From 1967 to 1970, Nigeria experienced one of the bloodiest civil wars in modern history. And at the center of this terrible national tragedy is the military chief, General Yakubu Gowon, the second fateful man in Nigeria’s checkered post-independence political history. After the deep euphoria of independence, the aftermath of the 1966 coup and civil war was too divisive for a nation that was aiming for the status of a major player on the continent and the globe. A nation-state was supposed to reverse the evils of colonialism and promote the happiness of its people. These series of national events were also something that national leaders should be responsible for. And this was General Gowon’s position to defend the postcolonial status of one Nigeria in the face of national contradictions that led to the 1967-1970 civil war. But who would want to be involved in the collapse of a nation destined to protect?
General Gowon’s entry into the orbit of Nigeria’s national project meant that he was asked to oversee the direction Nigeria would take from the beginning of nation-building. The responsibility of directing the political development of the Nigerian state was thrust upon his head unwillingly and in a state of crisis and weakness due to extreme discord. And in this sense, we can see General Yakubu Gowon as the grand embodiment of Nigeria’s resilient spirit. It is very difficult not to believe that providence was involved in imprinting a purpose so unique on Gowon’s life that it eventually came to intersect with Nigeria’s life. From the showdown with the late General Odimegwu Ojukwu to the creation of the Aburi Declaration, which ultimately collapsed due to contrasting interpretations of what the agreement required of the Federal Government and the Eastern Regional Government. The entire trajectory of incidents and events has become an area of research of great interest not only to political scientists but also to political psychologists. For example, what political egos were responsible for tilting this crisis into a violent conflict between two national gladiators?
War is always terrifying. In the case of Nigeria, all the variables involved are too numerous and complex to make any coherent sense. From external business interests to internal social and ethnic cleavages that were the main source of conflict. Still, the war had to be fought, and Gowon had to oversee the impending collapse of a barely begun national project. If we agree that providence imposed this national destiny on Gowon, we should also know that it is not deterministic. He could have surrendered and carried out his divine responsibility to the end. He didn’t. Even if he did not have such spiritual understanding at the time, he accepted it as God’s will and used a combination of sound and unsound decisions and judgments to move Nigeria forward as far as possible. I did. I would like to highlight just two that illustrate how contradictory leadership decisions can sometimes be.
On October 1, 1970, General Gowon promised to establish a political and electoral process that would lead to the transfer of power to civilian government by October 1, 1976. Unfortunately, the Supreme Military Council was forced to renege. About that promise. And that’s because the political class seemed unprepared to take on the great task of moving a nation still reeling from the effects of civil war and the resulting ethnic suffering. This decision can be approached from multiple interpretive perspectives. One wonders what gave Gowon the messianic audacity to legislate Nigeria’s future. After all, the political behavior of Nigerian politicians has not changed since then. Some may point to an important patriotic sensibility of not wanting to impede the progress made since the end of the Civil War. Anyone who has experienced a tragic war would never want to experience it again.
One of the infamous moments of the Gowon administration was the missed opportunity to transform Nigeria’s civil service system through the adoption of the Udoji Commission Report and the implementation of its grand management paradigm shift recommendations. This report began as a result of the global management revolution that argues that the old Weberian regime must give way to new public services that are flexible, economical, efficient, effective and efficient in achieving service delivery. It was done. The new public services are intended to be modernized and strengthened for production-oriented performance, increasing Nigeria’s productive base within the grand structure of a developed nation that sustains the “supreme heights” of the national economy. I am. Udoji was motivated to critically evaluate the Nigerian civil service by the 1968 Fulton Commission Report, which also addressed the British civil service and the urgency of reforming its system. The Udoji Commission was immediately established to address long-standing pay and incentive issues that civil servants had been grappling with since before independence, and the Adebo 1971 Report issued a final resolution calling for a total institutional review to the Udoji Commission. I gave it to Unfortunately, the Gohara administration (perhaps conceding to the sentiments of the super-permanent secretaries) has clung to the wage element of the Udoji report and has not been able to implement more fundamental institutional reforms that would fundamentally improve the ability and readiness of the people. I left that aspect alone. service system. How can a regime that balks at ceding power to an unprepared political class fail to understand the importance of civil service as a condition for national productivity and good governance? Professor Lars Konrind believes this sense of why organizations fall into irreversible decline stems from what happens when organizations avoid change when they reach the pinnacle of success. As a result, leaders (political and administrative) develop selective deafness and, in the case of Nigeria, rein in the Weberian bureaucratic tradition of “I am being directed” by ignoring the innovations that managerialism foreshadows. It has been over-glorified, giving Nigeria a reputation as a “hesitant reformer.” .
Yet, neither frivolous nor hagiographical, General Gowon is, in my estimation, one of the most heroic of Nigeria’s leaders. He embodies a sense of statesmanship that contrasts with the intense complacency that characterizes politics today. His career as a politician has been marked by many characteristics. A combustible nation like ours was born before its founding and went to war to enhance an artificial creation of the British colonialists – “a mere geographical expression” in the words of Chief Obafemi Awolowo. I have grown to the point where I received the mission to do this. The state of a nation worth preserving is nothing less than a definitive trajectory. When we faced the dilemma of “to be or not to be” in our evolution as a nation, General Gowon chose Nigeria. With this choice, General Gowon made the importance of ethnic groups a key aspect in fleshing out the Nigeria plan. This is a clarion call to the majority ethnic groups that Nigeria does not belong to all of us. It is God’s sacred project.
Despite the errors regarding the Udoji Commission report and its critical recommendations, the Gowon administration still left behind an indelible administrative example of replicating the Awolowo Adebo administrative model of the former Western Region. The super-permanent secretarial corps significantly set back the Gowon administration in policy areas that were pushed back during the civil war. Without that basic model as a key fulcrum, it is hypothesized that the civil war would have been worse than before. Therefore, as evidence of the potential greatness of the Nigerian state, there are already two versions of the political-administrative model that can be reinvented to inspire good governance.
Moreover, General Yakubu Gowon was no ordinary military man. He was an officer and a gentleman. At a time when the reputation of soldiers and the image of the Nigerian military was in serious decline, Gowon epitomized the essence of military professionalism and a reputation for excellence. As an officer, he attached great importance to the scope of education and training, so he was ready to do everything in order to prove his desire to learn and become more professional. General Gowon was not satisfied with his honorable training at Sandhurst, Camberley and Latimer. He eventually had to undergo the academic rigor of adult education to earn a PhD at the University of Warwick in England. It may have been a vision of personal fulfillment, but it also raised the public’s awareness of who and what officers should be. For his accomplishments, Officer Gowon is a true military professional, defined not by his brawn or ability with a gun, but by his intellect, intellect, and humanity in a profession defined by his unique masculinity. It became a comprehensive image.
Overall, General Yakubu Gowon believes in Nigeria. Only the most misguided critic does not take that as a consequential fact. Indeed, even after leaving the corridors of power, General Gowon continues to have a spiritual responsibility to uphold the providential command that Nigeria is on the divine path to greatness. There is no other way than to see General Yakubu Gowon, who was deeply involved politically, professionally and spiritually in Nigeria’s nation-building efforts, as a patriot and one of Nigeria’s eternal heroes. And to see his many endeavors as seeing Nigeria fulfill its divine mission is to explore his political and nationalist legacy while he is still with us. There is no other way but to do so. At 90 years old, our 90-year-old statesman and general deserves more than national honors. He has the right to see a Nigeria of dreams and hopes.
Related article: Police debunk viral video about poor training conditions
