Connect with us

Opinion

Examining Uju Anya’s vitriol on Queen Elizabeth II

Published

on

Like a prude confronted with sexually explicit images, the world didn’t hide its shock at Nigerian-born American professor, Uju Anya’s negative comments last week on the late British monarch, Queen Elizabeth II. The world had waited with bated breath at manifest indications that Elizabeth’s last hours had come. Amid this apprehension, the associate professor of Applied Linguistics, Critical Sociolinguistics and Critical Discourse at Carnegie Mellon University launched her salvo. It came in the form of a tweet that brimmed with bile and hate. She had tweeted: “I heard the chief monarch of a thieving, raping genocidal empire is finally dying. May her pain be excruciating”. It was a bazooka that upset and shook the world out of its sanctimony.

Billionaire Jeff Bezos, the world’s third richest man, had an immediate riposte for Anya. “This is someone supposedly working to make the world better? I don’t think so. Wow,” he had written. Not one to be cowed, Anya launched another diatribe at both Bezos and the now-confirmed-dead 96-year-old monarch. “If anyone expects me to express anything but disdain for the monarch who supervised a government that sponsored the genocide that massacred and displaced half my family and the consequences of which those alive today are still trying to overcome, you can keep wishing upon a star,” she tweeted. Uju was apparently making reference to the 1967–1970 Nigerian-Biafran war during which time the British Empire, supporting Nigeria, supplied arms and ammunition that helped Nigeria vanquish Biafra. About one million people reportedly died in the needless war. For Bezos, Anya had a harangue: “May everyone you and your merciless greed have harmed in this world remember you as fondly as I remember my colonizers”.

Uju is apparently an against-method academic. Born of a Nigerian/Trinidadian origin, her parents lived in Enugu, Nigeria and her father’s embrace of the African polygyny fractured the wedlock, necessitating her Trinidadian mother to flee to America with her and siblings. A self-confessed lesbian, Uju got legally separated from her husband in 2017, even as she publicly announced her against-the-grain sexuality.

While Uju may be considered to have stepped off the borders of humanity by wishing another creation “excruciating death,” the facts of her grouse are in the public domain and need not be glossed over. An analysis of Anya’s tweet reveals three key elements in her accusations against the British Empire, viz theft, rape and genocide support. There is none of these allegations that historical renditions, especially by African and Africanist scholars, have not levelled against British colonisers.

Apparently, because of her vested interest in Nigeria, Britain overtly supported Nigeria in the civil war and indeed supplied arms and ammunition to Nigeria. Thousands of Igbo had been killed in the 1966 pogrom with Britain, the immediate past suzerain, lifting no finger. The Harold Wilson government, through its lackey high commissioner in Lagos, David Hunt, was unapologetically against Biafra. As the war raged, 1.8 million refugees sprang up in Biafra, many of whom were living skeletons, kwashiorkor-stricken kids. Karl Jaggi, head of the Red Cross at the time, had estimated that about a million children were killed by hunger and bullets but Red Cross saved about half a million through its intervention.

With the help of BBC correspondent, Fredrick Forsyth, the terrifying pictures of skeleton-like children appeared on British TV and unsettled Britons, leading to a lack of appetite as those figures disrupted the flow of their dinner meals. The hitherto covered grim situations of the war, which Wilson had shielded from the British people’s view, sparked outrage and revealed Britain’s complicity in the genocidal war against the people of Nigeria. Queen Elizabeth was so powerful that if she indeed desired that the war should not be fought by both youthful soldiers, Yakubu Gowon and Emeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu, no blood would be shed by both parties.

Before Anya, Forsyth had revealed this complicity and connivance by Britain’s top echelon of power. He had written, “What is truly shameful is that this was not done by savages but aided and assisted at every stage by Oxbridge-educated British mandarins. Why? Did they love the corruption-riven, dictator-prone Nigeria? No. From start to finish, it was to cover up that the UK’s assessment of the Nigerian situation was an enormous judgmental screw-up. And worse, with neutrality and diplomacy from London, it could all have been avoided”. The truth is that, if Britain and her monarchy had insisted that the Aburi Accord, struck by the two leaders in Ghana, be observed to the letter, there would not have been the bloodshed that eventually occurred.

Britain was stung by allegations of vicarious complicity in the multiple deaths. It became clear that it either did not seek an armistice between the warring countries or it failed in its peremptory bid to reconcile them. Dr Akanu Ibiam, former governor of the Eastern Region, disclaimed the Knight of British Empire (KBF) bestowed upon him by Queen Elizabeth in protest of the UK’s biased involvement in the war. To further show his protest, Ibiam reportedly renounced his English name, Francis. So many other people protested the British complicity in the deaths of the people who later became re-assimilated into Nigeria.

What in Harold Wilson and David Hunt’s actions showed that they did not mirror the mind of Queen Elizabeth and her desire for the deaths of a people who, a few years before then, were her subjects, under the British colonial umbrella? A people who had now taken on the new name of Biafra? If the debonair queen didn’t stop Wilson from supporting the war on Biafra, why does anybody want to spare her of history’s unkind jab for the colossal deaths during the Biafran war?

Facts of history do not see Britain and ipso facto, Queen Elizabeth, as benevolent but cruel conquistadors. Till today, Britain’s foundational roles in the socio-political woes Nigeria currently faces have not ceased from jutting out of remembrancers’ lips. The 1914 amalgamation was done by Britain for the business pleasure of the empire without any regard for the future of Nigeria. The Royal Niger Company, a mercantile company formed in 1879, was chartered by Britain in the 19th century for this purpose. It became part of the United Africa Company which was used for the purchase and formation of colonial Nigeria. Through the activities of the company, Britain fenced off Bismarck Germany from the acquisition of Nigeria and it enabled this colonial empire to establish firm control over the lower Niger.

In Kenya, Britain’s conquistador role was no less benumbing. Between 1952 – the year Queen Elizabeth ascended the throne – and 1960, a revolt of the Kikuyu tribe against British rule reigned. The war was fought over three issues – the expulsion of Kikuyu tenants from settler farms, white settlers taking over lands and Britain’s failure to ascribe political representation to Kenyans in their own land. In the uprising, 32 white settlers and about 200 British police, as well as soldiers were said to have been killed. More than 1,800 African civilians were also killed. The number of Mau Mau rebels killed was put at around 20,000. When Britain hunted and captured the leader of the uprising, Didan Kimathi on October 21, 1956, it signalled the beginning of the move to grant Kenya its independence. Kimathi was executed by hanging in the early hours of February 18, 1957, at the Kamiti Maximum Security Prison.

Many of the empires under British suzerainty will also remember Britain and the Queen with grim-laced hearts.

Thus, while we stricture Anya, we should not gloss over history. By our human convention and norm, Anya tripped over the borders. The convention is for us to beatify fellow residents of this human space who transit mortality for immortality and their earthly sins are forgiven them. Our laws are no less guilty as even criminals undergoing trial have their cases discontinued. But should we allow the dead to escape that easily?

Britain dealt unkindly with her empires like merchandise and forcefully and unjustly expropriated their natural endowments as mercantile do. In the process, many lives were lost and futures railroaded. While many of those Mephistophelean activities of Britain took place before Queen Elizabeth ascended the throne, as the monarch that the rest of the world has known in the last 70 years, she should be a recipient of the assets and cruelty of her recent forebears. Methinks this was what Anya tried to say but which, either due to her unbridled anger and lack of diplomatese, she failed to pad with niceties – as the world wanted. Attempts at suppressing the angst against the past, rather than placating offspring of those whose kindred blood was spilt by African rulers, in connivance with colonial authorities, have boomeranged. Treating them dismissively and dressing them in derogatory words like “dot in a circle” has led to the metastasis of the hate and curated angry characters like Anya and Nnamdi Kanu.

The culture of not speaking ill of the dead is ancient and perhaps spans the whole of humanity. Africa has carried this culture on its head, probably more pretentiously than the rest of the world. History has however not allowed us to close our eyes to the evils perpetrated around us, even by ancient African monarchies who are the precursors of the current kings. From Sunni Ali Ber, the first king of the Songhai Empire and 15th ruler of the Sunni dynasty who conducted a repressive policy against the scholars of Timbuktu; Askia the Great, emperor of the Songhai empire; Shaka the Zulu; Idris Alooma; Benhazin Bowelle of Dahomey; Menelik II; Mansa Musa of Mali and down to some of our ancient Alaafins of the old Oyo Empire, as well as their chiefs like the wicked Bashorun Gaa, Africa too does not have a sparse supply of despots. Today, we paper over these excesses in history, just as we are doing with the kings and queens of England.

The British monarchy and some monarchies in the world are realising that modernity may make it hard for them to continually assert the fiery powers of their fiefdoms as they did in times past. This, I think, is the most enduring manifestation of the monarchy superintended over by Elizabeth II. Under Elizabeth as queen, though the monarchical power is huge and awesome, it was dressed in a ceremonial robe. The political power, on the outward, was then made to look like the decider of the destinies of Britain and its erstwhile colonies. This however does not remove the fact that the monarchy was an umpire of bloodshed and tears in colonial territories some centuries ago.

The realisation of this wave shift in power was espoused by the author of the celebrated Yoruba classic, Igbi Aye Nyi – Life swivels like a wind – Chief T. A. A. Ladele. Written in 1978, Ladele, an Okeho, Oyo state-born history teacher at Durbar College, Oyo and pioneer headmaster of Baptist School, Iwere-Ile, was one of Nigeria’s early writers. In, Igbi Aye Nyi, the 1920-born writer sought to teach us all about the ephemeral worth of political power and the un-enduring texture of raw brawn. Set in a town called Otolu at the outset of colonial incursion into Nigeria, Oba Bankarere, the Otolu king, in concert with his sons, inflicted huge terror on his subjects in his excessive wielding of power. He flaunted the wealth that accrued from power and defied all known societal norms. Two of Oba Bankarere’s subjects however rose to save the sanity of the traditional institution and the lives of the people. In the end, the colonial government waded in to curtail these excesses in a manner that rubbished the king and curtailed his outlaw sons.

That culture of defending the dead, even when we know their excesses while alive, is what the rest of the world seems to be espousing with Queen Elizabeth’s transition. While I agree that wishing evil on the living as Professor Anya did was not tidy enough and sounds very inhuman, I am not against her dwelling on the perceived soft landing for the genocide that Britain, under the Queen’s watch, gave the Nigerian war. By not treading this path of beatifying the dead, in spite of themselves, Professor Anya and travellers on her kind of boat have received flaks on their persons. Some even went to the extent of deploying Anya’s sexuality to attack her and a queer character said that because she tweets positive comments on LP’s presidential candidate, she epitomizes the negative character some online rats ascribe to the candidate. Yes, Africans cannot stand same-sex relationships, but the fact of our global existence is that the biology of some people is misdirected towards such sexuality, in spite of themselves. There are so many citizens of the globe who share our admirable opposite-sex biology but whose minds are as odious and repugnant as the sewer. So why beatify the latter and incinerate the former?

To my mind, the culture of beatifying the dead with a blanket of “a life well lived” is self-serving. Most of the time, we spread this omnibus blanket as a shawl on the disreputable lives lived by the dead simply because we all dread what the world would say when we too exit the world. This was aptly explained by the late Ilorin, Kwara state Dadakwada maestro, Odolaye Aremu, who sang that no one can predict who will be free of being drenched by rain that is yet to abate. He had expressed it in his lyrics: “Ojo ti nro ti o da, Olohun lo mo iye eni ti o pa”.

The way to go is to let whoever lives their lives miserably be apportioned strictures commensurate with their measly lives and those who live life as puritans be so accorded at their departure. We have taken this apportioning of blanket beatification on the dead to such an absurd level that it encourages evil doers to bask in the warmth of their evil broths. This does not discourage the living from evil. While it is nice to beatify Queen Elizabeth as it is being done all over the world for her recorded great footprints while alive, let non-conformists like Anya freely dwell on the misgivings they have about her too. They should not be made victims of unfavourable censoring or censure.

 

Dr. Festus Adedayo, a Journalist, author, lawyer and columnist writes from Ibadan, Oyo State

Comments

Opinion

Nigeria: Dancing On The Edge Of Destiny

Published

on

Nigeria stands as a paradox, endowed with immense natural wealth yet grappling with staggering poverty levels among its populace. The country is blessed with an abundance of resources, including diverse agricultural products, vast oil reserves, and a burgeoning tourism and entertainment industry, all of which hold immense potential for national prosperity. Despite this richness, many Nigerians endure dire economic conditions, raising questions about the effective management and equitable distribution of wealth generated from these resources.

The agricultural sector in Nigeria is a significant contributor to both the economy and food security. With favourable climatic conditions and arable land, Nigeria has the potential to become an important player in global agriculture. However, inefficiencies in farming techniques, lack of access to modern equipment, inadequate infrastructure, and insecurity impede growth, leaving many farmers in subsistence conditions. By addressing these challenges, Nigeria could harness its agricultural wealth to reduce poverty and strengthen its economy.

Similarly, oil and gas remain at the forefront of Nigeria’s natural resources, providing a substantial share of government revenue. Unfortunately, the oil riches have also been a source of conflict and corruption, leading to environmental degradation and social unrest in oil-producing regions. Although the sector can foster economic growth, the mismanagement of resources has prevented the country from fully benefiting from its wealth. Furthermore, the fluctuating oil prices on the global market create vulnerability, emphasizing the need for economic diversification.

The entertainment industry, particularly Nollywood, represents another facet of Nigeria’s wealth. This sector showcases rich cultural heritage, offers employment opportunities, and generates income. Despite its success, it has not yet been leveraged to bring about far-reaching economic change across the country. Without addressing existing systemic challenges, Nigeria’s abundant resources might continue to dance precariously on the edge of opportunity, further complicating the narrative of its natural wealth.

Leadership Challenges and Political Corruption

Significant leadership issues and pervasive political corruption have plagued Nigeria’s history. Since gaining independence in 1960, the nation has witnessed a succession of leaders, many of whom have failed to prioritize the welfare of their citizens. Ineffective governance has not only hampered Nigeria’s growth but has also led to a persistent cycle of political instability. This crisis of leadership has contributed significantly to the erosion of public trust in governmental institutions, weakening the social fabric of the country.

The impact of political corruption is deeply entrenched in Nigeria’s socio-economic landscape. Corruption permeates various layers of governance, leading to the misallocation of resources intended for public welfare. Essential services such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure development suffer as funds are diverted for personal gain. The consequences of such malfeasance are evident in the rise of poverty rates, inadequate healthcare systems, and a significant lack of access to quality education. Consequently, these socio-economic challenges create a vicious cycle that further exacerbates the leadership crisis.

Historically, Nigeria has experienced a range of leadership styles, from military rule to civilian governments, yet the recurring theme remains the same: a failure to eradicate corrupt practices. Each new leadership regime often promises reform and better governance, but these assurances rarely translate into meaningful change. The lessons from past experiences underscore the importance of accountability and transparency in rebuilding trust between the government and the populace. As the nation grapples with its leadership crisis, the intersection of governance and corruption demands critical attention to chart a new course towards sustainable development and empowerment.

The Hardships Under the Current Administration

The current administration of Nigeria, under President Bola Tinubu, has ushered in an array of policies that have sparked significant public discourse due to their profound impact on the lives of ordinary Nigerians. Notably, the removal of fuel subsidies has been a pivotal move that has reverberated through the economy, leading to steep increases in fuel prices. This sudden change has not only made transportation costs soar but has also led to a ripple effect, dramatically affecting the prices of basic goods and services. Citizens are now grappling with the daily realities of inflated living costs, often on already strained budgets.

Furthermore, the naira floating, aimed at addressing exchange rate discrepancies, has instead resulted in further devaluation. The naira’s instability has posed challenges for local businesses and individual consumers, making it increasingly difficult to afford essential products. This monetary policy highlights the delicate balancing act required in governance, reflecting the complexity of addressing economic issues while ensuring the welfare of the populace. Many Nigerians report feelings of uncertainty and anxiety regarding their financial futures, emphasizing a general sentiment of disillusionment with the direction of government policy under the Tinubu administration.

A Path Forward: Hope or Despair?

Nigeria’s current circumstances present a dichotomy of hope and despair. Despite the numerous challenges confronting the country, including political instability, economic hardships, and social unrest, there is a glimmer of hope that reform is possible through concerted efforts by the populace and leadership. As the country reaches a crossroads, systemic reforms have the potential to catalyze change. These reforms must prioritize institutional strengthening, increase transparency, and promote inclusive and sustainable economic growth.

Public participation is critical in this endeavour. Citizens must reclaim their agency by actively participating in democratic processes, advocating for accountability from their leaders, and demanding that their voices be heard. Civic education should be promoted to ensure that the electorate is informed and empowered to make decisions that affect their future. Furthermore, civil society organizations can play a pivotal role in mobilizing resources and providing platforms for dialogue, where citizens can articulate their needs and aspirations.

Accountability from leadership is another cornerstone for progress in Nigeria. As the people seek a path forward, leaders must prioritize the needs of their constituents over personal interests. Regular assessments of governmental performance, transparency in budgeting and spending, and anti-corruption measures can help to restore public trust. Leaders who demonstrate commitment to these principles may inspire hope and foster collective action aimed at the common good.

Ultimately, the question remains: Who holds the key to Nigeria’s promised future? The answer lies within the collaboration between the government and its citizens, whereby both parties work towards common objectives. The road to prosperity for Nigeria is not easy, but through systemic reforms, public engagement, and accountability, there exists an opportunity to transform hope into reality, steering the nation towards a brighter tomorrow.

 

 

Mimiola, an Award-Winning journalist, sent in this piece.

Continue Reading

Opinion

NNPCL vs. Dangote: Why Tinubu Can’t Play Pontius Pilate

Published

on

The Presidency addressed several issues last Wednesday as the Special Adviser to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Information and Strategy, Mr. Bayo Onanuga picked the microphone to give perspectives to certain developments. One of the issues he addressed was the lingering feud between the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL) and Dangote Refineries Limited.

Onanuga said that President Tinubu would not intervene in the feud because the two entities “operate independently in a deregulated market.”

According to Onanuga, the Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) field has been deregulated, just as Dangote is a private company. The NNPCL is a limited liability company, he said. In the loaded statement, the presidential adviser was hinting Nigerians why the President cannot dabble into the huge but confusing feud between Dangote Refineries and NNPCL, over the pricing of petroleum products in the country.

The presidential adviser and Nigerians are not oblivious to the implications of his statement. First, a lot of hope had been invested in the Dangote Refineries by Nigerians, who had concluded that its coming on stream would yield them cheaper fuel and help end the perennial fuel scarcity that kept the pumps at the filling stations dry for most of the months. But as the refinery was about to fag off its full operations, officials of the refinery, the NNPC and its subsidiaries started singing some music with disparaging tunes. Accusations upon accusations were rampaging in the air, while some name calling and tagging were being spread openly and under the table. It became obvious that elements in the administration of President Tinubu were opposed to the operation of the local refinery. Such insinuations must have prompted the President of Dangote Group, Alhaji Aliko Dangote to speak out in some tones not easily attributable to him hitherto. He alleged that officials of the NNPC were running a blending plant in Malta, where fuel is imported into Nigeria. He equally offered to hand off the Lagos-based refinery if the government would buy him out.

As tension rose, between Dangote and NNPCL, the corporation was having the last laugh, as it chose the same time to unleash some violent strokes of koboko whips on the back of the Nigerian citizen. It galloped fuel prices at will and at the same time locked the products away from their reach. Queues got unwinding at filling stations and the agony was unending. The hunger and thirst for Dangote fuel grew, but the NNPC chose to remain the stumbling block. I guess that the cries of Nigerian citizens at one point got across the Aso Rock Villa, in Abuja and the presidency had to order a temporary ceasefire. NNPCL was directed to create avenues for the supply of crude oil to Dangote in Naira while the refinery too was to agree to a pricing model to be fashioned by the Federal Executive Council. Even at that, the two combatants have continued to throw jabs at each other, especially over what should constitute the exact price of Dangote petrol. While Dangote had claimed that fuel from its refineries would be far cheaper than imported ones, the NNPC had given a conflicting indication. The NNPC/Dangote tango has been a ding-dong and a topsy-turvy affair.

That was the situation as the October 1 date fixed for the start of crude supply to Dangote draws close. And Mr. Onanuga was speaking against that backdrop. If that stands, it would amount to classifying Tinubu in the mould of the biblical Pontius Pilate, as seen in the book of John 18:37-49 and 19:1-19. In that biblical encounter, leading to the final crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the Jews had brought Jesus to Pilate’s court for an indictment that would enable them to crucify him. Pilate asked questions of Jesus and even though Jesus answered in the spirit, the judge was still able to conclude that he found no fault in Jesus. And that was despite the mounting pressure from the multitude of Jews, seeking to crucify Jesus.

As we read in John 19:6; “When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, Crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him.”

I believe that President Tinubu should not throw Nigerians at the NNPC, like sheep to wolves. If the declaration of his office is allowed to stand, he would be doing otherwise. To play the Pilate in this needless NNPCL and Dangote feud, he would have endorsed all the punishment his compatriots are suffering at the hands of the NNPCL. He would have said, even though I found no merit in the push to whip the population, I leave you to crucify them’ That would tell us that the President is not only shirking his responsibility as the Minister of Petroleum but also his overriding power as the President and Commander-in-chief.

Much as the officials of the NNPCL and other subsidiaries owned by the Nigerian people want to play the master by believing that they are independent limited liability companies, we will be hiding behind one finger if we believe any inch of that claim. And besides, which limited liability company would not be accountable to its shareholders or the chairman of its board?

If we don’t want to use agidi to light a gas cylinder, we have to agree that the matter of fuel supply in Nigeria is a basic unmistakable assignment President Tinubu must handle for his employers-the Nigerian people. He must be in a position to find answers to the puzzles. Why is fuel supply such a pain in the neck under his administration so far? Why is the locally imported fuel threatening to get more expensive under the watch of the NNPC he supervises? And why is the same NNPC seeking to suffer headaches for another person? When will NNPC’s refineries come alive after the several deadlines?

President Tinubu needs to intervene decisively too, by helping his employers find solutions to the endless hike in fuel prices, and why citizens of other oil-producing countries derive benefits from oil while the Nigerian situation is perpetually in the negative. The Daily Trust on September 23, published a report by Global Petrol Prices, a platform that tracks petrol prices across various countries, which claimed that four countries in Africa sell fuel cheaper than Nigeria. They include Libya which sells at $0.032 (approximately N52/litre), Egypt ($0.279), Algeria($0.342) and Angola, another oil-producing country, at $0.351 per litre.

 

Besides the above, Tribune columnist and renowned writer, Professor Farook Kperogi quoted data by some oil industry experts who claimed that the landing cost of imported petrol in Nigeria should stand at N1,107 per litre and that several cost components are not inclusive of locally imported fuel.

According to him, when such cost components are removed, Dangote’s fuel should not sell higher than N518.35 per litre. Indeed, investigations have revealed that Dangote fuel costs far cheaper than the amount quoted by him and the NNPC. You could see the fire in the eyes of the spokesperson of Dangote when he refuted the claim that NNPC got fuel at N890 per litre from the refinery.

President Tinubu should not play the ostrich, he cannot afford to play the Pontius Pilate in this case, if he wants a reversal of the oil curse in his tenure.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Who Says Nigerian Youths Should Not Japa?

Published

on

The trend of Nigerian youths relocating abroad, commonly called “Japa,” has reached alarming levels, driven by many pressing factors. Chief among these is the dire economic situation in the country, characterized by high unemployment rates, inflation, and widespread poverty.

Many young Nigerians find themselves grappling with the harsh realities of a stagnant job market where opportunities are limited, leading to a pervasive sense of hopelessness about their futures. In a society where ambition is often met with barriers, the desire for a better life has become a powerful motivator for japa (migration).

In addition to the economic challenges, high levels of insecurity further exacerbate this trend. The persistent threat of violence, crime, and social unrest makes everyday life precarious for many. Young people often feel vulnerable and unsafe, prompting them to consider relocation as a viable solution to secure their well-being. This atmosphere of fear and instability not only impacts their psyche but also diminishes their prospects for career growth and personal development.

Moreover, the desperation felt by many of these youths leads to significant personal sacrifices. It is not uncommon for individuals to sell their properties, deplete their savings, and even acquire loans in the hopes of financing their migration plans. These choices reflect a profound commitment to change their circumstances despite the inherent risks of leaving their homeland. Pursuing better educational prospects, career opportunities, and improved living conditions fuels the great exodus, as many believe that the benefits of migrating outweigh the costs of remaining in a challenging environment.

Ultimately, the convergence of economic instability, insecurity, and a lack of hope in the current environment drives this trend of migration among Nigerian youths. Each individual’s journey represents a search for a brighter future, underscoring the critical challenges facing young Nigerians today.

The Call for Action: Political Responses and Policies

The migration of Nigerian professionals, particularly within the healthcare sector, has elicited varied political responses. As the phenomenon of ‘Japa’—the colloquial term for seeking greener pastures abroad—grows increasingly prevalent, the Nigerian government has been compelled to confront the ramifications of this brain drain. Efforts have been made to formulate policies designed to retain healthcare workers, reflecting a recognition of these professionals’ pivotal role in national development. Initiatives such as improved salaries, better working conditions, and enhanced career advancement opportunities have been introduced to stem the tide of emigration.

A Lagos lawmaker representing Oshodi Isolo II Federal Constituency in the House of Representatives, Hon. Ganiyu Johnson, in 2023, sponsored “A bill for an Act to Amend the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act, Cap. M379, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, to mandate any Nigeria-trained medical or dental practitioner to practice in Nigeria for a minimum of five before being granted a full license by the council to make quality health services available to Nigeria.”

He argued that “the government has invested so much money in training these medical doctors, on average. Recently, the United Kingdom opened healthcare visas to people; who were all going to the UK, USA, and Canada. So should we fold our hands?”

President Bola Tinubu recently approved a National Policy on Health Workforce Migration to manage the exodus abroad of skilled Nigerian healthcare professionals. According to Muhammad Pate, the Coordinating Minister of Health and Social Welfare, the 56-page document outlines the national strategy for addressing the dynamics of health workers’ migration while ensuring that it does not jeopardize the requirements of the nation’s healthcare system.

However, the efficacy of such policies remains a subject of intense debate. Critics often point to the disparity between these governmental measures and the observed behaviour of political elites, who were based abroad before returning home to occupy political posts,  frequently seek medical attention for themselves and educational and professional opportunities for their children overseas, and are even quick to return abroad almost immediately they are out of political offices. This disconnect has raised questions about the commitment of leaders to create a conducive environment for graduates and professionals in Nigeria. Many citizens view these actions as a manifestation of hypocrisy, breeding further disillusionment and fueling the desire to ‘Japa’.

The persistent crisis in the healthcare system, characterized by inadequate infrastructure, insufficient funding, and a lack of essential resources, undermines these retention efforts. As the government formulates strategies, a more holistic approach is necessary to tackle the issues underlying healthcare workers’ dissatisfaction. This includes addressing systemic problems such as corruption and the lack of equitable resource distribution. A truly effective solution must encompass policies aimed at retaining talent and a broader commitment to reforming the conditions that compel professionals and youths to look abroad.

Ultimately, the Nigerian government faces a critical juncture in addressing the migration of skilled workers. A renewed focus on policy effectiveness and political accountability is essential to reverse the brain drain trend and retain valuable talent within the country.

The Ethical Dilemma: Is Japa Justified?

The decision of many Nigerian youths to japa, seeking opportunities abroad, stirs a profound ethical discourse regarding migration. At the heart of this phenomenon lies the debate over human rights to freedom of movement and the ethical implications of seeking better prospects in foreign lands. From one point of view, migration is a valid option for people who want to advance socioeconomically, supported by the fundamental human right to seek out a better life. This viewpoint emphasizes that individuals should have the autonomy to explore opportunities that enhance their quality of life, especially when local conditions are less than conducive to personal and professional development.

Conversely, critics often label this exodus as brain drain, equating it to a collective abandonment of responsibilities towards a nation grappling with myriad challenges. This characterization raises questions regarding the role and responsibility of political leaders in nurturing an environment that fosters growth, stability, and opportunities within the country. Are they not, partly, accountable for the growing desire among youths to leave? When governments fail to create adequate conditions for human capital development, they inadvertently precipitate a flight of talent, which may severely hinder national progress.

The ethical implications become even more complex when we consider the motivations behind migration. If the pursuit of knowledge and global exposure drives these individuals to relocate, does that not warrant a more nuanced conversation about the potential benefits of such a movement? Rather than framing this trend exclusively as a detrimental outflow of talent, exploring how these experiences, when leveraged effectively, could eventually contribute to national development upon their return may be more productive. Thus, understanding these ethical dilemmas necessitates a balanced perspective, recognizing the individual’s rights and the collective responsibilities inherent within the societal framework.

From Brain Drain to Brain Gain: The Way Forward

The current trend of brain drain among Nigerian youths poses a significant challenge to the nation’s development. However, this brain drain can be transformed into a brain gain by implementing strategic initiatives. It begins with fostering a conducive environment that encourages talented individuals to return home after acquiring international experience. The government and private sector must collaborate to create job opportunities that match the skills of returning emigrants and offer competitive salaries and benefits. Establishing policies that support entrepreneurship can also incentivize returnees to contribute to the economy, fostering innovation and local development.

In addition to encouraging returnees, it is essential to educate Nigerian youths on the motivations behind their relocation. Instead of following trends or peer pressure, young individuals must be empowered to make informed decisions about their futures. This can be achieved through comprehensive career counselling programmes in schools and universities, which will help students understand their options and the potential impacts of their choices. Encouraging critical thinking and strategic planning can lead to more purposeful migrations—individuals seeking international exposure while still retaining a commitment to their homeland.

Furthermore, cultivating a culture of engagement within Nigeria will encourage both citizens and expatriates to invest in the country’s future. This can be accomplished through initiatives promoting community building, networking, and professional collaboration. By emphasizing the skills and experiences that returning Nigerians bring, the nation can foster an environment where intellectual capital is valued. Hosting forums and symposiums where returnees share their experiences can inspire others and create a cohesive community centred around progress.

In conclusion, Nigeria can combat the brain drain phenomenon by actively promoting brain gain strategies and educating youths on purposeful migrations. This approach not only mitigates the loss of talent but also cultivates a dedicated populace invested in the nation’s development, ultimately benefiting both the individuals and the broader society.

 

Mimiola, an award-winning journalist sent in this piece.

Continue Reading

Trending