Niger's military junta on Friday severed diplomatic relations with four countries, including its southern neighbor Nigeria, which earlier in the morning disconnected electricity export to the country following its delegation's failure to meet the coup leader.

“The functions of the extraordinary and plenipotentiary ambassadors of the Republic of Niger to France, Nigeria, Togo, and the United States are terminated,” a spokesperson for Niger’s coup leader, Col Maj. Amadou Abdramane, announced in a broadcast televised by local media.

Nigeria shut off its electricity supply to Niger on Friday, sending parts of the country into darkness. Niger buys 70% of its power from the Nigerian Electricity Company.

On Thursday, Niger's coup leaders denied access to a Nigerian delegation sent by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to the country. Former Nigerian military head of state Gen Abubakar Abdulsalami led the delegation.

Nigeria's president, who also serves as the chairman of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), has called for military action against the Niger mutineers and the reinstatement of President Mohamed Bazoum.

Ambassador Francisca Omayuli, spokesman for the Nigerian Foreign Ministry, did not immediately respond to Anadolu's request for the country's reaction to the current diplomatic standoff following the Niger decision.

However, a senior constitutional lawyer Onyeama Okei urged the Nigerian government to recall its ambassador and other staff at the embassy in Niamey, Niger’s capital.

He did, however, advise the Nigerian government to let the people of Niger deal with their internal problems.

"Nigerians cannot cry more than the people of Niger. While we work to ensure that democracy thrives in African countries, we must recognize citizens' right to select what they want," he told Anadolu.

On July 26, a group of soldiers calling themselves the National Council for the Safeguarding of the Country (CNSP) delivered a statement on Nigerien state television shortly after detaining Bazoum, saying they took the step due to the "deteriorating security situation and bad governance."

Bazoum was elected in 2021 in Niger’s first democratic power transition since it gained independence from French colonial rule in 1960.​​​​​​​

[yenisafak]

West African defense chiefs have drawn up a plan for possible military intervention to restore democratic rule in Niger, an official said Friday, as a seven-day deadline given to coup leaders to reinstate President Mohamed Bazoum drew closer.

The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) at an emergency meeting last Sunday in Nigeria in the aftermath of the coup ordered the military leaders to reinstate President Bazoum within one week or it would “take all measures,” including the “use of force,” to restore constitutional order in Niger.

Speaking at the close of a three-day meeting of defense chiefs in the Nigerian capital Abuja, Abdel-Fatau Musah, ECOWAS commissioner for political affairs, peace and security, said that all the modalities have been worked out, although a diplomatic option remains on the table.

“All the elements that would go into any intervention have been worked out, including the timing, resources needed and how and when to deploy such force,” he said.

“Whatever has been achieved here will be presented very soon to the heads of state who will have the final say as to what we are going to do with regard to the situation in the Republic of Niger.”

In 2017, ECOWAS used military force to restore constitutional order in Gambia when Yahya Jammeh refused to cede power after losing an election.

Musah made a fresh appeal to the coup leaders in Niger to give peace a chance by immediately restoring constitutional order in their country.

Nigeria, Senegal, Ivory Coast and Benin have all expressed their resolve to send troops into Niger if ECOWAS endorses the decision.

Ibrahim Kana, Nigeria’s Defense Ministry Permanent Secretary, said that Nigeria remained committed to restoring democracy in Niger, but the diplomatic approach is seen as the best option.

On Wednesday, coup leader Gen. Abdourahamane Tchiani sounded defiant, saying the junta would “not give in to threats” to restore the deposed President Bazoum and “refuses any interference in the internal affairs of Niger.”

Bazoum was detained by members of the Presidential Guard on July 26, and that evening, the military announced that it had seized power.

Two days later, Gen. Tchiani, the commander of Niger's presidential guard, declared himself the head of a transitional government.

[https://www.aa.com.tr/]

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu yesterday wrote to the Senate to inform it of an impending “Military build up and deployment of personnel for military intervention to enforce compliance of the military junta in Niger should they remain recalcitrant.” This is a dangerous, ill-advised, potentially self-destructive gamble Tinubu would do well to give up because it has the potential to consume not just him but also Nigeria.

I detest military regimes because I am repulsed by any system that imposes unequal, predetermined structural limits on the aspirational compass to leadership. It is for the same reason that I despise the unearned, inherited authority that monarchies represent. Everyone should, at least in theory if not in practice, have the latitude to aspire to the highest level of leadership in the land. Military rule limits leadership to professional people, as monarchies limit leadership to bloodline.

Additionally, as someone who came of age during totalitarian military regimes, I loathe the brutality and dehumanization that accompany all military rules and wish that no country would ever have to endure the nightmare of military monocracies. 

But going to war with another country because it unfortunately devolved into a system of government that, in our judgement, is abhorrent is unwarrantedly arrogant, provocative, and reckless. This is particularly more so because, at least for now, the new military junta in Niger Republic enjoys enormous goodwill among the vast majority of the citizens of the country. 

I have seen massive demonstrations in support of the new military regime in rural and urban Niger— and against President Bola Tinubu whom demonstrators have rechristened “Ebola Tinubu” to signal the toxicity and unwelcomeness of his intrusion into the internal affairs of their country. Nigeriens obviously have no problems at the moment with the junta in power. When they do, they’ll find a way to deal with it.  Who are we to tell them how they should conduct their affairs and whom they should prefer as their rulers?

Plus, in Nigeria, the tide of public opinion is overwhelmingly against any form of Nigeria-led military aggression to restore civilian rule in Niger. Nigeria is itself wracked by disabling internal turmoil on multiple fronts, which the Tinubu administration hasn’t yet shown any willingness to confront, much less contain. Why is Tinubu igniting a fire in another person’s home to “resolve” a squabble there instead of putting out the enduring conflagration in his?  

And who is paying for this unsolicited, foolhardy misadventure? Nigerians have been pushed to the very edge of existence (and several have already fallen off the cliff) by the cruel removal of fuel subsidies, yet the Tinubu administration will expend billions (that it repeatedly says the country doesn’t have) to start a needless and avoidable war in a country that is at peace with its anomaly. 

Is it the 1 trillion naira the government claimed it has saved from the removal of subsidies that it will use to fight a thoughtless war in Niger that has neither tactical nor strategic benefits for Nigeria? It makes absolutely no sense.

Nigeriens don’t want a war. Nigerians, too, don’t. On whose behalf is Tinubu starting this pointless war then? “Democracy”? Whose “democracy”? 

Well, if preservation of civilian rule is the sole motivation for Tinubu’s intervention in Niger, why is he unconcerned about military rule in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Guinea, which are also members of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)? True, Tinubu wasn’t president when these other coups took place, but what’s stopping him from adding Mali, Burkina Faso, and Guinea to his list of West African countries that must reinstate their ousted civilian presidents if “democracy” is his overriding concern?

The only thing that makes sense at this point is the widespread insinuation that Tinubu is doing the bidding of Western imperialist powers whose approval he seems insanely desperate for. Since his conservative, stultifying, and asphyxiating economic policies, which have paralyzed the country, are already merely a page from the World Bank and the IMF, it’s apparent that his greatest aspiration isn’t to serve Nigerians but to be a dutiful poodle of the West. 

On the instructions of the West, he is killing his people with hunger. On the instructions of the same West, he wants to kill his neighbors with war. 

In a private communication, famous University of Texas history professor Toyin Falola pointed out that this is France’s war. “France can give up Mali and Burkina Faso, but Niger is the only country it will not give up without a fight,” he said. “Agadez is the life wire of France, without which it will be using generators like Nigeria. No gas from Russia, and uranium is what it uses for its nuclear energy power. Nigeria cannot use its resources and army to work for France.”

Is Tinubu committing Nigeria to a violent entanglement with Niger on behalf of France because Paris is now his second home—like London used to be Buhari’s second home?

Another dimension to the situation in Niger that Tinubu and his advisers seem oblivious of is that Mohamed Bazoum was a deeply unpopular president who, as Professor Falola said, didn’t win his election. “His predecessor planted him there and gave his [i.e., predecessor’s] son a cabinet appointment,” Falola said. “Niger is a democracy on paper. The mafia distributes rent. Niger has the highest number of land cruisers per capita in Africa.”

What Professor Falola describes isn’t exclusive to Niger, of course. It’s the feature of most “democracies” in Africa. But when you throw Niger’s identity politics into the mix, you are staring at a really combustible situation.

 Bazoum comes from Niger’s Arab ethnic minority (with roots in Libya) who constitute less than one percent of the population. 

The Hausa constitute a little over 50 percent of the population. The Zarma (whom Hausa people call Zabarma, which probably influenced the Yoruba Sabarumo) are a distant second with a little over 20 percent of the population, although they dominate Niger's military and civil service. There are other minor groups in the country such as Dendi (whose language is mutually intelligible with Zarma but who consider themselves different from the Zarma), Tuaregs, Kanuri, Fulani, and Gurma.

Former President Mahamadou Issoufou is Hausa, but for personal gains he rigged Mohamed Bazoum, a minority Arab, as his successor. Bazoum was overthrown by Abdourahamane Tchiani who appears to be Zarma going by the region of the country he comes from, but who enjoys the support of the Hausa. 

The Zarma and the Hausa (who together constitute more than 70 percent of the population) were resentful that an Arab (with a minimal command of the Hausa language and probably zero proficiency in Zarma and whose people are less than one percent of the population) was imposed as president over them without actually winning a legitimate election.

Forcing the return of Bazoum as president would be a declaration of war against more than 70 percent of the country’s population. But that’s not even my worst fear. In the event of an all-out war, there would be refugees from Niger all over northern Nigeria, which could, in fact, flare up a Yoruba-Hausa ethnic strife in Nigeria because the narrative would be that a Yoruba man is killing Hausa people.

 Should that happen, that could end the Tinubu presidency. Is it worth it? I don’t think so.

Maryam Shetty’s Unexampled Ministerial Embarrassment

I had no idea who Maryam Shetty was until I saw what seemed like an unremitting cornucopia of congratulatory messages directed at her on Facebook on her appointment as a minister by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. 

Maryam Shetty

I saw jokes about how almost every (northern) Nigerian on social media somehow found a way to establish connections to her. I was going to join the joke by saying I was connected to her, too, because she shares the same first name as my second daughter, graduated from my alma mater in Nigeria, and even got some sort of certification from Emory University in Atlanta where I live. 

Then I woke up Friday morning to the shocking news that her nomination had been withdrawn. I don’t recall if there is any precedent for this kind of embarrassment. Why was her name announced when the president hadn’t made up his mind that he wanted her on his cabinet? The public ridicule she has been subjected to can’t be redeemed by any compensatory appointment.

I thought her appointment sent a symbolic message to young women that they, too, matter. Kwara State governor Abdulrahman Abdulrazaq has already blazed a trail in appointing everyday young women with no roots in political dynasties into commissionership—to the annoyance of political old stagers. I thought President Tinubu was following in Abdulrazaq’s lead and was going to write a full-length column to commend this.

The embarrassing but totally preventable flip-flopping of the Tinubu administration is becoming truly unsettling. 

Alarmed by the fake promises of Nigerian leaders, Christopher Okigbo wrote in the 60s: “Today-for tomorrow, today becomes yesterday/How many million promises can ever fill a basket?” And then he gave himself a stern warning: “If I don’t learn to shut my mouth I’ll soon go to hell/I, Okigbo, town-crier/ together with my iron bell.” Okigbo went to hell as he feared, but our leaders may need to resurrect and kill him again, because their promises remain a forged certificate.

On Wednesday, President Bola Tinubu assured the leaders of the organised labour, including the national president of the Nigeria Labour Congress, Joe Ajaero, and the Trade Union Congress president, Festus Osifo, that the Port Harcourt refinery would commence operations by December. Hear the labour leaders: “He let out a certainty that the Port Harcourt Refinery will commence production by December this year.” Tinubu apparently caved in to pressure; his promise is the same in form and substance with Buhari’s promise in 2015 that things would be okay after three months, and that Nigerians would only suffer for that period, regardless of his intentions.

Now, the news says that a part of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company NNPC Limited’s commitment to providing cheaper alternative fuel to motorists, the company has entered into a strategic partnership with NIPCO Gas Limited to deploy Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) stations across the country. The aim is to expand Nigeria’s CNG infrastructure, improve access to CNG, and accelerate the adoption of cheaper and cleaner alternative fuel for buses, cars and Keke NAPEP, which would significantly reduce the cost of transportation and engender sustainable national economic growth. Under the partnership, 35 state-of-the-art CNG stations will be constructed nationwide, including three mother stations.Once fully operational, we are informed, the stations can service over 200,000 vehicles daily, thereby significantly reducing the cost of automobile fuel for Nigerians and the cost of transportation. This is great news, but shouldn’t it have come before subsidy removal?

In May, President Muhammadu Buhari commissioned the Dangote Refinery amidst royalty. Ghana’s Nana Akufo-Addo, Rwanda’s Paul Kagame, Togo’s Gnassingbé Eyadéma, Senegal’s Macky Sall, Niger Republic’s Mohamed Bazoum and Chad’s Mahamat Déby were all invited to the epoch-making occasion. The 650,000–barrels-per-day edifice located at the Lekki free zone was, we were told, going to be a game-changer on the African continent: the pipeline infrastructure at the refinery, the largest in the world with 1,100 kilometres, would handle 3 billion standard cubic foot of gas per day. The refinery was expected to meet 100 per cent of the Nigerian requirement of all refined products and also have a surplus of each of these products for export.

The refinery was, of course, not ready, but Buhari had to calm frayed nerves like Tinubu has just done. You see, subsidy payments had steadily risen from N351bn in 2005 to N4.39 trillion in 2022, and N3. 6trn had been earmarked to fund fuel subsidy for the first six months in 2023, and so the government crafted a fine story: it would end fuel imports, and then Dangote refinery would meet local needs. Aliko Dangote, in an interview with the Economist, said with the commencement of operation at the refinery, Nigeria could save up to $10 billion in foreign exchange and generate another $10 billion in exports. The first product of the Dangote Refinery would be out in the market before the end of July and beginning of August 2023, he said. Well, we are in the beginning of August.

Nigerian leaders surely know how to get the masses’ hopes up. In November last year, big news surfaced: the North had found oil in the Kolmani river. And President Muhammadu Buhari enthused: “We are pleased with the current discovery of over 1 billion barrels of oil reserves and 500 billion cubic feet of gas within the Kolmani area and the huge potential for more deposits as we intensify exploration efforts. It is good to note that the discovery has now attracted investment for an end-to-end integrated development and monetisation of the hydrocarbon resources …It is therefore to the credit of this administration that at a time when there is near zero appetite for investment in fossil energy, coupled with the location challenges, we are able attract investment of over $3 billion to this project.” The first phase of the integrated development project, we were told, would yield oil refinery of up to 120,000 barrels per day. There would be a gas processing plant of up to 500 million standard cubic feet per day, a power plant of up to 300-megawatt capacity and a fertiliser plant of 2,500 tons per day. The governors of Bauchi and Gombe states assured Buhari “of their unwavering commitment and willingness to ensure support and cooperation in the localities as the activity affects the local populations is meaningless.” Why is nobody talking about Kolmani now?

Previously on this page, I drew attention to the fact that in September last year, even with the country’s refineries having been shut down since November 2020, the NNPCL left over N136 billion as operational deficits across its three refineries in Kaduna, Port Harcourt and Warri even as it continued the so-called rehabilitation works at the Port Harcourt refinery for $1.5 billion and the Warri and Kaduna refineries for $1.4 billion. When will the “rehabilitation works” be completed? And if the Warri and Kaduna refineries gulped $1.4bn, why are we not talking about their completion in December? Folks, the children of Lucifer who loot the nation blind do not mean for the refineries to work. I mean, in which other country do you pay people billions for doing nothing and maintain refineries for billions of dollars without any results?

The Establishment can console itself with the lie that even with the sudden hike in the pump price of petrol, Nigeria still sells the cheapest fuel in Africa or even the world, but the fact is that fuel is cheaper in 16 other countries, some of which are not even oil-producing nations. While Venezuela fuel is the cheapest in the world, citizens of Saudi Arabia, Ecuador, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia, Afghanistan, Iran, Libya, Algeria, Kuwait, Angola, Egypt, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Bahrain, Bolivia, Iraq, Qatar, Azerbaijan, Russia and Oman pay less for fuel than Nigerians do. All of this only leads me to reiterate a previous position: Nigerian leaders stand eternally damned for their inability to refine the fuel freely given by God. The palm oil they eat daily is the product of refining.

President Bola Tinubu has disclosed that a comprehensive forensic audit of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) is underway, while a thorough overhaul of the Civil Service payroll is imminent.

He revealed this during an audience with the President of the World Bank, Mr. Ajay Banga on Friday at the Presidential Villa, Abuja.

A statement issued on Friday night by Ajuri Ngelale, Special Adviser to the President (Media & Publicity) quoted him as saying :

”A comprehensive forensic audit is on-going at the Central Bank. We are going to do very serious structural review of the Civil Service payroll. I can’t believe in the numbers I’m seeing and I’ve had that experience before at the state level.

”The reforms are in tandem with Nigeria’s Ease of Doing Business programme. We’ll block all financial loopholes. The reforms will be targeted at the way we work, change of attitude and equally on educating our people. It’s costly but we will do it.”

Highlighting Nigeria’s resilience and intellectual prowess, the President implored the Bretton Woods institution to view the country as a significant player within the global community, not solely as a struggling economy.

‘‘We stand as a vibrant and educated society, seeking to avert chaos through strategic interventions. Your proactive engagement aligns with our quest for partnership, and together, we shall pursue mutual benefits that enrich us all,’’ he said.

On poverty alleviation, the President called for more increased support from the World Bank, expressing optimism for a productive collaboration between Nigeria and the World Bank that will lead to mutual benefits and sustainable progress.

He also discussed the ongoing efforts to address issues such as subsidy removal, foreign exchange mismanagement, exchange rates, inflation, liquidity, and debt management.

President Tinubu also shared insights into his administration’s substantial reforms, including those aimed at consolidating improvements in Nigeria’s oil industry, enhancing the Ease of Doing Business, and prioritizing security to boost the country’s revenue generation.

The President pointed out the importance of electricity generation for economic development, highlighting the turning of sod earlier today on the first phase (350MW) of the 1,350MW power generation project in Gwagwalada, Abuja.

While Nigerians were still trying to come to terms with the nomination of Maryam Shetty, a young and relatively unknown politician from Kano State, as a minister, her shocking replacement few hours to her screening has set tongues wagging on the intriguing power play that precipitated the unfolding process, Daily Trust Saturday reports.

Shetty entered into national limelight when her name was one of the 19-man list submitted by President Bola Tinubu in his second batch of ministerial nominees after the conclusion of the screening of the first batch. But the president shocked Nigerians on Friday with another correspondence to the Senate, informing them of two additional ministerial nominees and the withdrawal of Maryam Shetty.

The Kano nominee was replaced with Dr Mariya Mahmoud Bunkure, a former Commissioner for Higher Education in Kano State. Also, Festus Keyamo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and former Minister of State for Labour and spokesman for the All Progressives Congress (APC) Campaign Council during the presidential election, was included among the ministerial nominees. His absence on the previous lists had also raised some dusts.

However, the scenario that played out on Friday, leading to the announcement of the withdrawal of Shetty as a ministerial nominee, shocked many. This was because few minutes before the news of her removal came through, a short video of her at the National Assembly for screening had surfaced on the social media.

Daily Trust Saturday confirmed the authenticity of the video from one of her associates, who said he was with her at the National Assembly for the screening when they heard of the development. The associate, who spoke in confidence, said Shetty was shocked with the news and immediately for her home.

NAFDAC not functioning, says Ministerial nominee

Ministerial Appointment: God is A Miracle Worker, says Keyamo

Shetty could not be reached for comment at the time of filing this report as calls to her known line was not connecting, while a message sent to her via iMessage was marked delivered but has not been responded to.

The power play

Daily Trust Saturday confirmed from multiple sources that the immediate past governor of Kano State, Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, who on Thursday emerged as the new national chairman of the ruling APC, nominated Bunkure, his former commissioner to replace Shetty.

Ganduje’s associates told our correspondent that the real power play that led to the swapping of Shetty with Bunkure is that she does not belong to the political family of the former governor. It was suspected that her name was “smuggled” into the list by a senior member of the presidency.

It was gathered that Ganduje was informed that the slot Shetty used to make the list should have gone to him; hence he was asked to nominate a replacement. This is more so as the other nominee from Kano, Abdullahi Tijjani Gwarzo, is Tinubu’s associate from their days in the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN). Thus, after Ganduje emerged as the national chairman of the party on Thursday at the party’s 12th National Executive Council (NEC) meeting and got the information that the president had been ‘misled’ in nominating Shetty, he started the process of “righting the wrongs,” his associates said.

The president was surprised that the nomination of Shetty did not come from Ganduje, one of the sources said, adding that “the people that nominated her showed a picture she took with the former Kano governor to the president to make it look like she was in his group”.

On the manner in which the replacement was communicated, one of the associates of Ganduje said it was the president’s way of communicating to those that “smuggled” Shetty’s name into the list to know that he was in charge and was not happy.

ad
“It was also to communicate that the national chairman has the hearing ears of the president, and it is a warning to whoever smuggled her name into the list,” he said.

Kano is one of the strategic states the ruling party hopes to regain, and with the breakdown in talks with Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, whose New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) controls Kano, analysts said Tinubu may have concluded on consolidating his push for the state through the Ganduje camp.

However, sources close to Shetty said that aside the insinuation that the young politician was reportedly nominated by the chief of staff to the president, another reason Ganduje sought and secured her replacement was because she had been vocal in the past against some of his policies when he held sway as governor, including the controversial deposition of former Emir Muhammadu Sanusi.

“Perhaps the insinuation that she was nominated by the chief of staff gained momentum because Shetty is Abuja-based although she is from Kano. This might be the reason the Kano APC family was not happy with her nomination.

“Another reason is that she is close with former Emir Muhammadu Sanusi and she was very vocal against his removal. You know she is very popular on social media, where she champions several causes, including women’s rights,” one of her associates in Kano who asked not to be named, told Daily Trust Saturday.

How Bunkure got the nod ahead of other bigwigs

While Bunkure served in the Ganduje administration, Daily Trust Saturday gathered that she was not among top contenders for the ministerial list. She got the nod ahead of other strong contenders because Tinubu made his intention to have a certain number of females in his cabinet clear.

“Oga (Ganduje) was informed by the president that he would prefer the replacement of Shetty to be a woman so as to meet his target number for female representation in his cabinet. This is why Bunkure got the nod at the last minute. Although she is close to the family, there were stronger contenders, but all of them are male, so oga picked her,” an associate of the APC national chairman said.

Bunkure is a medical doctor and contemporary of Shetty. Some of their associates also said both could be described as friends as they were classmates throughout junior secondary school and were both at Bayero University’s Faculty of Medicine at the same time, where Bunkure read Medicine and Surgery and Shetty read Physiotherapy.

While Shetty made name for herself through her social activism, Bunkure became popular as a commissioner in the second term of Ganduje. She is a friend to Amina Ganduje, one of the daughters of the former governor. It was believed that Amina influenced her appointment as commissioner.

Shetty’s nomination, replacement set social media agog

Daily Trust Saturday reports that since her nomination on Wednesday, Shetty’s name has been one of the most mentioned across the social media like Facebook and Twitter (X). While many were querying her choice based on her youthfulness and political power play in Kano, others celebrated her nomination as a hope for youths in the Tinubu administration. But on Friday after her name was withdrawn, Twitter users more or less queued behind her to register their shock.

Sanusi Dantata wrote, “This situation is sad. She doesn’t deserve this emotional roller coaster. I had not heard her name until her nomination; I pity her. May this be the best for her and our country, Ameen!”

A former aide to Ganduje and gubernatorial candidate in the last election, Salihu Tanko Yakasai wrote, “I pity Maryam Shetty, irrespective of whether she is qualified to be a minister or not. I blame the process that nominated her and withdrew her name. This is embarrassing. She might never recover from this humiliation.”

A supporter of the NNPP in Kano, Hassan Sani (Noble Hassan) tweeted, “This is disappointing. Irrespective of party differences and what we thought of Maryam Shetty’s nomination, I think it is vile to subject her to this national embarrassment. I hope she gets something good.”

Akin Akinwale also tweeted, “The removal of Maryam Shetty’s name shares the top spot for worst political heartbreaks, along with David Lyon’s disqualification.”

Dawood Abubakar tweeted, “The youths’ response to Maryam Shetty’s ministerial nomination indicates that we might not be prepared for the change we claim to seek. Although we advocate more youth and women in the system, the narrative quickly shifts when someone unfamiliar to us is nominated.”

A social commentator, Gimba Kakanda also tweeted, “Maryam Shetty is a dedicated frontline party loyalist. The decision that led to her replacement had absolutely nothing to do with social media outrage in some quarters.

“This change is likely for the best for her, and we wish her all the best in her future endeavours.”

Japhet Omojuwa (JJ Omojuwa) wrote, “The president shouldn’t have called her to withdraw the nomination, anyone else could have done that on his behalf. She now deserves his personally delivered apology. She didn’t nominate herself. No one deserves to be so humiliated.”

The security committee of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), made up of Military Chiefs from various countries, announced on Friday their decision to prioritize diplomacy in handling the ongoing political turmoil in Niger.

The decision came after a two-day meeting involving Chiefs of Defence Staff from Togo, Sierra Leone, Senegal, Nigeria, Ghana, Liberia, Guinea Bissau, Gambia, Cote’Divoire, Cabo Verde and the Republic of Benin.

Notably, representatives from Mali, Niger, Guinea, and Burkina Faso were absent.

Presided over by Gen. Christopher Musa, President of ECOWAS Military Chiefs, the meeting concluded with a commitment to strengthen diplomatic efforts and prioritize dialogue and negotiation in resolving the crisis in Niger, as stated by Gen. Musa during a press briefing.

Musa said, “It has been an honour to preside over this extraordinary meeting on the situation of the recent coup in the Niger Republic as the President of this honourable committee of the CDS of ECOWAS States.

“I would like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to each one of you for your insightful contributions, thoughtful deliberations, and unwavering commitment to the cause of peace and stability in our region.

“Throughout our discussions, we have collectively recognized the gravity of the situation and the urgent need for a well-coordinated response. The deliberations have been marked by a spirit of unity, cooperation and determination to address the challenges at hand.

“We have examined the immediate implications of the coup on the Niger Republic and its potential ripple effects across the ECOWAS region. We have also deliberated on the broader implications for democracy, peace, and stability in West Africa.

“I am pleased to note that our discussions have yielded valuable insights and actionable recommendations. We have acknowledged the need for a comprehensive approach that encompasses political, security, and diplomatic dimensions.

“It is imperative that we translate our deliberations into concrete actions that can effectively address the crisis and prevent a recurrence in the future.

“Firstly, we must emphasize the importance of upholding democratic principles and the rule of law. The coup in the Niger Republic represents a blatant disregard for these fundamental principles that underpin our regional integration and stability. We must unequivocally condemn such actions and demonstrate our unwavering commitment to democracy.

“Secondly, we must strengthen our regional security architecture and enhance our collective response to security challenges. The coup in the Niger Republic has highlighted the fragility of our region and the need for a robust and proactive security framework.

“We must enhance intelligence sharing, joint training exercises, and capacity-building initiatives among our defence and security forces to effectively combat threats to our collective security and enhance interoperability.

“Thirdly, we must intensify our diplomatic efforts to engage with all relevant stakeholders. Dialogue and negotiation should be at the forefront of our approach to resolving the crisis in the Republic of Niger.

“We must engage with the transitional authorities, civil society organizations, and other key actors to foster an inclusive and peaceful transition process.”

ECOWAS made it clear that they’re committed to preventing unconstitutional power changes in the region.

ECOWAS Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security, Amb. Abdel-Fatau Musah remarked that the recent trend of successful and unsuccessful military coups, estimated to be eight to nine in the last three years, has put the region’s democratic stability at risk.

Musah stressed the urgency of addressing this situation, mentioning that all ECOWAS member states were governed by democratically elected presidents just three years ago, but the threat of military takeovers has increased lately.

He reminded that the defence chiefs’ meeting was guided by the Protocol relating to the mechanism for conflict prevention, management, resolution, peacekeeping and security, which was adopted in 1999 and universally accepted by all member states in 2001.

Musah said, “Respected chiefs of defence staff of our region, this is a clarion call to you. This is a test of the will of our militaries to demonstrate that we have a democratically minded military whose responsibility is the protection of the state.

“So the diplomacy is being given a chance to succeed and like we said, the military option is the very last on the table. And if we can avoid that, a peaceful resolution is our preferred option but we have to prepare for all eventualities.

“The time has come again for ECOWAS to show that we are a rules-based organisation, we are rule-based countries; we cannot allow the rule by the Ballot Box to be replaced by the rule of Kalashnikovs.”

‘Let government focus on investing in security, education, health infrastructure and maybe the arts but not business. Enough of giving out funds, if we want to ease the economic burden of people, let government curtail its revenue by freezing taxes and putting a moratorium on levies, duties and other charges they put on transactions and properties and transactions’

Dear Readers 

LET us today make some considerations around the speech by the President on the economic situation in the country. The speech was delivered a few days ago, 31^st July 2023 for the records. It is a well written speech and I recommend you read the whole document too. The intent of the speech was to explain reasons for the policy and measures the president has taken and intends to take to combat the serious economic challenges the country is grappling with. The president termed the challenges as “challenges this nation has long faced.” The president chose to do it in simple terms without economic jargons, that is an indication that he wanted to speak to the most. 

There is no other way to put it, those who totally reject the speech in terms of content, and even idea, are wrong. They are wrong because it is a good thing for the president to directly, with his face and voice, come out to explain the rationale for his decisions and to acknowledge the situation in the country. Doing so is an indication that the president is connected to and cares about the people of the land. It is also a symbol of the president considering himself and his office accountable to the citizens of the country he is charged to govern. This might seem basic and expected, yes, it is but if we cast our minds back to the bad days of the immediate past president, it will be clear that little big things like communication matters. One who knows how think will also know how to be thankful. 

Appreciation for little or much that is good should not and does not however deprive us our ability and duty to dissent from some reasonings. Contrary to what the president and many are proposing, it is neither natural nor logical nor a given that fuel subsidy must go. Some of us, I don’t know how many of us left these days, but some of still argue that the real issue of the fuel subsidy regime were the abuse, mismanagement and outright fraud that corrupted the regime. It is my strongly held view that in the face of a situation where a very few are mismanaging, abusing and looting a commonwealth facility created for the benefit of the very many, the appropriate response should be to sanitize the system with the aim of getting rid of its destructive parasites not shut down the whole facility. 

We cannot say because there are thieves in the market or kitchen, we are going stop cooking for and feeding our children. Do we have to keep cooking for and feeding a child forever? No, not unless the child grows with some sort of disability. When do we then remove the fuel subsidy, if ever, you may be asking? My position is that we make fuel subsidy redundant by making fuel available at local prices (creation of refineries), by reducing and diversifying our demand of fuel (investment in alternative sources of energy, investment in mass transportation), increasing value and revenue through export of refined not crude oil. All these were to be done whilst managing the regime of fuel subsidy. This was my position in 2012 and it is still my position in 2023. On a personal note, it is worth restating here that my participation in the Occupy Nigeria Movement was nothing personal nor partisan against the government of President Goodluck Jonathan but a matter of principle, knowledge and conscience. I have nothing to fear from the “God of Jonathan” as invoked by Reuben Abati, those who have changed their positions today will have their conscience and history to deal with. 

Save for something extraordinary, like a miracle, to occur, it is difficult is foresee a return to the fuel subsidy regime, it is however pertinent for future actions and policies for us to examine and document why we have had to stop the regime. Are we removing fuel subsidy because for long we have been against it like the president says he is? Such reasoning will be an ideology-led thinking process and conclusion. Are we removing subsidies simply because it was being “funnelled into the deep pockets and lavish bank accounts of a select group of individuals?” Such reasoning will be an indication that corruption and various form of other crimes are more harmful to the country than we care to admit and this will be notwithstanding all the noise we already make about corruption. Are we removing fuel subsidy simply because we are broke and cannot afford the bill? That will reveal sheer incompetence, maladministration and lack of foresight on the part of past administrations. They ate the cookie jar dry without thinking of baking or calling those that can bake. 

We are where we are today so what is to be done?

A good place to start towards an effective and efficient policy process that will yield positive, progressive and prosperous political and economic outcome for the country is for the new president to adopt “discontinuance” as a keyword. Unlike the past administrations that have tried to appease, accommodate but eventually abdicated to the corruption filled and ethically challenged elite that has amassed so much wealth and power that they have become a serious threat to the fairness of our economy and the integrity of our democratic governance, let the new administration take the fight to them and boldly say “there is a new sheriff in town”. The new administration, if it truly wants to fruitfully serve the people of this country, needs to in words and deed let the guilty and innocent know that those strong privileged few that have taken food out of the mouth of the many, the young and the weak to feed their unsatiable and depraved appetite will cough it and they will not be allowed near the cookie jars any more. 

The president in his message made refence to investing here and there, making available funds for this and that, these plans are clearly aimed at reducing the economic woes of the country. How can one fault such intentions? These are noble intentions of someone or people who care and show they care about the pain of citizens. The speech is a sign that the president and those working around him are neither totally lost in a bubble nor prone to defending the undefendable like some of their supporters and followers outside office try to do. These proposed solutions are however patently weak where not outrightly wrong and worse still similar to what has been done in the past. 

Enough of this obsession of government investing in ventures, let businesses do business. Role of government is to attract, facilitate and guarantee returns for private investment, this is done by creating an enabling environment. Let government focus on investing in security, education, health infrastructure and maybe the arts but not business. Enough of giving out funds, if we want to ease the economic burden of people, let government curtail its revenue by freezing taxes and putting a moratorium on levies, duties and other charges they put on transactions and properties and transactions. Let us even reduce VAT and suspend land use charges while working towards building a truly credit society wherein your status as a tax payer and an employed citizen is what guarantees you a living not your ability to grovel or support. 

President Bola Tinubu has said a comprehensive forensic audit of the Central Bank is underway, adding that a thorough overhaul of the civil service payroll was imminent.

He added that his administration was going to block all financial loopholes to make the country more attractive to foreign investors.

The President disclosed this during an audience with the President of the World Bank, Ajay Banga, on Friday at the Presidential Villa, Abuja, as disclosed in a statement by his Special Adviser of Media and Publicity, Ajuri Ngelale.

‘’A comprehensive forensic audit is ongoing at the Central Bank. We are going to do a very serious structural review of the civil service payroll. I cannot believe in the numbers I’m seeing and I’ve had that experience before at the state level.

‘’The reforms are in tandem with Nigeria’s Ease of Doing Business programme. We’ll block all financial loopholes. The reforms will be targeted at the way we work, change of attitude and equally on educating our people. It’s costly but we will do it,’’ he said.

He also requested the World Bank’s support in addressing the challenges posed by the removal of cross-sectoral subsidies, particularly in lessening the impact on less privileged Nigerians.

Highlighting Nigeria’s resilience and intellectual prowess, the President implored the Bretton Woods institution to view the country as a significant player within the global community, not solely as a struggling economy.

‘‘We stand as a vibrant and educated society, seeking to avert chaos through strategic interventions. Your proactive engagement aligns with our quest for partnership, and together, we shall pursue mutual benefits that enrich us all,’’ he said.

He also discussed the ongoing efforts to address issues such as subsidy removal, foreign exchange mismanagement, exchange rates, inflation, liquidity, and debt management.

Some folks are trying to put their knee on the neck of Niger Republic. This is in addition to the suffocating knee of imperial France that has been on the collective necks of the so-called Francophone countries of West Africa. They have been unable to breathe since their individual flag independence. A wind of change appears to be blowing across the subregion and this appears to have the potential of a breathing opportunity that the citizens appear to embrace, even celebrate. But there appear to be counter forces that see what some regard as freedom fighters as terrorists. This is what I set out to interrogate in this piece.

West Africa was colonized by two main European powers – Britain and France. Germany did have a tiny foothold in Cameroun, but as they lost the 2nd World War, the winners took their portion and handed it to France, one of their allies. Technically, Cameroun and Chad are in Central Africa but they are being added to this West African geo-political discussion because of their contiguity to Nigeria as well as their exemplification of what is pernicious about French colonial and neo-colonial hegemony. Guinea Bissau was colonized by Portugal. So, we have Niger, Mali, Togo, Benin, Cote d’Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Guinea (Conakry), Senegal and Mauritania as Francophone countries in the West African sub-region.

In the recent past, coups d’etat have begun to rear their ugly head after we thought democracy had berthed permanently in West Africa. Curiously, this trend is taking root in the Francophone region of West Africa. The Sahelian space seems to have become a fertile milieu for military rule. Mali (2020), Guinea (2021), Chad (2021), Burkina Faso (2022), and now, Niger Republic (2023). Is it a mere coincidence that these are all Francophone countries or is there another thread that runs through these countries that has made military rule fashionable again in the last four years? I will explore their French colonial past and present neo-colonial experience as a major factor in this jackboot resurgence.

France adopted the policy of assimilation in their colonial strategy in Africa. They wanted to convert Africans to Frenchmen and, indeed, some Africans like Sedar Senghor were elected into the French parliament. The French virtually wanted their colonial subjects to forgo their culture, cuisine, and history and adopt French culture, cuisine, dressing, mannerisms and etiquette as theirs. Unlike the British who adopted indirect rule in their colonies, as bad as that was too, this French variant, which wanted to paint Africans French and stop their ability to think as Africans was the most pernicious. It was a subterfuge to perpetually enslave and exploit those countries in order to keep metropolitan France prosperous. That doing so would impoverish Francophone Africa did not prick the conscience of a country that gave the statue of liberty to the United States. A country whose creed is Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite was doing the opposite in its colonies! For those colonies, liberty, equality and fraternity did not matter. Perpetual subjugation was the ethos.

Has this ungodly state of affairs changed in the relationship between France and its neo-colonies that Francophone Africa is? Unfortunately, the answer is no. Today, all those countries’ external reserves are held by France. France virtually dictates what happens in those economies. The CFA zone is under France’s armpit. They cannot breathe unless France allows them, and even then, the amount of oxygen is decided by France! The CFA Franc value is determined by France. The currency is printed by France and its owned banknote printer in Cote d’Ivoire. I understand there is a colonial tax still being paid by all Francophone countries to France to date!

In terms of exploitation, France controls the mineral resources of its former colonies. When Camerounians asked for more transparency about their petroleum resources, their ancestor of a president – been in power since 1982 – told them it is too complicated for the citizens to understand! The man, who farted publicly and did not even know where he was during the US – African summit in Washington DC, is still propped up by France because he serves their interests despite Cameroun’s ruination. It is said that most of the electric power generated in France comes from nuclear power plants. The uranium for generating all that power comes from Niger Republic. The same Niger cannot construct a rail line for themselves but are depending on the benevolence of their cousin in Nigeria to lay a rail track into their country. Ditto power supply which comes from Nigeria and is now being used as a tool for undiplomatic arm twisting.

Leaders in those Francophone countries, apart from stealing their countries blind and keeping their loot and concubines in France, help France to perpetuate its stranglehold on their countries while France ensures their stay in power is unchallenged. It is this mutually ‘beneficial’ but unholy symbiotic relationship between those leaders and French interests that appear to be fueling resentment by the younger generation of citizens in those countries including those in the armed forces. They see their resources being stolen by France and their own so-called ‘elected’ leaders and their future seems bleak. They seem to ask themselves what next if this state of affairs continues? The same questions that Thomas Sankara asked and agents of imperialism cut his life short using his treacherous bosom friend whose name is not worth my mention here. Thomas Sankara’s place in Burkinabe history is assured. So is the infamy of the man that was used to stop his attempt to take his country to greatness.

It seems to me this wind of change in Francophone West Africa is a re-igniting of the Sekou Toure vision of Guinean independence. Of all the African leaders that negotiated independence from France, Sekou Toure, God bless his soul, was the only one who refused to sign away his country’s beckoning freedom. He refused continued subjugation after flag independence. Consequently, France removed all the infrastructure in the country before departure and left the country prostrate but with its self-pride intact. Such a ‘scotched earth’ policy by the country of egalite, liberte and fraternite! What a shame.

These threats coming from ECOWAS and Nigeria to the junta in Niger are viewed by different people from different prisms. People like the President of Togo, who is only President because his father, a coupe plotter and killer, was in power forever are also lending a voice to those threats? When is his tenure ending? Is there a voice of opposition in his banana republic today? Akuffo Ado used to speak well and say the right things at international fora. But go and check how he has brought Ghana, our shining star of recent to its knees – economically speaking. He too is issuing threats?

Is ECOWAS ready to fight a surrogate war on behalf of France? Is Nigeria going to do that in Nigeria’s interest? Has France not seen itself, and behaved as, Nigeria’s competitor for influence in the West African sub-region? Has it not tried on uncountable occasions to undermine Nigeria’s position at every opportunity? Let us take the case of the ECOWAS common currency mooted from the Gowon Era. Did France not undercut us by getting the Francophone countries to dump the ECOWAS plan and go ahead with theirs? Which country has the largest economy in West Africa and could have reaped bounty benefits from improved free trade in West Africa? So, should we fight France’s proxy war in Niger? Qui bono? In whose interest?

Nigeria’s power cut to Niger Republic, to say the least, lacks strategic thinking to some of us. The Government, of course, may have superior information and longer-term view. But to poor folks like us, we know that the decision to supply Niger Republic power when we do not have enough was a strategic decision made in Nigeria’s interest. It was done in order to persuade Niger Republic not to dam the River Niger upstream. The River Niger flows past Niger into Nigeria and supplies water to Kainji Dam – our biggest single source of electric power. If Niger dams the River Niger tomorrow, the water supply to Kainji dam would be impacted. Using that power supply to play power games and please France and other interests have long-term implications. Have we planned for that? And will anyone in Niger Republic actually take this insult to their sovereignty and wellbeing (electric power supply) as being done in their interest? I doubt so.

The case for democracy has long been made starting from ancient Greece where the people voted for their leaders and had their say on issues that affected them. It neither started with the Gettysburg Address by Abraham Lincoln nor with the French Revolution that began on 5th May 1789. That is the form of government that we all like, when practised in the interest of the people. Why are we cutting power supply and issuing ultimatum with not-so-veiled military threat before sending a mediation team? Is it not a bit unsettling that those who excoriated NLC and TUC for going on strike while negotiations are ongoing are loudly silent while the Niger Government was dealt a power cut and given a 7day ultimatum before a ‘mediation’ team is being sent to Niamey? It is like thinking of what to do about palliatives after subsidy removal rather than the other way round.

France, and to some extent, the West should remove their knee from Francophone Africa’s neck and allow it to breathe. Their resources ought to benefit the people and not the thieving elite and their colonial metropolis. God did not make a mistake by putting under their soil such valuable natural resources as uranium now craved by rich countries who are not ready to pay for them. That France became rich and has a very high standard of living through the sweat of these same poor countries is bad enough. Keeping them perpetually poor and not letting them breathe the same oxygen that God gave us free is criminal.