Memories of Bala and Chima At a Time Like This -By Kayode Komolafe

In the past few weeks, the memories of two patriots have been kept alive for the inspiring progressive marks they left behind. These exemplars of the Left in politics – the radical historian, Dr. Bala Yusufu Usman and the quintessential activist, Comrade Chima Ubani – died 10 years ago three days apart.  Ubani died at 42 in a road accident in Maiduguri while on mobilisation trip against fuel price hike on September 21, 2005. A senior photojournalist with the Vanguard Newspapers, Tunji Oyeleru, also lost his life in the tragic incident. Usman died at 60 of after some illness on September 24, 2005. Unmistakably, Usman and Ubani belonged to different generations; if Ubani, who was trained in crop science, were to study history in the university, he would probably be taught by a former student of Usman.

Yet, a reflection on the lives and times of these genuine patriots should compel severe self-criticism on the part of elements of the broad Left. This assertion is valid in many respects. Both Usman and Ubani not only popularised ideas for human progress, they also selflessly took concrete action to transform their dreams for a just society into a   reality. Both were unequivocally professed Marxist socialists.  However, regrettably the virtues their lives represented are vastly on the decline. This point should not be lost as different forums are deservedly convened to honour their great memories.

Take a sample. Usman was a fine scholar who contributed immensely into the building of the nationalist historiography school from an unambiguously Marxist and anti-imperialist perspective. He was also a notable public intellectual, who actively participated in all the great debates of his time. Usman and his comrade, Dr. Segun Osoba, another radical historian, produced the people-oriented minority report of the committee of the “49 wise men” who drafted the 1979 Constitution. The Section II of the document that eventually emerged, as Constitution is replete with important ingredients of Welfarism and socio-economic justice. It is believed that this is a great concession to the pro-people position pushed by Usman and Osoba. Every constitution made since 1979 has retained the essential elements of the Section II.  Apart from Usman and Osoba who were committee members, elements of the Left actively participated in the larger public debate on the constitution. The vigorous exercise is now historically referred to as the Great Debate.  This influence of the Left on politics is hardly remembered by the leftists themselves as they get overwhelmed by the vicissitudes of the bourgeois society.  During the regime of President Ibrahim Babangida, there were at least two important debates encouraged by the administration. The issues were a loan of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to Nigeria and the direction of the nation’s foreign policy. In those days, the progressive voices were loud, clear and remarkably influential. Usman and Ubani contributed immensely to this influence from the Left.  The situation was not like today when the voices of our neo-liberal technocrats have drowned the progressive voices. In fact, the debate today is more of a civil war in the neo-liberal camp; the argument is now about who can privatise better or impose hardship on the people more honestly. The liberals and conservatives have taken a huge advantage of the silence from the Left. To their eternal credit, in their different ways, Usman and Ubani ensured that their voices were heard in defence of the people’s socio-economic interests.

For 30 years now, Nigeria has been experimenting essentially with models of economic development inspired by the Washington Consensus – privatisation, liberalisation, reduction of social spending and the supreme reign of market forces. Babangida and his brilliant team started the journey with their Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP).  Subsequent economic strategies and visions have been basically different brands of SAP. But the copyright actually belongs to the Babangida regime. In terms of packaging and articulation, the Babangida regime did better with their SAP than subsequent administrations have done   with their own variants of SAP. Rather than reduce poverty, these wild economic experiments have worsened mass poverty and misery in the land. The mantra in those days was that “ there is no alternative to SAP.” But from the Left not a few alternatives were offered. The regime, of course, elected to ignore them all.

Significantly, before SAP was imposed with his enormous social costs including the wiping out of the middle class, Usman and some of his comrades and colleagues wrote a book in 1985 entitled The Nigerian Economic Crisis: Causes and Solutions. Apart from Usman, the other authors of the book were Alkasum Abba, Yahaya Abdulahi, Muhammad Sanusi Abubakar, Mike Kwanashie, Abubakar Saddique Muhammad, Okello Oculi and Kyari Tijani.  They were all scholars at the Ahmadu University (ABU), Zaria.  And the book was published by the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU). The topics examined were agriculture, industry, energy, transport, education, health, income distribution, public service and national security.

The most distinguishing feature of the publication was that on every topic listed in the foregoing, the authors not only made a devastating critique of the condition then, they also offered “ alternative strategies.” For instance, on the alternative strategies to national security, Usman and his co-authors wrote among other things: We believe that in order to tackle the current economic crisis at its roots the recent expansion of the definition of crime by the Federal Military Government to include economic sabotage and enrichment from public funds, should be codified to produce a new definition of national security along the lines set out on page 173. And on Page 173 of the book, the authors listed three categories of crime to be considered in the new definition of crime. They were as follows: (i) Crimes committed against the sovereignty, territorial integrity and the resources of the nation and the welfare of its citizens by foreign governments, foreign corporations and foreign organisations and individuals; (ii) crimes committed against the welfare, rights and dignity of the nation and its citizens by other citizens entrusted with public office to serve on its lawful institutions; and (iii) crimes committed against lives, rights and dignity of the nation and its citizens by other citizens who are not entrusted with public office. Does that speak to the contemporary Nigerian situation? Well, that was the depth of the ideas harvested in public debate 30 years ago even under a military government. The point to be stressed   here is that alternative strategies were spelt out by some patriots.

Similarly, Ubani grew up as a cadre of the Left in the student movement at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, with a total committed to expansion of access to quality education. On graduation, he remained consistent in the war against mass poverty. Imbued with exceptional ideological clarity, Ubani notably made a lot of sacrifice in the struggle. He put his personal comfort and career at risk to pursue his conviction.  Beyond human rights advocacy, he devoted so much energy into building a progressive party. He was a member of the Democratic Alternative (DA). It is a tragic irony that 10 years after Ubani died protesting increase in fuel price, fuel supply remains a national nightmare. That cannot be an index of progress.

It is, therefore, relevant to summon the memories of Bala Usman and Chima Ubani at a time like this when government officials seem to make a virtue of austerity. If they were to be around at this time they would be thinking of fashioning a broad anti-poverty strategy in response to the austerity mongers. Government officials talk of “hard times ahead” as if the Nigerian state has the moral authority anymore to impose hardship on the poor after decades of mismanagement and corruption. It is simply socially sensitive for ministers to be talking of increasing tariffs when no appreciable difference has been made to power supply or contemplating tolls when roads are yet to be built. Ministers talk of hard times as if the President was elected to impose hardship. No! Buhari was elected to create the condition for prosperity using pro-people policies as instruments. There is much of rhetoric from Abuja that suggests a hangover of the mentality of the SAP era. The programme that the All Progressives Congress (APC) sold to the electorate during the election has a good dose of social democratic content. For 30 years the poor have been swallowing the bitter pills of the SAP experiments without any improvement to their chronic socio-economic condition. Poverty is worse in Nigeria today than it was in 1985!  So, it is important to make sure President Muhammadu Buhari keep to that path of development informed by a social democratic strategy. It is time Nigeria embraced an alternative to SAP not the Buhari variety of SAP again.

At a time like this, Bala and Chima would be offering alternatives to the bogey of austerity and hardship. They would not only think about the alternatives, they would also struggle for their actualisation.