” proved uncannily prophetic. General Sani Abacha, who died last Monday at the age of 54, never retreated as he led Nigeria through some of the most difficult years of its history. Like Diem, he experienced several attempts — by people he trusted — to overthrow him. But unlike Diem, he survived them all. Till the end, he appeared to be at a loss about what to do with the verdict on the coup attempt led by his deputy, General Diya. But at the end, he didn’t survive the final onslaught against him by death, which came surreptitiously even a few hours after he had performed a public function: receiving and seeing off the visiting Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. Call it God’s own coup: neat, surgical, bloodless and, like a thunderclap, so sudden.
We lesser mortals were left gaping, shocked beyond belief by a phenomenon to which we all are subscribers. When Bertrand Russell said, “Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do,” it’s as if he was referring to our own head of state. In Abacha’s case, even higher mortals were flabbergasted, thrown off balance by the news that descended on the nation like acid rain. For, the debate had since shifted from the General’s reported ill-health to the talk shop of his perceived self-succession plans.
General Abacha’s sad demise, if you take away the surprise element, has also revealed to us what we all knew. The nation, nay the world, emerged divided as usual, with regions and peoples failing to go beyond dichotomous thinking. As the OAU and a large segment of the Nigerian citizenry sympathise with his family and the nation over the great loss, the CNN and most Lagos-Ibadan newspapers are full of the views of those who are happy that the man died. However, the real Abacha will only be fully judged and understood, like all leaders who died, now that he is no more. There should be no doubt that he led a courageous life as head of state, never giving in to the loud threats of the scheming Western powers and their local collaborators. His foreign policy was vibrant, hard nosed and gutsy, even if replete with miscalculations. His regime restored democratic rule in Liberia and Sierra Leone, embraced friends within the ECOWAS and stood firm over Bakassi.
At home, he introduced laudable programmes that sought to — and succeeded to a certain extent — positively change the socio-economic fortunes of the nation. General Abacha had, in his time, carried out an effective war against drugs abuse and trafficking, fought corruption through the instrument of the Failed Banks Decree and was expected to introduce a failed parastatals tribunal. The Petroleum Trust Fund has, within four years or its existence, lived up to its billing of repairing decayed infrastructure and given a measure of respect to the government. Mrs. Maryam Abacha’s own Family Support Programme and the Family Economic Advancement Programme have both brought succour to a lot of Nigerians. Even if you didn’t like Abacha as a person, you couldn’t fault the very idea for these projects. Of course, the mode of execution of some of them may be questionable, but then such is the case with most worthy government programmes.
Some of his other programmes weren’t as honourable, though. The political transition programme, which the new government intends to continue, drew much of the hate. It has had its credibility tainted not because of its introduction but the way it was ultimately derailed towards an agenda whose name was anything but democratic. The programme was twisted towards favouring the head of state, his friends and those interpreted as believers in him. Although he didn’t announce outright that he would surely transform into a civilian president as campaigned by a coterie of government agencies, political parties and shadowy groups, his silence understandably spoke louder than words. The greatest lesson from Abacha’s transition programme — and now his death — is: never, ever again, personalise the national interest. For at the end of the day, as the God’s ‘coup’ has demonstrated, life’s transience and unpredictability make it all too worthless.
The government battled with perceived local enemies, many of whom were detained without trial — politicians, human rights activists and journalists. This gave the former leader a bad image in the eyes of many. The government also ran a huge family-and-friends complex, the Mafiosi of whom made fast wild bucks at the expense of the rest. Then there was the crying poverty at the local level which seemed to increase by the day, making it difficult for most families to make both ends meet. This was in spite of huge investments in areas meant to curtail the problem.
Now that he is gone, the future lies before us, still indeterminate and dim. Nevertheless, those who now insult him or are happy that he is dead are wrong. It is impious and anticulture to use the type of terms used on Abacha by Gani Fawehinmi on the BBC radio. As John Donne once said. “Any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”
Our problems as a nation have not disappeared with Abacha’s death because his exit wasn’t meant to be a great solution. An ease in tension may happen, yes, but the basic questions about the nationhood will still pester us for a long time to come. However, the sad event of this week is, as someone said, some opportunity to make amends. Fortunately, and much to the chagrin of those who pestered the nation with the refrain that Abacha was the only person capable of ruling Nigeria today, we’ve got another leader, a fine officer and gentleman whose precedents are so honourable and reassuring that we have no cause to doubt his abilities. General Abdussalami Abubakar has already drawn a line in the sand which we can all read. He has pledged to complete the transition programme, with all its imperfections, as scheduled. This remains to be seen, but Nigerians can count on the words of this largely apolitical, principled gentleman who, it seems, may not be led astray by sychopants and such infamous bodies as the YEAA. (Remember that YEAA is right there busy reading the situation, wondering whether to carry on or not, especially since the new leader shares initials with the old one).
It is important that the ‘new’ regime learns from the mistakes or the ‘old’ one. In our country, the onus lies with the man at the top, as the recent experience has shown. As such the head of state is expected to pull the country out of the doldrums, re-befriend the rest of the world, reconcile the nation, and give credibility to the transition programme. We all know that he has no much time on his hands, hence our ever-ready determination to cooperate with him. We know that a man of his type, even as he listens to his own heartbeat, will always listen to the heartbeat of the nation.
* Published in my column, Melting Pot, in the New Nigerian Weekly today
