The US Government has been in partial shut down for
about 30 days now because Mr. Trump wants the Congress to include 5.7 billion
US$ for his wall on the Southern border of the United States in the budget and
the congress doesn’t think there is a
need to build another structure visible from space and very likely to be named
after Trump in years to come. The Congress prefers software reinforcement of
the border which cannot be named after anybody. In his “compromise” speech yesterday,
Mr. Trump offered the democrats some of the medicine which he himself had
refused in 2018 in exchange for money for his wall in order to reopen the paralyzed
arms of US government. Mr. Trump wants
his hardware – concrete or steel.
Just a few days earlier, I also watched how the House
of Commons of Britain shot down Theresa May’s Brexit Plan. They rejected the plan
with a big majority and gave her three days to present a new plan. They humbled
her and she almost also lost her government too. She’s not out of the woods yet
as her Plan B may also be rejected by the British Parliament and this time,
maybe her government will be shown out the door of No. 10 Downing Street.
As I watched Mr. Trump’s speech and the vote on
Brexit, I could not help but think of Nigerian politics and leaders. I watched
the helplessness of Mr. Trump and realized that he has met his match in Nancy
Pelosi. And neither could Mrs. May do anything about members of her own party
that voted against her Brexit Plan. The question that came to my mind was “how
would a Nigerian leader, president or governor or even a district (local
government) chairman handle a situation like Trump’s or May’s?” And secondly, how
can Nigerian democratic and elective leadership experience help out Mr. Trump
from his “logjam” and help bring Mrs. May’s party members to toe the line
traced by their leader?
In Nigeria, the solution would be a multi-pronged
strategy to convince the dissidents to abandon their opposition to the leader’s
pet project. Cash inducements of the recalcitrant legislators would probably
come first. Suitcases of money would find their way to the lockers of the
dissidents in the parliament to help them recalibrate their thinking. Many
would quickly see the need for the wall and under this inducement might even propose
to the president not to limit the wall to the borders of the country, but to
also fence the entire borders of the offending country.
If cash fails, then the Police would be called in to
remember an offence committed sometime by the staunchest opposing legislators. Their
offence would be published in the press; then they would be invited to the
Police Station where they could be detained for a few days before being sent to
court. Senior Advocates of Nigeria, young and old in large numbers would then
turn up at the court proceedings. If the legislators suddenly see reason for
the construction of the wall, then the case fizzles out. The Nigerian press also
fizzles out with the case. Very often
the defendant feigns some terminal illness and asks the court for permission to
travel abroad. He disappears abroad for some time and later sneaks back into
the country. On his return, he becomes an advocate for the leader’s pet
project.
Sometimes, the Police is boycotted for a more rapid
and equally effective strategy. The fearful EFCC (Nigeria’s Financial Crimes
Agency) would be called in to dust up long-dormant files of the dissident
legislators. Here in Nigeria, it is generally assumed that most of our leaders
have committed one economic crime or the other in their previous lives in other
elective capacities before reaching the parliament. The dissidents would be
invited by the EFCC Office with a good press coverage. The fear of EFCC and the
public knowledge of their hither-to hidden financial and corruption crimes
invariably would change the mind of the legislators about the construction of
the wall. They would vote “Aye” by text message while still in EFCC custody and
after a few days, “their sins would be forgiven”.
In Nigeria, each politician worth his salt has his
army of thugs, composed of disenchanted youth, transport workers and
professional thugs. The bigger the army, the more likely you would win an elective
position; and the leader’s army of thugs is supposed to be the biggest and the
most violent. The dissident legislators could get a home-visit, or their
vehicles waylaid by thugs often with life-threatening intentions.
In the end, opposition is swept aside, and the leader
gets his pet project approved. These strategies do not follow a particular order.
They may all be deployed simultaneously or in any order. It is the result that
matters – a leader’s pet project cannot be opposed by the parliament. It does
not matter if the project never gets executed after disbursement of funds –
that is another potential dormant file to be visited another day by EFCC.
If Mr. Trump really wants his wall, and Theresa May
really wants her Brexit Plan approved, a short training by Nigerian politicians
in Abuja would do them a lot of good. After all, that is what friends are for.
3 comments:
If Mr. Trump really wants his wall, and Theresa May really wants her Brexit Plan approved, a short training by Nigerian politicians in Abuja would do them a lot of good. After all, that is what friends are for."Yes that is what friends are for, but I bet you not in this case".
And I suppose EFCC stands for ECONOMIC FINANCIAL CRIMES COMMISSION?
Weldone my Boss. Continue to enlighten Nigerians.
Quite interesting,the truth can't be hidden for so long let just keep watching! thanks Bimbos kudos to your effort.
A short training by Nigerian politicians would destabilise the country because I trust Americans would not agree with any nonsense...I think both sides concerning the wall are right and are doing it in the interests of their people as they think so lets watch and see the outcome but in Nigeria it is obvious anything done by the politicians is never in the interest of the people but in the interest of their pockets.
Post a Comment