Former Governor of the defunct Western State, Gen. Adeyinka Adebayo (retd.), tells LEKE BAIYEWU about what has changed in the Nigerian military and the Yoruba socio-political group Afenifere
In terms of discipline and performance, how was the Nigerian military when you were in active service and how is it now?
During our time (in the military), we were not as many as they are now. The leaders then were together; they respected each other. And whatever decision we took then was the decision for all of us. But now, the military is larger and the leadership many. In certain areas, they are taking different decisions and the decisions are not together.
How?
The leaders of today want to be heard separately or individually unlike in our own time when there was better discipline and the leadership was highly respected on whatever decisions they took on behalf of others.
There are military hierarchies and it is expected that whatever the order issued by a senior, it is binding on the junior. Where then could there be different decisions among the ranks and files?
It depends. You know that there is more politics now than before. In our own time, the politicians were different from military leaders. But now, the politicians, even though they are separate from the military leaders, still want to be heard separately. That is why the decisions are not the same now like our own time. Whatever a leader — a military — in our own time took as decision, we obeyed. But now, everybody wants to be heard.
Are you saying things have changed because military rule is gone and democracy is here?
Yes, democracy should be separate from military. Democracy authorises the command of the military. But now, democracy wants to be heard alone and military want to be heard as well.
Do you think the military has been politicised by successive presidents since democracy returned in 1999?
The civilian leaders should be separate from military leaders. The civilian leaders should be the authority and the military leaders should take the voice (command) of the civilian leaders and act on it.
Does this include politicians’ alleged use of the military for political goals, especially during elections?
The military should be a separate entity under the command of the civilians. The civilian leaders should take the decision that the military will take the command from the authority of the civilians.
Does it mean the closed gap between the politicians and the military is responsible for the perceived indiscipline in the Nigerian military today?
I won’t call it indiscipline. The political heads (leaders) should be the authority from which the military derive powers and carry out their duties.
Do you see a different military set-up under President Muhammadu Buhari, being a retired general and former military Head of State?
Buhari was a disciplined military leader. He was a Head of State before. Now, he has two areas from which to take decisions — as an ex-Head of State and retired senior military officer side combined with his civilian side. In fact, his command and authority should be bigger and better than — with due respect — civilian authority alone. He has the military influence and the civilian influence to combine.
With your military experience, do you think the relocation of the military command centre to Maiduguri, as President Buhari ordered, will help the war against insurgency in the North-East?
They have not moved the military headquarters; they only sent part of the military command to Maiduguri. Of course, it should (help the war). Mere seeing them (military chiefs) will assist; the insurgents will be afraid.
But there are those who see danger in relocating leaders of a war team to the centre of the battlefield?
They have not sent their war team. War team is part of the military team. And there is nothing wrong in sending the war team as part of the military team.
Is the December deadline President Buhari set for the service chiefs to crush Boko Haram realisable?
It depends on the military command and the loyalty of the military to the head of the country. The head of state takes responsibility for security and every other thing affecting the country. The military take orders from him.
With what you have known about the sect – the size, weapons and affiliations – do you think the insurgents can be wiped out in four months?
The military were not sent there to fight; they were sent there to debar Boko Haram from expanding.
But the order from the President was for the military to end the insurgency…
That is how it should be. He is the Commander-in-Chief; he is the head of the military; he gives them orders. It is now left for the military to get themselves together on how to combat the insurgency.
Under former President Goodluck Jonathan, such orders were issued to the military and several deadlines were set for them but the insurgency still persists. What will make the difference this time?
It depends on the military commanders and the head of state. The military commanders should be responsible to the head of state and the head of state should advise the military commanders on what he thinks they should do.
Does this mean ex-President Jonathan did not do this while in office?
It is wrong to blame anybody. All he needed to say was, ‘I want you to do this because of the country. The country wants you to do this because of what is happening.’ It is now left for the military commanders to do the right thing so that what the head of state wants is done.
What about the lamentations by former Chief of Defence Staff, Air Chief Marshal Alex Badeh (retd.), after his retirement that the military lacked the equipment and other supports needed to fight? Is it just for the president to advise the military leaders alone?
No. He should make available what the military want to do their job. If they want more weapons, they should be given the money to get more weapons.
Do you agree with the critics who feel the military is prosecuting an asymmetrical war with a conventional war strategy in the current war against terrorism?
They should be better equipped than before so that they can do what they are supposed to do. Whatever they need to fight and win the war should be made available to them by the government, and the government is headed by the President.
Some Nigerians still refer to the invasion of the political space by the military and their successive regimes as destroying the country so much that it has yet to recover from the damage. Do you agree with this claim?
It will be wrong to put the whole blame on the military alone. The military are working with civilians and a lot of the civilians are politicians who come from different parts of the country. They should not blame the military alone. The problem should be on both the military and civilians in command.
How does it feel when there is a democratic government in power and some soldiers hijack the system and overturn the entire system?
Again, military taking over government can be as a result of two things: one, the civilian government is weak; two, the military is ambitious. If you can destroy the weakness and convince the military to carry out their normal duties alone, there will be no problems.
You were said to have called a general meeting of Yoruba leaders in August 1966, where the late sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, was made the leader of the Yoruba race. Why did you call the meeting and what actually happened there?
Then, there were so many leaders of factions in the Yoruba race and we felt that somebody like Chief Obafemi Awolowo, who had been on top of the politics in the area; who had a good face with other leaders from other regions; who had also done extremely well in dealing with Yoruba matters should be leader.
How unanimous was that decision?
It was taken unanimously because when we called the meeting, we called the leaders of both political parties and non-political parties for the Yoruba to have a political leader, which Chief Awolowo had been doing before but, unfortunately, it was sectional. Some (Yorubas) were in the Action Group, some were in the NCNC …, and so on.
But former President Olusegun Obasanjo has disagreed that Awolowo’s leadership was widely accepted like his followers claim.
Naturally, some people would oppose it. If the majority said that was what should be done. Then, that is it.
In his book, My Watch, he mentioned the late Chief Adisa Akinloye as one of those against Awolowo’s emergence as Yoruba leader.
Akinloye had always been in opposition. He was a good politician but he wanted to be the leader too naturally. Not everybody wanted Awolowo to be the leader of the Yoruba. Politically, he (Awolowo) was a strong leader; they should have accepted him. If they (Awolowo’s critics) didn’t want him alone, they could have possibly elected a deputy or vice to support him so that the two of them could carry everybody together.
Don’t you think the problem of factional leaders you wanted to solve then seems to be back again with different groups claiming to be speaking for Yoruba people?
Everybody wants to be leader; that is the problem. But everybody can’t be a leader; you can have a leader and the second in command but there must be a leader.
If the Yoruba people have to speak collectively now, which group or leader should the people speak through or hear from?
I still feel there must be one leadership for the Yoruba and that leadership must spread across all the political parties in Yorubaland, and all the political groups should support that leadership. What they need to do is to have a ‘number two’, ‘number three’ and ‘number four’ to the leadership so that they can all talk with one voice in the end.
The general group used to be Afenifere, which was synonymous to the Action Group led by Awolowo. What actually led to the disintegration of the group that its voice is no more widely acceptable like before?
Afenifere is a good group but there is nothing wrong in having another group. They should come together; they should meet together if they don’t want to be in one group. When they are talking on national issues, they should come together and speak together; otherwise, they are not the only Yoruba people.
But would Awolowo have preferred a proliferation of Yoruba groups, if all he did was to make Afenifere a formidable force and its leaders have been coming in order of succession?
There is nothing wrong in having groups that will come together. It is very difficult to say everybody must be one immediately. There is nothing wrong in having groups but those groups should meet regularly until they become one group.
How realistic is this?
Of course, it is possible. For instance, a few days ago, we held a Yoruba Summit meeting in Ibadan where we had groups; I was there as the Chairman of the Yoruba Council of Elders. When we got there, they decided that I should be the chairman of the meeting. It was not suggested by our own man at all; it was suggested by someone from another group and people accepted that I be made the chairman: One, being the leader of the YCE, which is non-political but of elders only. Two, apart from being the eldest of the people there – I am now 87 – I have been carrying other elders along. Thus, when my name was suggested, nobody opposed it.
The meeting you’re talking about was called after the recent kidnap of Chief Olu Falae by suspected Fulani herdsmen and repeated destruction to his farm. Why is it that Yoruba only come together when there is a threat to their common good?
We are hoping that after the meeting of last week, the groups will now be coming together regularly to a meeting and take decisions together. It is because they are not coming together to have meetings together that we are having separation all the time. The decision we took last week will now assist Yoruba generally to speak in one voice when it comes to issues affecting the country.
Sir Olaniwun Ajayi recently said the YCE you are leading was formed by the late Chief Bola Ige to spite Afenifere. Chief Olusegun Osoba later corroborated him by saying your group was born out of Ige’s disaffection with Afenifere leaders when they didn’t give him the presidential ticket of the Alliance for Democracy in 1998. Is your group now willing to work with others like Afenifere?
After the meeting we had last week, in which we all spoke our minds and took certain decisions together, and with all we have seen going on in the country, I think the Yoruba will now come together.
What name will the umbrella group be called?
It depends. Even if we don’t come together under a new name, if we could come together as we did recently, everything will be alright. By coming together regularly, possibly, there will be a time when we will all say we want to be together under one name.
Few years ago, several leaders of Yoruba groups converged on the Ikenne home of the Awolowos to form an umbrella body called the Yoruba Unity Forum, which was co-chaired by the late Chief HID Awolowo and Bishop Bolanle Gbonigi (retd.). Is what you’re planning not a replica of the YUF?
I do not think the YCE was at that meeting. I was not there. I am the President of the YCE. We were not there.
Then, how are you sure that the new efforts towards having a unity forum will succeed?
If we are open and sincere about the welfare of Yoruba people and the country; if we are all serious about what is going on in the country and how it affects all of us.
Are Yoruba leaders not likely to be sharply divided at critical moments like what was experienced prior to 2014 National Conference and just before the 2015 presidential election?
The Yoruba should have come together before that meeting (confab). If they had done so and agreed, they would not have had any problems. The trouble is that if we have so many groups, everybody wants to have their leader; that is the problem. But if we are sincere with ourselves and we love ourselves and we want to be heard, we should come together before attending such meetings.
What about Yoruba leaders who often refuse to attend meetings?
They don’t need to attend. But when they are told after the meeting what was agreed after the meeting, they will change their mind and come to the next meeting.
But about those who often complain that they were not invited to meetings?
Possibly, with what we discussed at that meeting – for those of us who went – if the decisions were spread to those who didn’t attend, they will come to the next meeting.
What are you doing about Asiwaju Bola Tinubu and other Afenifere leaders who pulled out of the AD and who have not been part of these meetings you’re talking about?
Possibly, they will come when they are told about the decisions reached at the last meeting.
Chief Obasanjo has remained Awolowo’s critic till date….
Awolowo’s critic while he is dead?
Even when Awolowo was alive…
He (Obasanjo) could be his critic while he was alive. But now, Awolowo is no more alive.
But up till now, Obasanjo doesn’t agree that Awolowo was ever the leader of the Yoruba….
Awolowo is no more the leader of the Yoruba because he is not alive but he is respected as former leader of the Yoruba.
As one of the leaders of Yoruba…
I am the leader of the YCE.
But when people talk of leaders of this part of the country, you are one of them.
Yes.
Why is it that Obasanjo seems not to have any strong relationship with other leaders like you or be part of the decision-making for Yoruba people?
Obasanjo is alone. Obasanjo is alone. If you want to be the leader of the people, you must be part of the people.
Is he not a Yoruba man?
He is Yoruba.
Why is he alienated from the circle of Yoruba leaders?
I don’t know whether he is recognised or not. I know he doesn’t attend our meetings.
Was there any disagreement between him and other leaders at any point in time?
I don’t know. I was invited (to the Ibadan meeting) and I went. Initially, I didn’t want to go but I was convinced that I should go and I went.
Beyond the Ibadan meeting, why is he not always part of other meetings of Yoruba leaders or is he not eligible to be part of the YCE, for instance?
If he was invited, he should have attended. If he wasn’t invited, it will be very difficult for him to attend. I was invited (to the Ibadan meeting) but when I discussed it with some people, some said I should not go, but I decided to go. I went and saw that the meeting was good. And I said we should meet regularly.
Why do you think he is critical of other Yoruba leaders, with the examples of Awolowo, the late Chief MKO Abiola, Prof. Wole Soyinka, among others?
I see no reason why Obasanjo should be critical of any Yoruba person being made a leader. He should go to that meeting first and let them discuss what they have to discuss in his presence; let him say his mind there and let them take a decision with him there. For instance, as I said before, I didn’t want to go to the last meeting but I was convinced by some people to go, and I went there. When I got there, I was surprised when they said I was to be the chairman of the meeting. And the meeting went on well. We took good decisions and people were happy at the meeting. We left happily.
When people are debating Yoruba political leadership and they are mentioning Obasanjo and Tinubu as potential candidates, what comes to your mind at that point?
There is nothing wrong in suggesting their names; it depends on the big meeting to take a decision on who will be the leader. They can’t be leaders on their own; they should come to the larger meeting where there will be more people – more important Yoruba people. That is where to take a final decision on who should be the leader.
The recent kidnap of Chief Olu Falae embittered several Yoruba leaders who saw it as an insult to the entire race. What is now the conclusion reached by you after the general meeting?
Didn’t you see the communiqué on our decision?
Can you give the details of how you arrived at your decision?
The decision we took at the meeting was the decision of everybody, including that of the YCE meeting the general meeting. We all agreed on the decision in our communiqué. It is now left for all of us to work on that communiqué and improve on it for the future.
Dr. Frederick Fasehun, after the meeting, asked Yoruba to go after Fulani herdsmen over their alleged criminal activities in the South-West. Will such action not degenerate into an ethnic conflict?
We said the Fulani herdsmen that caused trouble for Falae and co went through Falae’s farm, possibly on their way to Lagos. And that is what they have been doing before. Even before going through Falae’s farm, they had been through other states before getting to Lagos. What we are saying is that if they want to go through anybody’s area, they should do so peacefully; they should do so without any problems and go to wherever they want to go to. They should not cause trouble in anybody’s area; they should not do anything to anybody in any area. It is not fair the way they treated Falae: their cows went through his farm and they took (kidnapped) him away, released him and came back again. Is that a good thing? As if Falae doesn’t have any following. But luckily, we were able to meet and we took a decision, which we have announced and published. Everybody now knows the views of the Yoruba people. The Fulanis should be very careful now, if they want to go through that area to wherever they want to go to.
Do you see Yoruba people defending themselves now?
Of course yes! There was nothing wrong in defending themselves before. They should now come together and forget about the misunderstanding among themselves, and work together as Yoruba people. This is what we were not doing before. Our last meeting will now bring us together. The communiqué that we released will show to the people that the Yoruba are now seriously coming together.
Copyright PUNCH.
All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express written permission from PUNCH.
Contact: editor@punchng.com
SOURCE -: http://ift.tt/1kgrUX0
0 comments:
Post a Comment