OIC AND PEACE BUILDING IN NIGERIA

 OIC AND PEACE BUILDING IN NIGERIA

Cornelius Afebu Omonokhua

When a child is critically ill, the parents accept suggestions from any person that could provide healing. In sickness, everybody around you becomes “a medical doctor”.  Nigeria is plagued with a terminal disease of terrorism that appears to defy military diagnosis.  President Muhammadu Buhari has visited America and some West African countries to source for healing to the nation’s malady. On August 20, 2015, John Cardinal Onaiyekan invited me to a meeting with King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz International Centre for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue (KAICIID). The main agenda of the meeting was to seek for this healing through a conference of inter-religious and intercultural relations in Nigeria. Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah, the Catholic Bishop of Sokoto, is the Vatican delegate to KAICIID, a Non-governmental and worldwide organization that was founded in October 2011 by King Abdullah of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Although the Headquarters of KAICIID is in Vienna, Austria, the Republic of Austria and the Kingdom of Spain supports the Centre with the aim of keeping KAICIID free from all political interference and influence. KAICIID facilitates intercultural and interreligious dialogue as a humanely strategic forum for cooperation, communication, partnership and information exchange thereby building understanding and mutual benefit among peoples of the world. On October 13, 2011 an agreement for the establishment of KAICIID in Vienna was signed by the governments of Austria, Spain and Saudi Arabia. To know more about this centre, you may visit: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KAICIID_Dialogue_Centre).

KAICIID works in close collaboration with Religions for Peace, the largest international coalition of representatives from the world’s religions dedicated to promoting peace. His Eminence, John Cardinal Onaiyekan (the Catholic Archbishop of Abuja) and His Eminence, Alhaji Mahammadu Sa'ad Abubakar III (the Sultan of Sokoto and President-General of the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs) are Co-Chairmen in Africa. The International Secretariat headquarters is in New York City, with Regional Conferences in Europe, Asia, Middle East, Africa and the Americas with more than 90 affiliates at the national level, and a number of local units. Religions for Peace enjoy consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), with UNESCO and with UNICEF. Dr. William F Vendley is its Secretary General.  The report of the Religions for peace meeting which I attended in Vienna, Austria is published in my book, “Dialogue in Context: A Nigeria Experience” (Page 278).

This non-governmental organization (NGO) serves on all continents representing 90 countries; it networks with World Council of senior religious leaders while respecting religious differences, common humanity and the influence of peace within every religion. This organization has created inter-religious partnerships to confront most dire issues such as stopping war, ending poverty and protecting the earth. Religions for Peace was founded in 1970 and supported by various foundations, governments, intergovernmental organizations, religious communities, religiously affiliated development agencies and individuals. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religions_for_Peace)

That Nigeria participates in the activities of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is no longer news. Ambasador Yahaya Lawal, the Ambassador of Nigeria to Jeddah, who works in the General Secretariat of OIC, was present at the meeting with KAICIID in Abuja. He revealed the intention of the OIC to intervene in the security challenges of Nigeria. He believes that Nigeria can benefit a lot from OIC because it has nothing to do with missionary work of converting people to Islam. He reported that they had met with President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, the immediate past president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, to discuss the restoration of peace that was being destroyed by the insurgents. He affirmed that the OIC does not support any form of terrorism given that terrorism contradicts Islam. The OIC intends to initiate projects that could bring about peace to Nigeria by partnering with the Institute of peace and conflict resolution and the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN). The organization hopes to collaborate with the Nigeria Inter-religious Executive Council (NIREC) and other Non-governmental Peace and Dialogue initiatives to restore peace to Nigeria.

On June 17, 2015 Mr. Iyad Ameen Madani, Secretary General of OIC affirmed that peace is not a play on words. He added that Inter-faith and inter-cultural bridges are critical to peace. Consequently, it was recommended at the meeting that if OIC really has what it takes to restore peace to Nigeria, the organization should begin with intra-Muslim dialogue by concentrating mainly on the counter narratives of the terrorists’ ideology. This suggestion was informed by the facts that many Nigerians including some Muslims have a single story of OIC as an organization whose only intention is to Islamize the world. For instance, on February 4, 2015 Niyi posted this: “Osinbajo Slams Jonathan for Attending OIC Meeting, Defends Buhari on Alleged Plans to Islamize Nigeria”. Here is the full story: “Vice Presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Professor Yemi Osinbajo, has berated President Goodluck Jonathan for being the first Nigerian leader to have attended the meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Countries (OIC) since Nigeria was clandestinely enlisted by President Ibrahim Babangida in 1986.” Niyi reported that Osinbajo said, “those accusing the presidential candidate of the APC, Muhammadu Buhari, of being a Muslim fundamentalist, who might Islamize Nigeria are getting it all wrong. Throughout his period as military head of state, Buhari was under intense pressure to drag Nigeria into the OIC, but he never yielded, because he respects Nigeria as a secular state, in line with the constitution.”  

That the OIC debate could be used to score a political point in this way and manner shows that the organization tastes like a bitter pill in the mouth of many Nigerians. Moreover, Ishaq Oloyode, the secretary general of NIREC and the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA) had said that “he was not yet aware that the country has signed the OIC charter.” It is also alleged that when the first meeting of the organization was held in Morocco in 1969, General Yakubu Gowon sent a delegation of observers, led by Abubakar Gumi, to represent only the Nigerian Muslim community. When a French news agency reported that Nigeria has been admitted into the organization as its 46th member in January 1986, many argued that as a secular nation, it had no business with the Islamic body. While the Muslim community saw it as a pleasant surprise, the Christian community strongly requested the president to deregister the country from the organization, since our constitution holds that Nigeria is a secular society (http://nigeriavillagesquare.com).

To defrost this icy cloud of mystery and suspicion, the organisation should facilitate a sincere dialogue within the Muslim community to reveal the real identity and true values of the organization. The true status of Nigeria in the organization should be made public. Some people are eager to know what OIC has done about the crisis in Syria and the Middle East where Israeli and Palestinians are embedded in unending war. Some people may want to know if what OIC has on the table is beyond bread and butter. If OIC can stop terrorism in Nigeria, its taste could change from bitterness to sweetness in the month of Nigerians. Otherwise, the question lingers: “Can OIC restore peace to Nigeria and the world?”

Fr. Cornelius Omonokhua (omonokhuac@gmail.com / www.omonokhua.blogspot.com)

 
 

COULD NIGERIA AS A NATION BE A MISTAKE

COULD NIGERIA AS A NATION BE A MISTAKE

Cornelius Afebu Omonokhua

If you kill your own brother and thereafter succeed in reconciling with his children; it is expected that you would take care of the children in a way and manner that they would not often recall the tragedy. If on the contrary, the children are victimised, maltreated and oppressed, the wounds of their father’s death would forever remain fresh. At some point they would begin to ask if they really belong to the family that saw to the killing of their father. The wound becomes deeper if one of the children of the murdered brother is manipulated and used to systematically assist the oppression of the murdered father. Nigeria as one nation could be seen as a mega family and a community that contains different human beings with different horizons and worldview. Since the birth of this giant community, Nigeria has struggled to define herself as a nation with endless efforts to survive.

Could Nigeria as one nation be a mistake? Here is synopsis of some of the opinions expressed by some people in naijapals website. The amalgamation of Nigeria in 1914 by Sir Frederick Lugard of UK is the source of our problem today. No two or three people can co-exist unless they agree to share common values like religion, history, culture, language, beliefs, aspirations, ethics etc. Do you know the reason why Ireland separated from UK? Same reason!! It is time to divide Nigeria just as was done during the 1989 velvet revolution of Czechoslovakia led by Vaclav Havel. Until this is done, more and more bloodshed will abound. It will be one after the other, BIAFRA, MEND, BOKO HARAM, etc.  BIAFRA wanted to separate because they were massacred in the north and were not given fair treatment in the Nigerian polity but they were forced to integrate. MEND wanted to separate because their oil is tapped and land destroyed without fair compensation but they were forced to integrate. BOKO HARAM wanted to separate because they felt that their Islamic religion is being abused by western education and their culture is in jeopardy and near extinction but they are being forced to integrate. ODUDUWA wanted to separate even though they have only one man casualty –MKO ABIOLA (and more recently the secession threat sparked off by the recent abduction of OLU FALAE by Fulani herdsmen). The fire and bitterness of his death will be roused from slumber into full fiery fury in the very near future. (cf. http://www.naijapals.com).

My view in this discussion is that variety and differences could enhance beauty, and if well managed, add colour to peaceful coexistence. From experience, the different tribes and regions of the world that have the same language, same culture, same religion, same ethics and same “whatever” does not guarantee unity and peaceful coexistence. In Rwanda, the Hutu and Tutsi have so many things in common but the genocide and mass slaughter of Tutsi and moderate Hutu by members of the Hutu majority from April 7 to mid-July 1994 claimed the lives of an estimated number of five hundred thousand to one million innocent human beings. The solution Rwanda sourced for after the genocide was not cessation but the political means and will to live together again. “Today, Rwanda has two public holidays commemorating the genocide. The national commemoration period begins with Genocide Memorial Day on April 7 and concludes with Liberation Day on July 4. The week following April 7 is designated an official week of mourning. The Rwandan Genocide served as the impetus for creating the International Criminal Court to eliminate the need for ad hoc tribunals to prosecute those accused in future incidents of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide).

One of the ways Nigeria can truly be called a nation is if the leaders are selfless, ready and willing to make the sacrifice of healing the wounds from the root. Another way is if the leaders could think less of their personal gains and think more of the common good. Selfishness and greed had made some leaders to instigate some of their people into unnecessary violence akin to a situation where those who represent a particular zone in the senate or house of representative keep the allocation meant for the development of their region and still cry out that the region is marginalized. They go to any length to mobilize the innocent youths to die in the course of protest while they remain the hidden actors. This time of change should include a call to sincere ethnic dialogue and faithfulness to federal character. What if the resolutions of the conferences right from Aburi conference in Ghana were implemented, could Nigeria not have been  saved from the Biafra genocide and the different ethnic uprising that had destroyed the lives and properties of many people. Perhaps the problem affecting the oneness of Nigeria is not a result of varieties but a lack of leadership skills, sincerity of purpose and political will to manage the differences.

The publication of M.O. Ene, “Beyond Biafra, Beyond Buhari” in Aladimma Express calls for further reflections on the sincerity of the oneness of Nigeria akin to any refined nation. Ene compares Nigeria to a house that is still standing on a fundamentally flawed foundation. He believes that Biafra is back on the front pages because there was no proper healing from the root and a sincere follow up to the peace declaration: “No victor no vanquished”. The feeling that the Eastern region is marginalized could be what is being expressed in the recent call for the Federal Republic of Biafra. In October, 2015, various media reported that Nnamdi Kanu, the alleged director of Radio Biafra was arrested. On October 18, 2015, the report in Vanguard described Kanu as “the Director of Biafra Television and the Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB)”.  This is the time the Nigerian Government should call Nnamdi Kanu and his group for dialogue because detention or death cannot extinguish the ideology which he represents. He should be treated as a courageous person who dared to voice out the feelings and thoughts of many people. To accept this demands humility and sincerity on the part of Government.

Nigeria government should avoid the mistakes of the past. Imagine if Muhammed Yusuf was not killed! What if some orthodox Islamic scholars who do not share his ideology were called to de-radicalise him? What if he was handled with care such that he could explain why he was targeting only the police and government institutions? Perhaps, the politicians who used him and duped him and his group could have been called to order. Perhaps, the impression that they were against Christians could have been corrected because the Boko Haram of Yusuf did not attack Churches. Nigeria and Nigerians would have been saved from the present high level of terrorism. Dialogue when there is a spark always yields more fruits than the kind of post-mortem dialogue Nigeria is now negotiating with Boko Haram.

What of Ken Saro Wiwa and the tragedy of Ogoni land? This ugly episode is a scenario of how members of the same family could be used to destroy one another. What if the compensation provided by the oil companies were duly utilised to develop their own land?  What if Ken Saro Wiwa was not killed? What if the constitution of Nigeria was designed in the context of Nigeria reality and used to solve Nigeria nagging crisis? That Nigeria is one nation could not be a mistake. The mistake is attitude of some Nigerians and the lack of vision on the part of some of the office holders who ought to be leaders and patriots. Does Nigeria still need a National referendum to decide how to keep Nigeria one?  Make hay while the sun shines!

Fr. Cornelius Omonokhua (omonokhuac@gmail.com)

CARDINAL ARINZE AND DIALOGUE OF ENCOUNTER

CARDINAL ARINZE AND DIALOGUE OF ENCOUNTER

Cornelius Afebu Omonokhua

The presence of General Yakubu Gowon in Onitsha, Anambra State of Nigeria on November 28, 2015 is very symbolic. Why is it so important to introduce this conversation with General Gowon and not John Cardinal Onaiyekan (Archbishop of Abuja), Archbishop Augustine Kasujja (Apostolic Nuncio to Nigeria), Archbishop Ignatius Ayau Kaigama (President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria and Archbishop of Jos), Archbishop Jude Thaddeus Okolo (Apostolic Nuncio to Central African Republic and Chad), Archbishop Brian Udaigwe (Apostolic Nuncio to Republic of Benin and Togo) or Chief Willy Obianor (The executive governor of Anambra State)? Why singling out General Gowon whereas people from different parts of the world including Catholic Bishops, Priests, Consecrated persons, traditional rulers, uncountable lay faithful, Christians outside the Catholic Church and people of other religions from different parts of the globe gathered in the Basilica of the Holy Trinity in Onitsha to celebrate the golden jubilee of the Episcopal consecration of His Eminence, Francis Cardinal Arinze on November 28, 2015?  

Your guess could be as good as mine. During the homily, Archbishop Jude Okolo had told the congregation that His Eminence, Cardinal Arinze was consecrated Bishop on August 29, 1965. He became the Local Ordinary of the Catholic Archdiocese of Onitsha from 1967 to 1984. Among the numerous challenges of the young bishop was the Nigeria / Biafra civil war that started on July 6, 1967 and ended on January 15, 1970 under the watch and active participation of General Yakubu Gowon, the then military Head of State. While Cardinal Arinze was the youngest bishop in the world then, General Gowon was the youngest Head of State in the world. The civil war displaced so many people including priests and consecrated persons (male and female). Like Jesus Christ, the young Bishop Francis Arinze had no comfortable place to lay his head. After the civil war, he was faced with the task of searching for the flock akin to the Good Shepherd.

Until recently, many people shy away from talking about the genocide of the Nigeria / Biafra civil war for fear of opening fresh wounds. On this day of the golden jubilee celebration of Cardinal Arinze, the ice was broken. After the speeches of Archbishops Augustine Kasujja, Ignatius Ayau Kaigama and Chief Willie Obiano, General Gowon was invited to greet Cardinal Arinze. One could notice a dialogue of encounter in the presentation of General Gowon by the Cardinal .who called out Monsignor Matthew Obiukwu to greet Gowon. The Cardinal recalled how shortly after the war he and Monsignor Obiukwu went to visit General Gowon in Lagos to beg him not to send away the missionaries. The Cardinal said: “In that visit I realized that the Nigerian Federal Government had already resolved to deport the missionaries, but Gowon received us well.” Turning to Gowon, he concluded: “As you can see, the Church is still alive.”  In response, Gowon thanked and congratulated him.

Dialogue of encounter was the only means by which God could visit the earth in the incarnation (cf. John 1). This dialogue creates space for the low and the mighty to speak heart to heart. This is illustrated vividly in the visit of Mary to Elizabeth. This visit reveals the openness of the human heart that made the baby in the womb of Elizabeth leap for joy. This visit reveals total humility and submission to God as declared by Mary in the Magnificat (cf. Luke 2). Recalling the memories of the civil war, what can we learn from the encounter between Cardinal Arinze and General Gowon? Is it possible to hope that the broken trust in the unity of Nigeria can be restored?  The Church in Nigeria is a symbol of unity. She is alive with the obligation to carry out the mission of building bridges of trust, love and unity across all tribes and ethnic regions in Nigeria. Therefore the Church must continue to speak out loud and clear on national issues and social justice. Let us pray that the political leaders would listen to the voice of God through the Church and do what is right! Let us pray that the Church through intra-ecclesial dialogue would remain a model of unity in Nigeria. Let us pray that General Gowon would courageously take the message of peace to the incumbent leaders of government to enable the federal presence of encounter in every region in a way and manner that everybody would experience the joy of belonging in the national cake. As part of the healing process, a sincere dialogue of encounter between the Nigerian government and those who have been arrested in the course of the recent Biafra agitation could multiply this joy. Conflict resolution is better achieved in an atmosphere of freedom.

A prudent study of the current conflict resulting from the radio Biafra would go a long way to save Nigeria and unite the different aspects of the nation. Most regions in Nigeria quietly complain about total neglect in structural development and social amenities but somebody needs to speak out. Therefore this study must take cognizance of the fact that the human person needs relationships and so need to open himself/herself to dialogue through acceptance of the other. Dialogical relationship uses the language of the heart as a tool. The capacity to listen leads to wisdom hence listening is an imperative that the government cannot ignore. Dialogue is made of listening and not just hearing. It allows intelligence to open up. Listening requires silence because what the other has to say is also important. No one in law can be called a criminal if not convicted. Dialogue also involves answering and this generates respect and communion. A kind of dialogue where no one wants to listen to the other could best be described as dialogue of deaf people as recorded in the book of Job. Not to listen leads to reproach and humiliation of the other. Wisdom comes from God hence human beings must listen to God who speaks through human beings, events and signs of every given moment. Dialogue of encounter enhances listening to one another in conflict but it does not exclude speaking the truth that should be presented with prudence.

In the book, “God or Nothing, A conversation on faith with Nicolas Diat”, Robert Cardinal Sarah narrated his ugly experience in Guinea during the oppressive regime of Sékou Touré in Guinea. He could speak out to the oppressive powers even at the risk of being killed or imprisoned like his predecessor, Archbishop Tchidimbo. He was appreciated with a Papal visit to Guinea. He recalled this historic visit of Pope John Paul II to Senegal, Gambia and Guinea in 1992.  Cardinal Sarah said, “Several days later, I knew he had been really very impressed by the simplicity of the welcome by the people. To thank us, he asked Francis Cardinal Arinze, President of the Pontifical Council for interreligious Dialogue, to go to the countries he had visited to thank the Christian and Muslim people as well as the governments” (Robert Cardinal Sarah, God or Nothing, Ignatius press, 2015, Page 72).

In 2015, the same year of the Episcopal golden jubilee of Cardinal Arinze, the Catholic Church celebrates the golden jubilee of the “Declaration on the relation of the Church to non-Christian religions (Nostra Aetate) proclaimed by His Holiness Pope Paul VI on October 28, 1965”. This was celebrated in Rome in October 26-28, 2015 and in Kaduna, Nigeria on November 18, 2015. Cardinal Arinze, was the fourth president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue that facilitated this celebration of Nostra aetate. No wonder he has not stopped implementing the objectives of Nostra aetate as captured in the opening of the document, namely, “In our time, when day by day mankind is being drawn closer together, and the ties between different peoples are becoming stronger, the Church examines more closely her relationship to non-Christian religions. In her task of promoting unity and love among men, indeed among nations, she considers above all in this declaration what men have in common and what draws them to fellowship” (Nostra aetate 1). Your Eminence, may your jubilee restore peace to Nigeria and the whole world! Congratulations!