It is now beyond debate, all is not well with Nigeria’s southeast region. Activities of certain, yet suspectedly disparate armed groups have unsettled security arrangements in the formerly peaceful region.

The cracks have always been there. Riotous conclusion of the otherwise peaceful #EndSARS protest was only a marked announcement of a season of harvest.

To be sure, “unknown gunmen,” like many other armed ideological groups before it, initially enjoyed the support of a significant percentage of the masses. Federal government’s precipitably inept reaction to herdsmen terrorism, an often unspoken yet palpable fear of domination, strong feeling of marginalisation, aloofness of southeast’s political elite, and other issues watered the ground for mass acceptance of any group that was supposedly fighting for the people’s “freedom.”

Expectedly, not all southeasterners fell for the eloquent, often acerbic, but decidedly efficient media justification of the pursuit of a desired future. Nigeria’s federal government has to respond, one way or the other, to the uncouth charges of unfair treatment and a pronounced unwillingness to continue with the union.

The federal government had better options. It could genuinely attempt to make sense of the deep-seated feelings which prompted what looks like a brazen demand. Nigeria’s metaphoric sick child, it appears, has asked for the wrong medication. And the mother decides to either strangulate or let him die of sickness because his demand was unwise. If you come to think of it, the child is not any less sick because he asked for the wrong medication. Well, that is the exact way agitations work. Their specific method may be rash, but their pains, hunger, aspirations and resultant demands come from very deep and often irrepressible sources.

The federal government had only one job – “to understand those deeper demands and to find civilized satisfactions for them.” Or better still to reason with the sick child and then provide him the right medication. Led by a retired soldier who has a civil war experience under his belt, Nigeria made almost no attempt to look beyond the rash manifestations of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and get to the deeper impulses which inspire them.

The federal government instead deployed the full levers of the state to torture those impulses, shooting at them, disappearing them, enacting laws, making judicial pronouncements and lifting its heavy hand against them — doing everything but sifting carefully to understand them.

No one’s previously recorded insight on matters like this could have offered Nigeria’s policy makers better value than the immutable Walter Lippman’s: “Yet when government was asked to handle the question it had for wisdom an ancient conception of itself as a policeman. Its only method was to forbid, to prosecute, to jail–in short, to use the taboo. But experience has shown that the taboo will not solve “moral and social questions”–that nine times out of ten it aggravates the disease. Political action becomes a petty, futile, mean little intrusion when its only method is prosecution.”

Nigeria’s federal government did not apply itself to this wisdom. Of all the tools in its governance arsenal, it chose to call up the one which seemed most convenient yet had more damning consequences.

By opting for fire and brimstone, Nigeria’s federal government presented itself as an organisation which speaks mostly in the language of brute force. Current situation in the southeast is nothing but the crude reaction of some citizens attempting to speak to their government in the only language the government is perceived to understand.

As the federal government rounded up separatists and tried to forcefully shut them up, it inadvertently armed them with a practical instead of a rhetorical argument against the government. Any careful analyst can quite easily plot a straight-line graph from the point of federal government’s response to separatist agitations in the southeast to present day occurrences in the region.

Since the federal government proscribed IPOB and designated it a terrorist organisation, certain armed groups have emerged, appearing to be in a haste to justify the new tag and fulfil that troubling prophecy.

Today, Nnamdi Kanu and IPOB/Eastern Security Network (ESN) is squarely in the place the Federal Government wants it to be. This writer is pretty much convinced that the federal government is also in the exact spot IPOB/ESN wants it to be. Both entities suspectedly set traps for each other and interestingly hit their targets.

Nnamdi Kanu mastered his script. He deliberately set out to make social demands so strong and compelling that Nigeria will be literally forced to deal with them. As the government tries to tactfully arrive at their preferred destination, separatist rhetorics and violent field campaigns continue.

IPOB/ESN keeps denying its involvement in the ongoing terror in the southeast. Their arguments, no matter how weak, should be considered, even if they are not going to be accepted. One thing is clear however; the people terrorising the southeast today are acting in the name, and metaphorically speaking the language, of IPOB/ESN. That in itself is both revealing and potentially misleading.

Neither IPOB/ESN nor the federal government is right in their zero sum approach. Both seem eager to ruthlessly show their might while also trying to play the victim card, especially to the international community. I suspect that both entities grossly underestimate each other’s inherent capacity for evil. I also suspect that both, especially the weaker power, overestimate the attention and assumed benevolence of the international community.

Unfolding sword fights will be long-drawn. It will be bloody. There will be no winner.

What will emerge is a country at an avoidable but very costly war with itself. If mediation efforts fail to yield immediate results, the only achievements will be broken bones, mangled bodies and orphaned children.

One doesn’t have to stretch the imagination too far before coming to the conclusion that both the government and the governed will at some point grow weary of armed confrontations. When that time comes, both will stop speaking through the barrels. They will agree to talk to each other in the language of civilised men and women.

War is costly. Power has decayed. We can draw this conclusion from our experiences and perhaps from piles of research papers documenting other people’s experiences. Nigeria and the separatists can painstakingly look for and find that all-important middle ground now. It can also decide to find it after wasting each other. May sound reasoning prevail.

Chima Christian is a good governance advocate and a public policy analyst. He writes from Awka, Anambra State.

One of the signs that Nigeria is not keen on becoming a developed country is that she officially promotes different forms of discrimination. She discriminates against her own people on ethnicity, religion, gender, marital status, financial status, education, disability, age and other parameters. But let us narrow this discussion to age discrimination.

When I finished university and was undertaking my mandatory one-year National Youth Service Corps scheme, one thing that was common with vacancies for fresh graduates, popularly tagged “management trainees,” was the age restriction on them. Virtually all the ads had “not more than 26 years” as a condition.

I was lucky then to be less than 26 years old and got a job in an advertising firm but some of my classmates were not that lucky. For such people, no company would offer them a job as fresh graduates with no experience. All the other vacancies had “not less than two years cognate experience” on them.

By this official form of age discrimination, Nigeria gave a tacit endorsement to people to falsify their age. All it takes is for one to approach the premises of a law court and some touts would quickly type a police report of loss of birth certificate, then a court official would sign a document called an attestation of birth. Both the police and court officials would not even see the person they were signing the so-called trusted document for. All that was required was for payment to be made.

Consequently, any time Nigerians see someone with an attestation of age, they would conclude that the person has engaged in age falsification. I had such an experience. While working in advertising on my first job, a vacancy advert for an oil company came out. Oil company job was the most lucrative and prestigious in Nigeria then. The oil company wanted “management trainees” who must not be more than 26 years. But the oil company did not want any other document except a government document as proof of age. I had been using the original copy of my baptismal certificate as evidence of my age right from my primary school. It showed my date of birth and date of baptism. Its weather-beaten nature would immediately tell anyone of its genuineness. But this oil company would not accept it. It preferred a document that could be obtained easily with any chosen age stated on it. I was then compelled to go to a law court premises in Ikeja, Lagos with my baptismal certificate to get my attestation. I thought the officials would ask for evidence of my age but nobody bothered with that.

Age discrimination is not for fresh graduates alone. Some jobs for middle-level managers put an age restriction of not more than 40 years. The moment workers in Nigeria are over 40 years old, their chances of getting a good job begin to nosedive. When they are 50, the employment door is completely closed on them. The only people who may still be found relevant at this age are those working in similar positions in other organisations who are being head-hunted.

Why do many Nigerians falsify their age? It is because Nigeria officially discriminates against people based on age. Interestingly, most Nigerians don’t even see this as discrimination. They see it as a necessary employment requirement just like an educational requirement or professional experience. But it is a terrible form of discrimination that should have no place in any country that believes in equal opportunities and frowns at all forms of discrimination.

It is only when one compares Nigeria with other countries where people’s rights are respected and protected that one sees the harm Nigeria does to her citizens through age discrimination. Let us look at what obtains in Canada, for example.

Canada’s provisions prohibiting age discrimination are in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“Charter”), which applies to all jurisdictions and governmental entities. Section 15 (1) of the Charter contains an equality clause, which provides as follows: “Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.”

In Canada, it is against the law for an organisation to put any age restriction on any vacancy. Unlike in Nigeria, where you are required to state your date of birth in your CV, you are not required to do so in Canada. In Nigeria you are required to state your local government of origin, state of origin, religion, gender, age, marital status – all of which can be used to give you the job or deny you the job. But in Canada, it is against the law to ask applicants their age, gender, marital status, religion, race or sexual orientation.

For goodness’ sake, what you need is the employees’ skills. What is the relevance of their age to the work they will do? If the job requires physical strength, give them a physical test and those who cannot do it will eliminate themselves.

Just as the 25-year-old man needs to earn money to pay his bills is the same way a 60-old-year man needs to earn money to pay his bills. As long as the person has not reached the age of retirement, which starts at 65 years in Canada but comes into full effect at 70, the person has equal right to employment. You dare not discriminate against him.

People can take time off work to go back to school or have babies or look after their babies or parents. Any time they are ready to look for a job, they should be able to do so without any discrimination.

Nigeria criminalises the aging process. Ironically the same Nigeria, which engages in job discrimination based on age, has no reasonable welfare package for the aged like a country like Canada that ensures that every old person— respectably referred to as a “senior citizen” — is catered for until death.

Nigeria should show some seriousness and humanity and stop behaving like a country existing in the stone age. There should be a law criminalising all forms of employment discrimination based on age (as well as gender, and other irrelevant factors). Age discrimination on employment makes people to hate getting old and encourages people to falsify their age. It may cause depression, emotional trauma and even lead to suicide for many people who cannot get a job based on their age and, therefore, feel emasculated that they cannot perform their obligations to their immediate family, nuclear family and community.

Twitter: @BrandAzuka

I have read many articles and commentaries suggesting that Vice President Yemi Osinbajo should drop his presidential ambition in deference to Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu. They argue that since it was Tinubu that gave Osinbajo his first political appointment as far back as 1999, an Osinbajo challenge will be tantamount to ‘’biting the finger that fed him’’. In other words, the argument goes, since Tinubu, as Lagos governor, appointed Osinbajo Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice in 1999 and possibly played a role in his emergence as the VP in 2015, Osinbajo owes Tinubu eternal gratitude and so should drop out of the race. This argument is specious, deceptive and myopic. It ignores the urgency of the moment and panders to emotions and traditions. The idea is a clever and disingenuous ploy by the Tinubu campaign to discourage the VP from the race and pave the way for Tinubu as the sole APC candidate. Nigerians deserve the benefit of choosing the next President from a wide array of candidates. Nobody should be bullied or railroaded out of the contest; not this VP who is well placed to offer sound and competent leadership.

There are many reasons why Prof Osinbajo should ignore the taunts from the Tinubu camp, and go ahead to pursue his ambition. One, Yemi Osibanjo is the most favoured of all the presidential aspirants in both parties. Although he had served in the Tinubu administration as a commissioner, he is not under eternal servitude or peonage to the former governor. Public service is not a favour to the serving official. It is a civic duty or a sacrifice. Osinbajo served creditably well in Lagos. He is not under any bondage to Tinubu. Far from it. Rather, Asiwaju and his supporters should acknowledge Osibanjo’s status as the nation’s number two citizen and accord him the respect the office deserves. If anybody needs to withdraw for another, I believe that it is actually the Asiwaju who should step down and encourage the VP in the race. Tinubu should be proud that his former commissioner has continued to give a good account of himself as our Vice President, and he is a formidable contender in the presidential race. It takes a leader to raise another leader, so states the Law of Reproduction in management science.

Two, in the last one year or so, Nigerians from all walks of life, political inclinations and ethnic affiliations have been routing for the VP for many reasons. His support base has been growing steadily across board. It would therefore be an unpardonable act of cowardice for the VP to chicken out of the race just to please Tinubu. Nigerians would be too disappointed in the VP.

Three, our country is in a very critical socioeconomic circumstances now; an unusual moment that requires the best of us to step up and lead the nation. Osinbajo is a competent, committed and dedicated public servant reputed as the engine room of this administration. He can stand any way in the world, comfortable with other world leaders, business chieftains, the young and the old, on any platform, to discuss any topic. He is savvy with new technology and always ready with solutions for all problems. The VP easily connects with Nigerians and exudes compassion and empathy. He will make a great leader in times like this.

Four, Tinubu cuts a picture of a politician overwhelmed with a sense of entitlement. For him, the presidency should be handed over to him as a trophy for his achievements. His incessant reference to ‘’my life-long ambition’’ is an irritation and a clear dissonance with how modern day leaders speak. Nigeria is bigger than any one man, no matter how powerful he might be.

Six, Nigeria is long used to alternating its leader between a Muslim from the North and Christian from the South. It makes for balance, stability and inclusiveness. Breaking this long tradition may dislocate our national harmony and violate our diversity. After eight years of Buhari presidency, the natural successor is a Southern Christian.

Finally, it seems that the clamour for the VP to withdraw from the race for Tinubu is embedded in the Yoruba cultural milieu in which a younger person must prostrate before an elder and lie there until he’s told to get up. I get that. I respect our cultures and some of our rich traditions. They add colour to our lives and give us our identity as the world’s most populous black nation. But in the matter of the fate of Nigeria in the 21st century – a nation of over 200 million people with over 250 ethnic groups and a vibrant and youthful population – we cannot afford to subject our destiny to the whims of a kingmaker. The Presidency is not a reward for anybody’s past efforts or a trophy for his earlier victories. The Office of the President is the highest position in the land and it symbolizes our pride, prestige and stature. That office should be reserved for the best of us.