It was the cat that stole the fish but the police arrested the dog, a situation that made the baboon take to his heels. “Why are you running?” Forest dwellers asked him. “I know that the dog’s arrest is a decoy; the chains held by the police are designed for my waist.

When Russia started its aggression against Ukraine, you would have thought that Africans have nothing to do with their ancient quarrel and the politics of supremacy being played by the US and Russia. You were wrong. At the slightest opportunity, both Ukraine and Russia will demonstrate their unseemly side by descending with venom on the convenient whipping boy, Africa.

I don’t know who advised the African leaders to visit Ukraine and Russia to try and mediate in the ongoing conflict. Yes, blessed are the peacemakers in another context, not this one in which both parties have dug in, espousing irreconcilable positions. In any case, you can only mediate when the parties have some measure of respect for you. The AU delegation comprising Egypt’s Prime Minister Mustafa Madbuly, Senegal’s President Macky Sall, President of the Union of Comoros Azali Assoumani, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and Zambia’s President Hakainde Hichilema, actually meant well. But good intentions count for nothing where the intercessor is perceived as a perennial mendicant.

It took the undiplomatic comment of Vincent Magwenya, spokesperson of South African President Cyril Ramaphosa to trigger the inner revulsion of Ukrainians to the visit. Magwenya had said that he had not heard any explosion nor witnessed a missile attack in Kyiv while he was in the city with the African delegation. But the Kyiv Post, countered with a claim that its reporters, including “every other media organisation present in the city – saw and heard the missiles in the skies over the capital and witnessed several loud explosions as they were intercepted.”

The Ukrainians interpreted Magwenya’s statement as a ploy to deny the devastation caused by Russia. The Ukrainian presidential advisor and negotiator, Mykhailo Podolyak, quickly said the  African leaders had no business poking their noses into European affairs. He said African leaders had neither the capability nor the power to get involved in matters they knew nothing about, adding that this was beyond their understanding. He added that Africa and its leaders were using the failed trip to achieve their geopolitical goals in favour of Russia, which provides Africa with food supplies.

Said Podolyak, “The African delegation had no goal of settling the conflict or finding a solution. Obviously, this is not their task. It is not at their level or competency. They just want to be on the misinformation agenda and resolve their own issues, like the increasing resources they receive from Russia, including food supplies.” 

Podolyak, who is one of the advisers to the Chief of Staff of Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said the trip was a mere fishing expedition for information on behalf of Russia. Obviously, the Ukrainians are not enthused by South Africa’s membership of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa), the acronym used to describe the club of fast-growing economies that hope to collectively dominate the global economy by 2050.

President Zelenskyy was more diplomatic. However, he all but said the African leaders were on a futile mission. He declared that talks with Russia would be possible only after Moscow withdraws its forces from occupied Ukrainian territory. He said he couldn’t understand what the African leaders hoped to gain by meeting with the Russian leader.

“To allow any negotiations with Russia now while the occupier is on our land is to freeze the war, to freeze everything: pain and suffering,” Zelenskiy told a joint press conference with the delegation. “We need real peace, and therefore, a real withdrawal of Russian troops from our entire independent land.”

I must confess that I’m an admirer of the uncommon tenacity and youthful vigour with which Zelensky has been discharging his  duties as the Ukrainian commander-in-chief. It is difficult to believe that this is the same lawyer and comedian of yore. Having said that, I must assert my right to self-love. We, Africans, have historically always been at the receiving end of all sorts of insults no matter what we bring to the table. If we don’t stand our ground, every Vladimir and Volodymyr will treat us as foot-mat.

At the onset of the war, Nigerian students were at the receiving end of racism in both Ukraine and Poland. I recall that even in refugee camps, Africans were treated as dirt. There was the well known case of the Ghanaian student who said he had left the refugee camp he was placed in after fleeing Sumy in northeastern Ukraine because of  discrimination. His story: a Ukrainian man had complained to camp officials that sleeping beside a black man was traumatising. The student was then moved to another space within the camp.

African envoys spoke out strongly at the mistreatment of African nationals trying to flee Ukraine during a special session of the United Nations General Assembly.

African nationals, mostly students, have accused Ukrainian security forces of racially profiling them, and of stopping them from getting on trains. The reports of discrimination have caused uproar and left a bitter taste in Africa.

Over social media, several African students said they had been bypassed to allow Ukrainians and other European nationals to cross the border into Poland first. They said they were made to spend hours and days in freezing temperatures without food or sanitation facilities. “We echo here the outcry of African students who are fleeing the war in Ukraine and are facing discrimination in their exodus in search of shelter. This situation is unacceptable”, said Baudelaire Ndong Ella, the Gabonese Ambassador to the UN.

With the plethora of problems bedevilling Africa, why have our leaders not concentrated their efforts on resolving the conflicts on our continent first? I’m sorry, I don’t believe in peace vending at all costs. To be looked down on, talk down on and discriminated against by people whose only claim to superiority is hinged on the iniquitous appropriation of Africa’s resources over the centuries, is totally unacceptable, more so when our leaders have to travel to receive those insults instead of paddling the canoe of the various challenges on our continent. If you can see the hand of Esau and the voice of Jacob in what is going on, then you’ll understand why our leaders should stay home and fix this blessed continent.

Libya, South Sudan, the Central African Republic, Northern Mozambique, Ethiopia, and Cameroon’s north-west and south-west regions are African conflict hotbeds. Ethiopia’s conflict has since escalated. The Tigray People’s Liberation Front and its allies have their eyes on the capital Addis Ababa. A humanitarian crisis is apparent in many parts of the country. African Union (AU) mediation, led by former Nigerian president Olusegun Obasanjo, is ongoing. In the mean time, people are dying. South Sudan has its own daunting challenges. With the fight for power between rival forces in the Republic of Sudan, refugees are heading south, thereby compounding an already bad humanitarian situation.

The Central African Republic (CAR) has been embroiled in an intractable cycle of violence for several years. The country desperately needs a new approach for sustainable peace. The conflict in north and south-west Cameroon has not received the attention it deserves from regional and continental actors. The situation has degenerated from protests over poor governance and marginalisation to a deadly insurgency. Many people have died; many more are displaced.

The ever-present threat of violent extremism and terrorism in the Sahel and Lake Chad Basin (LCB) regions, East Africa and the Horn, and Mozambique’s northern province of Cabo Delgado, is also hovering over the coastal countries of West Africa. Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, particularly, have seen continuing attacks.

The terror attack in Uganda reflects the threat that violent extremism will continue to pose to Central Africa, East Africa and the Horn. Reports of possible collaboration between the Islamic State-affiliated Allied Democratic Forces and al-Shabaab are alarming. The Cabo Delgado extremist insurgency has been ongoing since the end of 2017.

The spread of the threat from the Sahel to West Africa’s coastal countries is best evidenced by the resurgence of attacks in northern Cote d’Ivoire near the border with Burkina Faso. Cote d’Ivoire is now suffering repeated attacks, and the fear is that violent extremism could affect other parts of the country and neighbouring states such as Ghana, Benin and Togo.

With all these problems at home, what are African leaders doing in Kyiv trying to quench another man’s fire?

As this piece was going to bed, word came that an attempted ‘coup’ of sorts was unfolding in Russia. See why we should maintain our lane for now?

On Tuesday, 13 June, 2023, I was at the University of Ibadan where I delivered a public lecture titled “The task before Nigeria’s 16th Head of State, Bola Ahmed Tinubu” at the 31st Anniversary of the Resurrection Morning Star Society, Chapel of Resurrection of the university. Following is an abridged version of the lecture:

“Tinubu is an enigma. To borrow from the words which the self-styled “evil genius” and self-conceited military president-cum-dictator, Gen. Ibrahim Babangida (IBB), employed while describing the sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Tinubu has been “the issue” in Nigerian politics since the current Fourth Republic kicked off in 1999. The return to democracy did not come on a platter but was forged in the crucibles of fire. The rallying cry was for the military to return to the barracks – that military rule had become an aberration worldwide. Tinubu was a senator under Babangida’s planned-to-fail Third Republic, having won election on the platform of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), Babangida’s “a little to the left” political contraption. When MKO Abiola threw his hat in the ring to contest the June 12, 1993 presidential election, Tinubu was in Abiola’s corner. Abiola won the election judged both locally and internationally as free and fair and the most credible in the history of elections in this country; but the results were annulled by IBB. Thus began an epic battle to have the election de-annulled, thereby throwing the country into what came to be known as political impasse or logjam that did not  come to an end until the military heeded the cry to return to the barracks and the country returned to civil rule on May 29, 1999.

Tinubu played a prominent role in the pro-democracy group called the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) that fought the Babangida and, later, Gen. Sani Abacha dictatorship to a standstill. When the soil of Nigeria became too hot for the pro-democracy activists due to the mindless assassination, arrest and detention of leading June 12 activists, many of them, including Tinubu, relocated abroad to continue the struggle to liberate Nigeria from the jackboot of military dictatorship. The struggle achieved its goal on May 29, 1999 but not before the death of Abacha in unexplained circumstances on 8 June, 1998 followed closely by that of Abiola in controversial circumstances on 7 July, 1998. Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar succeeded Abacha and initiated a return to civil rule programme that birthed the ongoing Fourth Republic, so far the longest-running in the history of the country. Tinubu participated in the process under the platform of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) and was elected the governor of Lagos State. He ruled the country’s most important state for two uninterrupted terms of four years each (1999 -2003; 2003 – 2007).

The momentous events that signposts Tinubu’s unforgettable years as the governor of Lagos state include his epic battles with the then President Olusegun Obasanjo, first in the 2003 General Elections when Obasanjo, leveraging on the ubiquitous “Federal Might”, uprooted all AD governors in the South-west with only Tinubu escaping the political tsunami! Obasanjo’s action was not only precipitated on earning himself a second term in office but also to avenge what had come to be referred to as “the shame of 1999” when he lost scandalously in his home geo-political zone of the South-west to his rival, Chief Olu Falae. The second leg of Tinubu’s tango with Obasanjo occurred in 2005 when, on account of the Lagos governor’s creation of more local government areas in the state, and justifiably so, Obasanjo seized Lagos State’s local government’s federal allocation, an action capable –and, perhaps, actually meant – to financially strangulate the state and force Tinubu on his knees. However, rather than back down and kow-tow to the president, Tinubu stood his ground and engineered a tax system that geometrically shot up the Internally Generated Revenue (IGR) of Lagos from a measly N600 million per annum in 2005 to the N51 billion per annum that it is today. That quantum leap in revenue generation makes Lagos state, perhaps, the only state in the country that can sustain itself without relying on Federal allocation.

Necessitated by what some say is vaulting ambition while others counter that it is survivalist instincts, Tinubu soon broke ranks with his political godfathers in the AD/Afenifere camp and charted his own course with the formation of the Action Congress (AC), which later became the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN). Archimedes it was who said: “Give me a place to stand, and a lever long enough, and I will move the world” Lagos and ACN became the “place to stand” in Tinubu’s scantily-concealed quest to master Nigeria’s political landscape and bear rule over its people. He took a quantum leap forward in 2014 with the cobbling together of an alliance (the All Progressives Congress, APC) that no one had given a chance of success going by the country’s antecedents. The APC, however, defeated the sitting president, Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, and his ruling party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the General Election of March 2015.

Tinubu’s mastery of Lagos politics since 1999 has not been in doubt. He saw off the AD/Afenifere leaders not only in Lagos politics but also in the elective political leadership of the entire South-west. He has since firmly ensconced himself in Lagos in particular as the man who decides “who gets what, when and how”, to quote Harold Lasswell. As a politician in Lagos, you disagree with Tinubu at your own peril! He saw off two deputy governors (Senator Kofoworola Akerele-Bucknor and Olufemi Pedro) and has installed Babatunde Raji Fashola, 2007 – 2015; Akinwunmi Ambode; 2015 – 2019; and the incumbent governor, Babajide Sanwo-Olu, 2019 to date. When, in 2019, he decided that Ambode would not go for a second term in office, no Jupiter, as they say, could change it despite the outcry against the decision.

For Tinubu, however, it has not all been a bed of roses. Virtually everything about him is steeped in controversy: His name, parenthood, state of origin, age, schools attended and academic qualifications attained and, no less so, the source or sources of his immense wealth. His case, however, can be likened to that of the palm frond that luxuriates in the midst of thorns. Controversy and opposition appear as energizers that fire Tinubu to mount with wings as the eagle and overcome adversaries and adversity. Nothing demonstrates this better than the last presidential election where he had to fight tooth and nail to win the presidential ticket of his party.  Tinubu’s famous “emilokan” and “o lule” statements at Abeokuta, Ogun state attested to his frustration and desperation as the stakes appeared stalked against him and his “life-long” ambition to rule the country seemeth in tatters. But like the phoenix that rose victoriously from its ashes, he eventually got the ticket and went on to win the last presidential election. Interestingly, like MKO Abiola in the June 12, 1993 presidential election, Tinubu lost the last election scandalously in the South-east geopolitical zone, whose voters voted overwhelmingly for son-of-the-soil Peter Obi. Tinubu had, fittingly, couched his Renewed Hope 2023 campaign after MKO Abiola’s Hope ’93 campaign 30 years earlier.

Now that Tinubu has achieved his life-long ambition of ruling Nigeria, it remains to be seen what he will make of it. If anything, our sour experience with Buhari has shown that it is one thing to thirst after an office; it is another to get into the office and perform. Buhari got into office after four attempts but messed up real time. A quotation once hung on the office wall of a friend; it reads: “O Allah, when you have prepared a place for me; prepare me for the place” It was obvious Buhari was ill-prepared for office but can we say the same of Tinubu?

Popular columnist, Dr. Reuben Abati, set out eight tasks for Tinubu, namely: removal of fuel subsidy (which Tinubu achieved in his first day in office); widening of the country’s revenue base; enthronement of true federalism; according a special status to Lagos; sanitizing the budgeting and procurement processes; taking a look at the foreign exchange regime (which Tinubu has also done); empowerment of the security agencies, particularly the police (he just changed the Service chiefs, including the IGP); respect for media freedom and the demands of Nigerian youths.      Another way of understanding the task before President Tinubu is to identify what the people wanted but which his predecessor, Buhari, failed to do. According to a former Kaduna state senator, Shehu Sanu, Buhari failed to secure the life and property of Nigerians; therefore, security of life and property is one of the tasks Nigerians expect President Tinubu to perform. Sani also said Buhari promised restructuring but failed to deliver. Since Tinubu himself also promised to restructure the country, he is expected to deliver on this promise. Sani accused Buhari of granting waivers to the rich while impoverishing the poor. Tinubu will be expected to pursue policies that will close the yawning gap between the rich and poor and not further widen it. Sani accused Buhari of building magical rice pyramids that disappeared after three days! We all saw the political rice pyramids but they did nothing to bring down the price of rice and other foodstuffs, which kept skyrocketing despite the billions of Naira allegedly sunk by Godwin Emefiele’s Central Bank of Nigeria into the Anchor Borrowers’ Programme. Food security, therefore, is one of the urgent tasks before Tinubu for, as they say, a hungry man is an angry man! When hunger enters a stomach,nothing else finds its way therein!

Yet, another way to approach this question is to attempt a comparative analysis of the situation of Nigerians pre-Buhari and post-Buhari and use that to set a template for President Tinubu, if only as a point of departure. Data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) indicate that in 2014 before Buhari took office, the inflation rate oscillated between 7.7 and 8.5 per cent. By 2015 when Buhari took office, it averaged 9 per cent but under Buhari, the inflation rate hit a 16-year high, in the midst of increase in prices and poor purchasing power. In 2016, inflation rose to 15.68 per cent; 16.52 per cent in 2017 but dropped to 12.09 per cent in 2018 and 11.40 per cent in 2019 before it resumed its upward climb again in 2020 to 12.2 per cent, closing at 16.95 per cent in 2021. In 2022 the inflation rate climbed to 21.34 per cent and now to 22.04 per cent . President Tinubu and his economic team are expected to adopt measures that will not only reduce the inflation rate to the single digit it was under Jonathan but also improve on it.

The unemployment rate when Buhari took over power in the second quarter of 2015 was 8.2 per cent; it rose to 9.9 per cent in the third quarter of that year but between then and May 2021, Nigeria’s unemployment rate has more than tripled. National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) data shows that currently, the country’s unemployment rate is projected to rise to 41 percent this year! At the 33.3 percent that it was earlier, the World of Statistics had already rated Nigeria as having the highest unemployment rate in the world! The NBS poverty survey also shows that 63 per cent of Nigerians, about 133 million people as opposed to 53 per cent before Buhari took over in 2015, are multi-dimensionally poor. The Multi-dimensional Poverty Measure is an index that measures the percentage of households in a given country deprived along three dimensions – monetary poverty, lack of education, and lack of basic infrastructure services.

The question must then be asked: The trillions of Naira that the Buhari administration reportedly spent fighting poverty in the country, where did it go?

(TO BE CONTINUED).

Some 3 weeks to the swearing-in of the winners of the last general elections in Nigeria, the Catholic Archbishop Emeritus of Abuja, John Cardinal Onaiyekan argued that the country’s electoral system ought to be reviewed to bring to an end the practice which allows another round of contest after winners of an election had been inaugurated. In the words of Onaiyekan,”it is not right to have a system that is constantly contested.”

Put differently, contests should end before governance begins. Many people especially supporters of the acclaimed victorious parties who felt the argument did not favour them attacked the frontline clergy. What such supporters want in earnest is a cancellation of election petitions which they see as running against the spirit of sportsmanship. For them, everyone should congratulate their own favoured winner who should then set up an inclusive government. 

What the winners of an election and their supporters appear to be suggesting is that how a winner emerges is irrelevant – a posture of ‘all is well that ends well’ which is visibly antithetical to democratic practice. Of course, it would be unfair to allow any fake winner to assume office or be allowed to remain there after having found his victory to be defective. As a result, the judiciary ought to vigorously review any disputed election and discourage political jobbers from getting into leadership positions in government. At the same time, the settlement of election disputes which may lead to the removal of persons who had been allowed to hold office, no matter for how brief, is untidy and should be discouraged.

The way out is not just to have election tribunals that would courageously identify and declare the rightful winners; but that would also expeditiously conclude the assignment between the period of voting and swearing-in of winners. After all, in recent times, election petitions have been concluded under 14 days in smaller African nations such as Kenya, Malawi and Angola. As foremost activist, Femi Falana has been asking, is there any reason why Nigeria cannot do same? Why are many party loyalists always anxious to sweep plenty of dust under the carpet by calling on petitioners to withdraw their election petitions supposedly in the public interest? Do fake elections benefit society? Again, why are Nigerian patriots not insisting that their nation should follow global realities?

Against this backdrop, let’s recall two examples of questionable calls.In Delta state, one political chieftain, Nick Ovuakporie called on Senator Ovie Omo Agege, the APC flagbearer in the last governorship election in the state,to drop his election petition and congratulate governor Sheriff Oborevwori in what he called the spirit of sportsmanship. Is it not surprising that it is in a state where the winner emerged with a huge margin that such a call was made?

At the federal level, a former coordinator in the then APC Campaign Council, Ene Ogbole, would also want Atiku Abubakar of the PDP and Peter Obi of the Labour Party to withdraw their election petitions and join what she described as President Bola Tinubu’s proposed government of national unity and inclusive government. Whatever may be the motivation of the callers, sorting out election grievances legally is certainly a better option for the country. 

The gains of election petitions, when well-handled, are numerous. One of such gains is the capacity to attain the justice in any of the cases presented. Peter Obi was the first to enjoy the gain of reclaiming his mandate as governor of Anambra State, after the 2003 elections which political harvesters had seized. After the 2007 elections, former governorship candidates in Edo, Ekiti and Osun states were similarly assisted by relevant election tribunals to regain their mandates from the hitherto almighty PDP. It should also be noted that it was through the work of an election tribunal that a defect in the credentials of a deputy governorship candidate was used to stop the otherwise victorious APC flag bearer David Lyon from forming the government of Bayelsa state after the 2019 elections. What this latter case established is that the victory of a candidate with the highest number of votes at an election, can be set aside on account of any infraction or legal disability.    

Nigeria’s political party system is exceedingly weak. Whereas it is political parties that promote democratic practices in other climes, the irony is that in Nigeria, political parties lack internal democracy. As the history of elections in the country has shown, most Nigerian political parties, especially the ruling parties often devote huge energies on how they can win elections through the circumvention of rules. Whatever little gains the parties have made so far were largely imposed on them by election tribunals. Surprisingly, notwithstanding the nullification of party primaries organized by the APC for the 2019 elections in Rivers State, the same party had to forfeit all its election victories in Zamfara State.The combined calamity suffered by the APC in Bayelsa, Zamfara and Rivers states suggests that the settlement of election disputes must never be halted because our politicians are not ready to follow the democracy that is premised on the rule of law.

The performance of Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission is no doubt one of the reasons why every election petition should be allowed to run its full course. It is during the proceedings of election petitions that the searchlight is usually beamed on the shoddy behaviour of the electoral body. Failure to begin voting day process on schedule, lack of understanding of the process by INEC officials and inadequacy of men and materials during elections are usually laid bare at the tribunal hearings. Indeed, election tribunals have helped in a few cases where rogue officials showed that electoral malpractices can also be committed or aided by senior academics who are supposed to be the nation’s models. Reports from proceedings in election tribunals on the 2023 polls that strange images were wrongly uploaded in place of results confirm the expedience of allowing the tribunals to work.

Unfortunately, some of the tribunals have not done well at all. They so much cherish pursuing technicalities making them appear to the public as paid agents of some politicians. In other cases, their verdicts confuse the public; a good example being the Osun governorship election in 2018, where the candidate with the highest votes lost because one of the members of the tribunal was allegedly absent once during the proceedings.

There is also the case of the Imo governorship election where the tribunal at the highest level declared a candidate winner with more votes than voters. Also memorable, are cases where non-aspirants became candidates in the senatorial elections. However, although some politicians have successfully used the judiciary to win elections in the past, it is only fair to make the point that it is not every judge that is part of the corrupt cabal in the Judiciary. Hopefully, the exposure of scandalous verdicts would sooner or later curtail excesses in the judiciary. 

Perhaps the greatest gain of election petitions is the opportunity the option offers to politicians to follow the due process of law. In times past, many politicians had more faith in extra-judicial methods. Those were the days when opponents were assassinated in broad daylight thereby frightening away decent citizens from participating in politics and elections. If the example of candidate Muhammadu Buhari is anything to go by, there is nothing wrong in ventilating one’s electoral grievances in the approved courts several times. Buhari doggedly did so about 3 times even when he was abandoned by his political party and no one dissuaded him from continuing.

Accordingly, those calling on aggrieved citizens to abandon their election petitions in the spirit of good sportsmanship greatly miss the point because their advocacy will never offer free and fair election from which visionary leaders will emerge and initiate viable policies to develop Nigeria. Besides, the calls portray a myopic viewpoint that democracy is basically same as government whereas the latter is only part of the former. The best democracy is not that in which the winner of an election accommodates all his opponents in his government; instead, such opponents should form a viable opposition to canvass alternative policies and serve as a check on government for the benefit of society.

‘Still on remarkable lessons from Singapore’

As I was saying beyond the contextual reporting of the strategy for Singapore’s success through education quality, it should be noted that Singapore’s education system was not designed de novo by the iconic Lee Kuan Yew and his colleagues. Rather, it was built on the very solid foundations inherited from Singapore’s British colonial past. Just like Nigeria. In contrast to many of his contemporaries among post-colonial leaders, Mr. Yew was not afraid of embracing whatever elements from that past that would prove useful to the enterprise of nation-building.

Nowhere has this approach been more evident than in education. Many of the country’s premier educational institutions for example, the National University of Singapore (founded in 1905), Raffles Institution (founded in 1823), and the Anglo-Chinese School (founded in 1886), significantly predate independence. Moreover, the curriculum for secondary education is modelled after the British O-level and A-level qualifications (with some adaptation to account for the generally higher average attainment levels of students in Singapore).

And, though infrastructure is by no means neglected, the key focus of educational investment is students and teachers. Our leaders who recruit imbeciles as teachers they don’t pay regularly, should please note this about Singapore. If you don’t recruit and pay good teachers, you can’t expect miracles of education quality.

Accordingly, in Singapore, a national system of generous scholarships enables the best students to avail themselves of an education at some of the world’s premier universities, even as Singapore develops its own world-class institutions. With starting salaries above the national median, the teaching profession attracts, develops and retains some of the best graduates.

The OECD and Project Syndicate report that Singapore’s education system is specifically meritocratic (some might say elitist) in its focus on identifying and developing the very best talent and, equally important, directing it towards public service. Government scholarship recipients are obliged to serve in the public sector for a minimum of two years for every one year of study. The same meritocratic approach governs the development and promotion of teachers.

In this connection, top-performing teachers are given leadership responsibilities without excessive regard to tenure, and there is a revolving door between the education ministry, classrooms, and school administration. Educators are frequently seconded to carry out policy work. Many subsequently choose to return to the classroom because it is not demeaning.

Even the World Economic Forum reports that the elitist tendency in Singapore’s education system is tempered by the fact that quality education is available for all levels of academic aptitude. Singapore is rightly proud of its elite secondary and tertiary academic institutions, but one could argue that the hidden gems of the system are the hundreds of neighbourhood schools, the Institute of Technical Education, and polytechnics that provide high-quality education for all.

Singapore’s education system is relentlessly forward-looking. From adopting bilingualism with English in addition to the mother tongue of Mandarin, Malay or Tamil, to its focus on science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), Singapore anticipated many of the key education strategies being adopted by today’s policymakers.

According to Stavros, the choice of English was driven by history and a multi-ethnic society’s need for a common language. But it was also a prescient recognition of English’s rapid emergence as the lingua franca of global commerce and science, and that once entrenched it was likely to remain so for decades, if not centuries, to come.

In this regard, too, Mr Yew distinguished himself from other post-colonial leaders of his generation. Rather than pandering to narrow nationalist sentiment and opting for the majority language and culture, he and his colleagues chose to adopt a global language for a global city (country).

This is worthy of note too: Singapore’s education system evolves with the times and in the light of new evidence. In the 1990s, Singapore’s policymakers, concerned that their approach to education might be somewhat regimented and overly focused on STEM, began to provide avenues for excellence in the humanities, arts and sport. That rebalancing is still ongoing, with a new emphasis on identifying ways to foster creativity and entrepreneurship. This is the light education should provide for citizens. For Singapore’s founding father, education went beyond formal schooling. As he put it in a speech in 1977: “My definition of an educated man is a man who never stops learning and wants to learn.” Indeed, Singapore’s world-class education system will continue to be one of Mr Lee’s most enduring legacies.

There is, therefore, so much brilliance to borrow from the legend, Lee Kuan Yew whose biography we brandish everywhere without studying the content. Let’s advise our new leaders at all levels to get cracking with radical, result-oriented education reform. It is a time to get the right technocrats to lead the pack to do the legwork. That is the first weapon we need to get us ready to lead the black race. And here is the thing, our restructuring priority should be anchored on how to rebuild Nigeria’s education to be world-class too. Let’s get all Africans to come to Nigeria for tertiary education quality.

Korean Education System. PIX:Korea.net

‘Korea: Education as a driving force of national development’
South Korea is a country that boasts of a 5,000-year-old history. A classical scholar’s attitude* and humanitarianism have been highly valued and are deeply embedded in Korean society and history. This has led to the creation of the Korean alphabet, the invention of the world first printing technology, and a rich cultural and spiritual heritage. Hence, Koreans have highly valued studying and cultivating one’s mind to develop one’s abilities and honor the family. Koreans have also considered contributing to national and social development as the ultimate goal of studying and cultivating one’s mind.

In 1866, a French naval officer, who experienced the French navy’s attack of Ganghwa-do to fight against the massacre of Catholics, depicted the education fever in Korean society then as follows. “We cannot help but admire this place and found something that really crushed our ego. Here, even the poorest have books in their homes. There is almost no one who is illiterate and the illiterate are looked down upon.” This is a story that shows well the education fever of Korea.

Korea is no longer a country of a calm morning of the East. It is now a powerful and responsible player in the international community. Let’s study, therefore, how education contributed to such dramatic national development.

South Korea is a country with almost no natural resources. And the Korean War in the early 1950s left the country in ruins. The leaders found some architecture in the debris. Korea overcame its despair and rapidly grew economically to create the Han River Miracle in the 1970s. The miracle was possible, thanks to the education fever that has been handed down for several hundred years. In the 1980s, Korea was called one of the four Asian dragons and has continued to grow rapidly. The country has played host to G-20 Summit Meeting and so has become a member of G-20—50 Club, a hallmark of a powerful country in the global economy.

In other words, Education was the energy that drove Korea to become an advanced country. Despite several national crises, it has amazingly grown since its independence in 1945. Behind Korea’s success was the people’s passion for and state investment in education.

After the establishment of the government of the Republic of Korea in 1948, Korea was one of the poorest countries in the world. But it grew into the world’s top 15th economic stronghold. From exports of USD 54 million in 1962, it surpassed USD 548 billion (as of 2012). In addition, Korea became a member of the 20-50 Club, a hallmark of an economic stronghold in 2012 (national income of USD 20,000 and population of 50 million).

Korea also overcame the oil crisis in the 1970s, the Asian financial crisis in 1998, and the global financial crisis in 2008. Korea is currently recognised as an IT, shipbuilding, and automobile manufacturing powerhouse. Samsung and LG are dominating the global smartphone and TV markets and Hyundai is a global leader in the shipbuilding and automobile industries. Korea is, however, not resting on its laurels, and dreaming of another leap forward through a creative economy, all thanks to knowledge development through quality research.

In sports and culture, Korea is also exerting much influence in the world. It successfully played host to the 1988 Summer Olympic Games and the 2002 World Cup (co-hosted with Japan). In addition, Horea was on hand for the Winter Olympic Games in Pyeongchang in 2018. Furthermore, it is spreading its pop culture through the Korean Wave, drawing the interest of people worldwide in Korean culture.

In 2010, Korea became a member of Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and switched from being an aid recipient to a donor. Besides, it hosted the 2010 G-20 Summit Meeting, the Busan High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-4) in 2011, and the APEC Education Ministerial Meeting in 2012, playing the role of a bridge between developed and developing countries. And so behind such unprecedented rapid growth was the education fever and the excellent Korean educational system that has produced excellent manpower according to the demands of different eras.

‘Current state of Korean education’
Korean education guarantees the right to a quality education to all through steady investment and is educating excellent manpower. Excellence of the educational process has been really significant. The Korean government has since Korea’s independence continuously expanded the provision of free education to all students step-by-step. Starting with free primary education in 1959, it expanded free education to middle school (1985~2005) and expanded to high school in 2017.

‘Everyone is entitled to excellent teachers’
Teachers in Korea are one of the most coveted jobs excellent students choose. Excellent institutions educating teachers are enabling teachers to get high-quality education. In addition, support is stably provided for teachers to focus on teaching only and systemic re-education and training opportunities are provided for them to effectively teach. Of all teachers, 30.8 percent have degrees over a master’s degree (as of 2012).

Let those who are also praying fervently for Nigeria to fulfill destiny note that miracles don’t just happen. We need to encourage our leaders at all levels that they need to invest more in education beyond the revival of the still-hazy Student Loan policy. Meanwhile, let our new leaders note that education is too important to be left to mediocre education ministers and commissioners at time that digital technologies shape at the speed of thought.

MAY BE CONTINUED