04-11-00 Nigeria prides itself as the giant of Africa, considering among other factors, its far-flung total land mass of 923,770 sq km; a bursting population of 88 mm (November 1991 census); 107 mm (July 1997 estimates); it boasts of a colourful constellation of over 250 multi-ethnic groups and the fact of its being the sixth largest producer of crude oil in the world.
The sheer size, population, diversity and relative cohesion had inspired the phrase 'unity in diversity' which was a beautiful slogan to indicate that although tongue and tribe may differ, Nigeria still managed to remain united. But that fragile unity and cohesion had the since Nigeria gained political independence in 1960 been under stress and strain. The unity had often been questioned and threatened by a vicious circle of mutual and bitter ethnic suspicion, rivalry and uprising that exploded into a very bloody civil war that lasted from 1967 to 1970.
It is instructive to observe that civil war was basically a product of ethnic conspiracy, confrontation and conflagration among the three dominant ethnic groups namely Hausa, Yoruba and Igbos.

Flashback to January 1966: Following the outright breakdown of law and order in the then Western Region of Nigeria, the homeland of the Yorubas; a situation which degenerated to a region of tension and terror all over the nation, the military authorities headed by an Igbo man, Lt. General Aguiyi Ironsi toppled the first civilian government of post-independence Nigeria which was headed by an Hausa man, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, the then Prime Minister.
Somehow, the coup d'etat witnessed the brutal assassination of prominent Hausa leaders including the Prime Minister as well as the Premier of Northern Region of Nigeria, Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Saudauna of Sokoto. In the counter-military coup that occurred in June 1966, the military government headed by the Igbo man was overthrown resulting in the killing of General Ironsi.
The ensuing and escalating ethnic crisis triggered off what came to be known as the pogrom in 1966 in Northern Nigeria, the homeland of the Hausas where hundreds and hundreds of Igbo people who had settled in the North were massacred. The Igbos who managed to survive the massacre fled to their own homeland in the Eastern Region of Nigeria.
Led by Chief Odumegwu Ojukwu, then a military officer, the Igbos declared their Republic of Biafra, which they insistently argued was based on an agreement reached with the then Nigerian Head of state, Gen. Yakubu Gowon (then a Lt. Colonel) at a peace meeting in Aburi, Ghana, where both of them agreed that Nigeria should be structured as a confederation.
The rest of Nigeria regarded the declaration of the Republic of Biafra as a rebellion against one and indivisible Nigeria. And so, for 30 months, the Hausa-fulanis (who constitute the political establishment of northern Nigeria) supported by the Yorubas and ethnic minorities of the North and the South successfully prosecuted the civil war to keep Nigeria one as united country.

The phenomenon of Hausa-fulani domination of power and politics continued (after the overthrown of Gen. Yakubu Gowon of Middle belt origin) with General Murtala Muhammed (1975-1976), Alhaji Shehu Shagari civilian president (1979- 1983), Gen. Muhammed Buhari (1983-1985), Gen. Ibrahim Babangida (1985-1993), Gen-Sani Abacha (1993-1998), Gen Abdulsalam Abubakar (1998- 1999). The south had a stint in power briefly with Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo as military Head of state (1976-1979): and Chief Earnest Shonekan (1993) who was Head of state for 81 days.
In an insightful analysis of the political power equation in Nigeria, Mr. Segun Ayobola, a political commentator stated. "The history of power and politics in post-independence Nigeria has been that of domination of the Hausa-fulani faction of the political class with different combinations of the Yoruba, lgbo, and minority ethnic factions serving at different times as junior partners in a collaboration venture of national thievery and ruination. The so-far successful attempt by the erstwhile junior partners to be on equal footing with those who had controlled the commanding height of national politics for so long is being stiffly resisted by the latter. Hence, all the noise about Sharia and the consequent retaliatory clamour for confederation."
Ayobolu referred to Prof. Peter Ekeh who in his owns analysis of the domination of power by the Hausa-fulani oligarchy had stated: "Shehu Shagari won a second term in the second Republic in 1983. What followed that presidential election must be understood to be one of the most mysterious and troubling in modern Nigeria history. Shehu Shagari was "overthrown" in a military putsch headed by two military generals who were not only fellow Hausa-fulani but were well known to be close to the president. Was the coup carried out as a pre-emptive measure to prevent other from overthrowing a government headed by a fulani aristocrat? Or was it a long term measure to prevent the rotation of the presidency after Shagari's second term?"

In the June 1993 presidential elections, as soon as Babangida noticed that a Yoruba southerner, Chief M.K.O. Abiola was heading for victory, he ordered that the elections be cancelled, and that marked the beginning of a turbulent political crisis which another fellow northerner, Sani Abacha exploited to prolong his own stay in power.
Abacha was actually orchestrating his plans to transform from being a military head of state to a civilian president, apparently, president for life when suddenly he dropped dead in June 1998. Chief Abiola, the president-elect, who was detained throughout the tenure of Abacha, was about to be released from detention when suddenly he also dropped dead, thus effectively nailing the southern bid for the presidency of Nigeria.
However, in the general election organised by Abacha's successor, Abdulsalam Abubakar in February 1999 the southerners eventually got the opportunity to control the presidential power when one of their own got elected as the president in the person of Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo. Therefore, for the very first time since Nigeria got political independence in 1960, a southern became the president of the federation. This eventual change of power from the north to the south, ought to have soothed frayed nerves, and helped to calm tension in the land. But that is not so.
Religious inclination is also responsible for the ethnicity problems now in Nigeria. The echoes of its worst atrocities have resurfaced, driven by the fears of other major groups in the entities of the spreading adoption of strict Islamic Law (Sharia) across the Nigeria's Muslim northern states.

The gruesome ramification of the sharia configuration has re-awakened the people of other part to the stark consciousness that we are citizens, not of one united Nigeria, but of two incompatible states in a tumultuous Nigeria. The architects of sharia are reminded to dig into history and understand what happened in Turkey and Pakistan. Kamal Ataturk and Ayab Khan both liberated their respective countries from the grips of decadent feudalism, stupidness, mentalities of murderousness, and rank unproductiveness by abolishing the Islamic legal system in favour of the secular system of governance.
There are growing agitations among the various ethnic constituents in Nigeria who are apparently not satisfied with the present structure of the federation, where the central government collects and controls the largest portion of the national revenue which is derived from natural resources located in the states, and the central government's months of prevarication to take a stand on the introduction of sharia (Islamic legal system) in the northern part of the country.
The clamour for a sovereign national conference, a confederation or true federalism is therefore gathering momentum. Initially, the demand was the sing- song of far individuals and quasi-political groups like the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO), South-south forum, Eastern mandate Union and non- governmental organisation often regarded as "traditional agitators". Now these groups have been joined by other interest groups, the O'odua Peoples Congress (OPC); the Afenifere, the umbrella cultural association of the Yorubas; the Ohaneze Ndigbo, the umbrella cultural association of the Igbos and so on.

However, Chieftains and leaders of the Middle-belt forum have said that the calls for a confederation or sovereign national conference will ultimately lead to the break up of the nation. The leader of the forum, Air Commodore (retired) Dan Suleiman was reported as saying that while there are justifiable cases of grievances across the nation as a whole. "these grievances need to be addressed by a constitutional conference, but not a sovereign national conference, which if pursued, could end in a confederacy".
Writing on this issue, Mr. Emma Ezebwelu, a public affairs analyst, stated: "The point must be made that those insisting on a sovereign national conference or confederation are not necessarily saying they no longer wish toremain in the Nigeria state neither are they bent on blackmailing the country as is being mischievously misconstrued. That cannot be their intent. After all, many of these protagonists paid greater prices and played more prominent roles than their detractors to ensure the political and economic emancipation of this country.
While there seems to be some consensus on the need to have a representative forum to discuss national questions, an issue has been raised. Concerning the "Grundnorm". In other words, a sovereign conference is unconstitutional because the National Assembly is constitutionally vested with the sovereign authority to make laws for the good governance of the country. The situations in Nigeria are an early warning.