Without joining in the macabre dance of the self-styled nationalist jingoists – who have suddenly become advocates of territorial integrity but hypocritically defending neo-liberal deregulation and trade liberalization, which ceded the economic territory of not only the country but that of the working poor – one is tempted to ask those defending the current capitalist world relation: Where is thy democracy?
Without joining in the macabre dance of the self-styled nationalist jingoists – who have suddenly become advocates of territorial integrity but hypocritically defending neo-liberal deregulation and trade liberalization, which ceded the economic territory of not only the country but that of the working poor – one is tempted to ask those defending the current capitalist world relation: Where is thy democracy?
The ceding of Bakkassi peninsula – a seemingly mineral-endowed border community between Nigeria and Cameroun – has clearly demonstrated the hypocrisy of the international justice system, and the pro-imperialist nature of many African rulers – most of whom aside emerging from questionable civilian process are nothing but pawns in the chessboard of imperialism. The issue of territorial conflicts in the world and Africa in particular is not new, and will not recede until the selfish profit system that drives them is thrown overboard. History records many wars, including first world war, fought by European nations to not only defend their immediate territories but also colonies in Africa, Asia and Latin America. A careful study of these conflicts and wars reveals the underlining interests which, aside the need for sovereignty and monarchical assertion, included the need to protect the markets of the emerging big business, a big source of privilege for the aristocracy.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
Territorial and ethnic crises that have and are facing African continent are as much a product of colonial partition of the continent by colonialism as well as product of degenerate neo-liberal capitalist system. Bakassi is one of the children of the above situation. The region was contested over by German, French and English imperialism until after the independence by Nigeria and Cameroun. As a result of colonialist partitioning after first world war, which is meant to make Africa the territorial dependent of the imperialist European ruling class, many territories were grouped together undemocratically – that is without the adequate consent of the inhabitants of such areas to determine where and how they want to live including how they want their resources to be used. This anarchical boundary partitioning has been a major source of conflicts and has led to economic, social and political dislocation to countries, whose many ethnic tribes are not allowed to determine how they want to live before being grouped together. The handing over of territories to local elites by the colonialists only generate more crises as it fuel ethnic jingoism by other sections of the local ruling class, who feel disengaged from national patrimony, mobilized ethnic sentiments to instigate crises. Therefore, only collective decision of the poor and working people on how they want to live and where they want to belong should be a cardinal part of international diplomacy and justice system that claims to be democratic. Thus, rather than making a archaic and ridiculous document that claim to hand over the fate of millions of Bakassi people for several generations, plebiscite should have been conducted by the international justice system for the people of the Bakassi, to not only determine where they want to belong – including right of having a separate and independent nation, but how their resources (mineral, material, etc) will be used and for which purposes. Although a kind of plebiscite was organized for people of southern Cameroun on whether they want to belong to Nigeria or Cameroun in the early 1960’s – which by any standard could not be termed democratic going by the nature and interest of the European imperialism – the fact that such was not organized now is a reflection of the fact that international capitalist relation has not purged itself of old bestial colonialist tendencies, despite wearing the toga of modernism. This clearly reveals the true nature of international justice system in the present neo-liberal capitalist era. But one cannot expect justice to come from a judicial system that is structured along an unequal profit system that put public resources in the pockets of a handful of big fat-cats, whose interest determine the fate and future of the majority. The history of the post-world war 2 international political system shows the hypocrisy of imperialism to abide by its own self-defined ideals – democracy, social justice, etc. For instance, records of the many violation of international treaties and judgment by major imperialist nations like the US, Britain, etc and their satellites like Israel are well documented. Wars have been waged by imperialist countries against the international rules and regulations, using the excuse of national interests which in the real sense is selfish interests of the big multinational corporations. The Iraqi war, that has cost hundreds of billions of dollars not only to the American public but also to the world economy, was waged not on behalf of the people – who protested against this monstrosity throughout the world, but for the profit interests of big multinational big business sharks. Today, while the war has led to deteriorating living conditions for the over two billion poor no thanks to the spiraling of oil prices, the big speculators (who have been gambling on oil future) and oil majors have had unprecedented profits – along with their turbaned sheiks in the Arabian peninsula and big time looters in Africa. In this scenario, international justice system is only a barking dog which only grows teeth when it becomes a willing tool in the hands of imperialism. Therefore, the fate of the poor people cannot be put in this kind of justice system. Even when it favours the poor people, they will still have to exact mass pressure in order to get sustain it on a long term basis. But, international justice system can also serve the diversionary interests of local rulers. This is the role the current Bakassi issue has played, no thanks to the blind position of many a so-called intellectuals. The Yar’Adua government has used the Bakassi handover to proclaim itself as a defender of rule of law both at home and beyond. Biya regime, which is facing a popular revolt at home, will use this as a sign of government’s responsiveness to national integrity. Both regimes will use these certificates to boost their resume in the comity of their imperialist masters. But some things are more common to both. They emerged from fraudulent processes. While the elections that brought in Yar’Adua could be classified as electoral madness of the new millennium, Biya’s stay onto power since 1982 is a product of continuous repressive and undemocratic process. Both regimes also preside over economic decay that has seen millions of people going hungry, not because there are no resources to make everybody happy, but because the neo-liberal economic policies of privatization, commercialization and retrenchment coupled with brazen corruption are opposed to this. The Bakassi area over which these ruthless rulers are claiming success is a cesspool of unprecedented poverty, with majority not having basic means of sustenance. In fact, a newspaper report had it that, the rank-and-file military men were happy that they were pulling out of the extremely poverty-stricken Bakassi. Definitely, going by the untamebale corruption in Nigeria, the over one billion naira allocated for resettlement will only end in private pockets, the same way billions of dollars allocated to the poverty- stricken Niger Delta have found their ways to the private local and foreign accounts of state and federal government officials, and multinational moneybags. In fact, the corruption-ridden Obasanjo and Cross River State government in conjunction with the Bakassi Local government had earlier allocated billions of naira for security and settlements which has not been accounted for. Furthermore, the more fact that the current Nigerian government, which claim to be fighting corruption, has continued to allocate a larger chunk of the nation’s wealth to politicians in power, in the name of rule of law, future for the Bakassi people is foredoomed. Also, the corruption-ridden Camerounian government and the rapacious oil majors will be salivating over the huge source of profit in Bakassi while the poor people of not only Bakassi but the whole of Cameroun will be licking the wound inflicted by capitalism. As against the assertion by some pro-government commentators that handing over Bakassi will avoid confrontation, the reality is that the handling of the Bakassi region by Nigerian government will further morally embolden the secessionists and militants to wage more violent attacks on Nigeria as they will have excuse that Nigeria which is just a contraption of unresolved interests, cannot protect them. This, given the expected economic stagnation in the country, especially in the South-South Nigeria, can gain mass supports, which can generate military frictions between Nigeria and Cameroun in the coming period, while also exacerbating militant activities in Nigeria. Also, a Nigerian or Camerounian government under serious home pressure can used vague nationalism to resuscitate this dispute. This is precisely what the despotic Sani Abacha regime – which out of crazed frenzy, mobilized military force to the poverty-stricken area – did when faced with mounting anti-military movement at home just to divert attention and bargain with imperialism. Although, immediate imperialism’s interest and crude nationalism by any of the affected countries may not be an immediate possibilities, but they are not ruled out while the militant and secessionist activities will surely be given more strength. The Bakassi issue has again shown the pro-imperialism and reactionary character of African rulers. Despite the fact that self-determination is part of international treaties, none of the two African regimes was even ready to explore this on behalf of the poor people of Bakassi. This again show that Nigeria, and indeed African need a working class political platform that will galvanize the forces of the poor and working people together in a political battle, not only to overthrow the pro-imperialism rulers but to also throw overboard, the capitalist system they defend and enthrone a democratic socialist system where society’s resources, rather than being used for the interest of the big moneybags, will be democratically put under working people’s control for the interest of the working and poor people. Working class solidarity across Africa is a vital tool in this direction. A call for plebiscite to determine not only where the people of Bakassi want to live but to also determine how they want their resources to be used, should have been the central demand of the labour movement in both Nigeria and Cameroon.
This coupled with a call for democratic public control of the mineral, natural and monetary resources of both Nigeria and Cameroun by the working people’s themselves and use of such resources to provide the immediate need of the people would have united the working and poor people of these countries. But alas, the local labour leaders, especially of Nigeria, were seen supporting the government’s action, even without criticism. This is a great blow to the working people’s aspiration for better future.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of SaharaReporters
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });