Who Wants IBB's Apology?
By Reuben Abati
Professor Wole Soyinka was being kind when he advised during a visit to Kaduna prison on July 27, that former President General Ibrahim Babangida should apologise to all Nigerians for annulling the Presidential election of June 12, 2003. I suppose the assumption is that if IBB apologises, the rest of us would be satisfied that he has at least accepted guilt, and may well atone for his sins. And if this is so, he may proceed with his ambition to return to the Presidential Villa in 2007. This is how the Nobel Laureate's statement has been interpreted simplistically. And not surprisingly the IBB group immediately announced that their General is willing to apologise.
They seem to think that Wole Soyinka has offered them an escape route from the albatross of June 12. I am sorry, I do not think that the matter is that easy. Nor should anyone ever think that Soyinka's suggestion is meant to facilitate IBB's ambition. A few weeks ago, General Yakubu Gowon at a dinner party in honour of Professor Soyinka had offered an apology for detaining the Nobel Laureate during Nigeria's civil war. Gowon was very civil about it, interspersing his reflections on that trying moment in Nigerian history with jokes and wisecracks. The distance between the actual event and the moment of his speech made Gowon's apology easy. Long before then, he and Soyinka had met at different fora and according to the laureate, "there was absolutely no problem between us". This is where the critical difference lies.
The majority of Nigerians with the sad exception of a few yes-men have problems with Babangida. They see him as the architect and the prince of pain, as the man who made the evil of Abacha's misrule possible and who in addition, helped to destroy whatever higher values existed in the environment. He shares in this respect, the same class and odium with such tyrants as Kamuzu Banda and Mobutu Sese Seko. If Nigerians were not as forgetful as they often tend to be, by now, Babangida would be living in exile, far away from the reach of the people's anger.
At the risk of sounding presumptuous, I want to argue that Professor Soyinka was taunting IBB when he asked him to apologise. He was throwing a dangerous bait at him. He was trying to test the level of Babangida's greed. He was setting a trap for him that would destroy him completely. Two things. One, Soyinka is more or less saying: "come on Ibrahim, let's see how desperate you are about 2007". For, if Babangida jumps at the bait and decides to issue a statement apologising to Nigerians at this moment, after he has been prompted publicly to do so, then his game of deception is up. He has so far denied being interested in the Presidency in 2007; each time the question is put to him, he simply avoids a categorical response. Meanwhile, his boys (mark my words, we live in a country of boys parading as big men) are all over the place pushing the case for his return to power. If he offers an apology, then it means he is doing so, for opportunistic reasons. And that is bound to weaken his ambition, and destroy him morally.
The second issue is that IBB in the last 11 years has never at any point admitted that he was the one who ordered that the June 12 election should be annulled. The best that we have heard from him on the subject is that he would at some point in the future tell the story of the forces at work and how his government was faced with no other option. Should he now turn around and apologise, the rest of us will go after him with the most poisonous bile that we can throw up. He would have established himself as a pathological liar to start with. And definitely, such a person cannot confidently ask that he should be allowed to serve Nigerians as President. It would make no sense whatsoever to vote for a man who admits that he annulled an election that was widely believed to have been free and fair. Babangida would have no moral right to seek to enjoy the benefits of a process and institution that he helped to destroy. Not even a thousand Adisas and Wada Nas can get him to power on that score.
It can be safely assumed that Babangida is a clever man. He is not going to apologise because it would be suicidal for him to do so. And he must be the first person to realise this. He has not said anything yet in response to Profesor Soyinka whom he congratulated lavishly in a paid advertisement on the occasion of his 70th birthday. Obviously, Soyinka did not see that advert and if he did, he remains untouched by the flattery contained therein. But not surprisingly, Babangida's "boys" have been speaking. Wada Nas was reported in one paper as saying that Soyinka's demand for an IBB apology shows that he hates the North. Why has he not asked Obasanjo to apologise to Nigerians I don't know how much learning Nas can boast of but it is my considered opinion that he just uttered the most uneducated statement of the year. How does a statement about IBB translate into the hatred of the North. And what North The North of the almajiri or IBB's North The North of Aminu Kano or Buhari's North
This noisy contribution by Wada Nas perfectly illustrates the problem with this country. Every opportunity for a clean argument is short-circuited by a resort to ethnic arguments. Hear Wada Nas: "Obasanjo is somebody who has scuttled every ingredient of democracy in Nigeria. I was not at all surprised by Soyinka's call. I know he will not make such a call on Obasanjo because it is his own that is in charge." This is not only cheap, it is a devious means of avoiding any form of rigorous thinking. If Wada Nas by any chance reads newspapers, he would have discovered that Soyinka is one of Obasanjo's harshest critics. In fact, not too long ago, both men had a spat, exchanging letters over Bola Ige's killing and government's handling of the case, and Soyinka in a deadly rejoinder that brought the correspondence to a halt, barely stopped short of calling Obasanjo an illiterate! So what is Wada Nas talking about The good news is that Professor Soyinka has studiously avoided responding to him. That in itself is a kind of response. Why dignify Wada Nas with the elegance of a Soyinkian response
In another development, General Abdulkareem Adisa who has given the impression that he worships Babangida, granted an interview to the Daily Independent on Saturday in which he tried to ridicule the idea of June 12 being a defining issue for the Babangida administration. Unlike Wada Nas, Adisa attempts to do a bit of thinking, but he ends up with that kind of thinking that advertises a combination of ignorance and mischief. He suggests that IBB is bigger than June 12 and that his administration is the best that Nigeria has ever had. Adisa goes further to list Babangida's achievement: DFFRI, NDE and MAMSER. Adisa is entitled to his opinion, but I do not think that there are many Nigerians who would readily accept that Nigerians have any reason to be grateful to Ibrahim Babangida. And if he insists that June 12 is not an issue, then no one should be surprised. Adisa after all is a soldier. He says we should forget about June 12. Clearly, he wants us to forget as he has forgotten. It is not his fault, is it The beauty of democracy is that anybody can say anything at all and expect to be granted an audience.
In the end, I do not think IBB's apology would be of any use to anyone. The weight of an apology does not lie in the ritual of uttering a few words of remorse. Of what use is an apology that stays only on the lips Who wants that kind of apology that is meant to be a vote-getting gimmick Even if Babangida feels like apologising, let him not bother. If an apology was necessary it should have been offered long before now. We have survived in this country since 1993 in spite of Babangida and his team. Their place in our history is already properly defined and the verdict of history has become part of our collective heritage. Of what use would Babangida's apology be to all the families that lost their dear ones Or those whose hopes were destroyed Or the average Nigerian who was sentenced to a future of penury by Babangida's misgovernance
IBB should not offer an apology. Let him tell the full story that he says he would love to tell. Let him seek refuge in the truth that he says he is carrying about in his chest. Let him make a clean breast of that truth, de-classify it, and let the rest of us take a critical look at that truth. And if he would not do that, let him remain quiet and stay out of our lives. A Babangida Presidency in 2007 would mean not just the return of Babangida but also of Wada Nas, Adisa and their likes. Could that be what Nigerians want or deserve I don't think so. But obviously, the best way to prevent that possibility is for civil society to bestir itself, and realise that Nigeria is precisely at that point in its history once again when the vigilance of good men and women is required. The elections of 2007 may mark a major turning point, and a critical issue before then is the country's lack of preparedness. What dominates political discourse is the naked ambition of those who think that it is their divine right to rule and control Nigeria. Nobody is talking about a road map that can prevent the shameless compromises of 2003 or the sadness of 1993.
The responsibility for saving us from ourselves does not lie with the politicians but with civil society as units and as a collective. Together, we face the challenge of showing the rest of the world that the people of this country stand for something, that we understand the importance of values in society and that the will of the people is real in our circumstances. To allow Babangida back in office either through the instrumentality of an apology or any other means would amount to telling the rest of the world that we are a land without memory or standards. A Babangida Presidency in 2007 would amount to the desecration of the graves of all the men and women who gave their lives and resources to the democratic struggle. The spirits of such persons would cry out in revolt from the very depths. There will be a riot in the Nigerian quarters of heaven, even if there would be no one to render an eye-witness account.
