⇱ Index page

The Internationalist Archive

Baba Aye is a Nigerian trade unionist, socialist and co-convenor of the Coalition for Revolution (CORE), a member of the Progressive International. He is the Health and Social Sector Officer of Public Services International, a global union federation for workers in public services, and the author of Era of Crises & Revolts: Perspectives for Workers and Youth (2012).

For issue #27, The Internationalist’s editor Tanya Singh interviews Baba on what he sees as the key impact of COVID-19 in Nigeria; his views on the country’s contested elections and divisive results; and the role of imperial powers in the present politics of Global South countries like Nigeria, as they prepare for an escalating climate crisis.

Tanya: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on societies around the world, including in Nigeria. In your view, what have been the most significant effects of the pandemic on working people in Nigeria, and what kinds of responses have you seen from the labour movement and other social organizations?

Baba: Thank you for that question, Tanya. Indeed, the COVID-19 pandemic had a dire impact on Nigeria, as with the rest of the world. Years of underfunding of the public health system have left the immense majority of the population vulnerable where working people cannot afford the few well-equipped expensive private hospitals that have sprung up to cater for the handful of well-off people in the country with the highest rate of multi-dimensional poverty in the world. These are mainly for the middle class. The super-rich running big businesses and the powerful people in government fly out of the country to access top-notch medical and health care in Europe and North America. 

So, one of the first visible impacts of the pandemic was that it became impossible for these leading members of the ruling class to travel outside the country, owing to the global lockdown. Moreover, in the first few months of the pandemic, several prominent Nigerians died, including the Chief of Staff to the president (who exercised power more than anyone else who had occupied that office), a senator, a former governor, and a former managing director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation. This led to a general perception that COVID-19 was a “big men’s ailment;” a number of left-leaning people also argued against the alarm we raised about it being a health emergency, pointing out that more working-class people were being killed by malaria, than COVID-19. 

At that point, they failed to make the connections: The pandemic might have had a limited direct impact on health, even at that point in time, but it had knock-on effects on other aspects of the physical and mental health of people. For example, it made it impossible for regular immunization exercises to be carried out and malaria intervention programmes were also impeded.  

According to records, to date, the number of lives lost due to COVID-19 in Nigeria over the last three years is just under 3,200, with the number of reported cases being under 270,000. While the death of even one person is a loss that should not be downplayed, there is also the fact that statistics in Nigeria are abysmally unreliable. People can justifiably argue that the actual figures are much higher, including a spate of “mystery deaths” in the northwestern state of Kano, where an average of 43 deaths were recorded per day in eight municipal local governments, as opposed to an average of 11 deaths per day, at the beginning of 2020.

But despite all these, when you consider the population of the country, which is about 220 million people, and compare both the absolute and relative numbers of recorded infections and deaths with countries like Indonesia or, particularly, Brazil, which have population sizes that are roughly in the same range, you will tend to agree with me that the situation in Nigeria has been rather benign. 

This partly reflects the lower impact of the pandemic on health in Africa, and thankfully so, even though there aren't any clear reasons. Some have argued that it has to do with the tropical climate combined with the demographics of the country. But a country like South Africa, with a population that is about a quarter of Nigeria, has recorded over one million deaths, with almost four million recorded cases. I have argued elsewhere that this might have to do with differences in social-economic integration with the world economy, particularly regarding air travel, through which the pandemic gained momentum. 

But we can hardly overemphasize the socio-economic impact of the pandemic, with the proviso that it was not so much the fuel as the match which lit a fire of crisis: for example, the lockdown, as we reported in the Socialist Worker, resulted in significantly increased incidences of gender-based violence, and Nigeria's economy tipped into its deepest recession in four decades at the beginning of the pandemic. 

During the lockdown, there was a 34.1 per cent loss in GDP with US$16bn wiped out. Most of these were in the services industry. For the working class, it meant job losses and cuts in wages. Several companies and even the public services of several states introduced cuts of up to a quarter of the take-home pay in workers’ salaries. 

In the heat of the lockdown, the two labour federations in the country Nigeria Labour Congress and Trade Union Congress set up a situation room. But since then, things have reverted to business as usual. 

The two centres jointly agreed to organise a general strike to protest economic hardships on 28 September 2020. But this was called off at the last minute. Newspaper interviews of the general secretaries of both centres at the time gave an insight into why they took this unpopular step at the detriment of the rank-and-file workers. To put it simply, they were afraid that such a mass strike could spiral into a revolutionary situation. Well, despite their calling off the strike, the EndSARS Rebellion was ignited just over a week later. 

Regarding the broader civil society movement for social justice, there was what appeared to hold hope, even though its origins gave cause for suspicion. This was the Alliance for Surviving COVID-19 and Beyond (A-SCAB) which was formed in April 2020 by the same people who had dismissed COVID-19. We joined the effort with enthusiasm in spite of our concerns. A-SCAB had been inspired by a similar united front established in South Africa: the COVID-19 People’s Coalition (C19PC). So, we felt that this was a good idea.

But these main sponsors of A-SCAB, in no time, demonstrated some of the most terrible traits of sectarianism and dishonesty that, unfortunately, you tend to find on the left as well. This led to the Socialist Workers League’s (SWL) withdrawal from the process. You can find our letter to that effect on the SWL website which speaks to what I am saying here. 

As it emerged, A-SCAB was less about providing a platform for social justice struggle in light of COVID-19 and more about trying to get a foothold in the Labour Party, which its promoters are now in, the tail of the middle-class-led “Obidient” movement. 

Tanya: Following Nigeria’s recent election results, where President-elect Bola Tinubu has taken office, how do you see him navigating some of the key issues present in Nigeria today, such as economy, geopolitics and security?

Baba: I think that the place to start, before looking at how Tinubu may or may not navigate through the landmines in front of him, is to question his victory which is being challenged by some opposition parties such as the Peoples Democratic Party which was in power from 1999 to 2015 and the Labour Party which had its most impressive electoral run, driven by the “Obidient” movement.

The 2023 general elections have been the most contentious in Nigeria’s recent history. It reflects sharp divisions in the ruling class on one hand, and the passionate involvement of youths, many of whom were drawn into the “Obidient” movement, in the midst of a sharp drop in voter participation, on the other hand. 

To put things in perspective, this was the seventh consecutive general election since 1999 when civilian rule was reinstated. The first republic lasted six years, from 1960 to 1966, with contested elections in 1964 and 1965 laying the basis for the coup that threw out the civilians. The second republic, which was instituted in 1979 also collapsed in the wake of contested elections in 1983. 

Those elections were all marked by political mobilisation of ethnicity and vote buying. These condemnable elements of the clientelist politics that the Nigerian ruling class plays have continued to dog elections in the 21st century. 

There were high hopes that they would be curbed this time around with the use of the Biomodal Voters Accreditation System (BVAS). But this hope was shattered during the presidential election on February 25. While the BVAS worked for the transmission of results for the national assembly elections, which took place simultaneously, they did not work in many places, for the immediate transmission of the presidential election which took place at the same time.

The political mobilisation of ethnic affiliation was also very palpable and there was large-scale rigging across the country. The scale of so-called “tribalism” (I really don’t like using that word, you know. Ethnic nationalities in Africa are no more tribes than the Welsh, Scots or Catalans are. But you get the idea), was astounding, especially in Lagos in the run up to the 25 March governorship and state houses of assembly elections. High-level officials of the All Progressives Congress (APC) spoke out against an imaginary attempt of Igbo people to take over Lagos state from its indigenes, and thugs stormed several polling units in neighbourhoods with a high population of Igbo people. 

While a lot has been said about the APC’s rigging, the fact is that all the four major capitalist parties were involved in doing this, in their areas of strength. The ruling APC of Bola Tinubu might however have outrigged the others, partly because it had a wider expanse of areas of influence, with more governors and government-oiled political structures. 

There were however quite some interesting surprises, despite the level of rigging. The Labour Party’s presidential candidate, Peter Obi, defeated Tinubu in the latter’s stronghold, which is Lagos state, where Tinubu had always dictated the electoral pace, ever since serving as governor from 1999 to 2007.

And quite significantly, ten serving and former governors that ran for senate lost out. This will be the first time that something of this nature would happen. Before now, governors had taken it as a birthright to head to the Senate and continue enjoying state patronage. Related to this is that for the first time ever as well, we have eight parties in parliament. While Tinubu’s APC still holds majority seats in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, which is the lower chamber of the National Assembly, it will now have to negotiate with a motley of parties to pass laws. 

Before looking at the issues that a Tinubu presidency will be engaging with, it is important to point out that the major contending capitalist parties are challenging his victory in court. And Datti Baba-Ahmed, the vice-presidential candidate of the Labour Party, has called on the Chief Justice not to swear in Tinubu, saying that doing so would amount to the end of democracy in Nigeria. 

This demand has been met with mixed reactions. The “Obidients” have hailed Datti. Wole Soyinka, Nobel Laureate, has called out Datti for making such a fascistic demand. In turn, the “Obidients” have rained abuses on Soyinka. But I fear that he is right. While we might not be talking of a case of classical fascism here, the Datti angle points at a neo-fascist seed in the make-up of the “Obidients’ movement. 

For you to have a better understanding of what I am talking about, Datti was a member of the Senate in 2014 when debates were taking place there towards passing the Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act (SSMPA), and he said that nothing short of a death penalty was enough. So, when someone like that is making the sort of provocative statements he made about democracy and is being hailed by the populist movement behind him and his principal, there is cause for concern about the parameters of politics in the unfolding period. 

In my opinion, probably the first major issue that Tinubu will have to face and which might set off a mass fightback is the so-called fuel subsidy because it is meant to be removed latest by June and 29 May is the presidential inauguration day. 

According to the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Ltd, more than $850 million is spent each month on fuel subsidies. The trade unions and radical civil society movement have pointed out that this is a scam. And over the years that has been buttressed with evidence. More importantly, we have argued that the issue of removing fuel subsidies, instead of tackling the corruption involved, is like putting the cart before the horse. 

The main reason why there is a need for a so-called subsidy is because despite being a major oil producer, Nigeria refines just a small fraction of the petroleum it produces. So, we export petroleum and import refined products. Billions of dollars have been spent to expand the capacity utilisation of the country's refineries but to no avail. Such monies have also ended up in the big pot of corruption. 

Nigerians will not take fuel pump price increases lightly. In 2012, such an action led to the #OccupyNigeria general strike and mass protests. But Tinubu has said he will remove the subsidy and damn all consequences. Unabashedly, he said people could protest for as long as they want, he will increase the prices and stand by his action. So, this could be the first major test for him.

Beyond this immediate issue, the Tinubu presidency will be confronted with an economy in crisis. The World Bank projected a deceleration of the national economy to 2.9 per cent this year. Meanwhile, inflation has rendered the incomes of poor working people useless, increasing to a 17-year high of 21.91 per cent in February. 

The national minimum wage stands at $65 (or $40 using the black market rate which is more effective for use), down from $120 in 2011, despite a nominal increase in 2019. So, the trade union bureaucracy will be under intense pressure to initiate negotiations for a new minimum wage, which the government is not likely to be willing to grant, to a substantial extent.

Alongside economic insecurity, physical insecurity is a troubling matter in Nigeria. Last year alone, over 9,000 people were killed by bandits or insurgents, according to the data gathered by the Nigeria Security Tracker (NST). Also, at least 4,680 persons were kidnapped. Tinubu has promised to stop this reign of terror. But during the campaign of President Muhammadu Buhari in 2015, Tinubu who played a key role said that Nigerians should vote for Buhari because as a retired army general, he would bring an end to insecurity. Eight years down the line, there is nothing to show for that promise. 

Related to insecurity, at a geopolitical level, the incoming government will have to take a more robust approach to provide leadership and address the increasing insecurity and reversal of the limited democracy that people are facing in the Sahel region, for instance.

Tanya: In your writing, you have often discussed the role of imperialism in shaping the political and economic landscape of Nigeria and other countries in the Global South. What specific forms of imperialism do you see as most pressing today, and how can they be challenged and overcome?

Baba: The Nigerian ruling class has always been subservient to the dictates of Western imperialism, except - and arguably so - for a brief period in the mid-1970s. The United States and Britain in particular have also greased the relations of Nigeria’s ruling class’ political, economic, ideological and mental subservience. The reasons for this are not far-fetched. Apart from the geopolitical importance of the country as the most populous in Africa, having some 220 million people, being a major oil-producing country makes it a goose that lays golden eggs. 

There is often a lot of talk about the country’s leaders’ corruption. But what is often not added is that oil firms and imperialist countries do not only turn a blind eye to this. They actually utilise this to further illicit financial flows, including shady deals in the oil sector. Some Wikileaks releases have confirmed what we always suspected about the control that mainly Shell, but also other oil companies like Chevron, have wielded on oil production by pandering to the corrupt antics of rulers of Nigeria.  

The international financial institutions have been key players in furthering imperialist interests in the country, in several ways. The most visible ways are with their conditionalities, which have resulted in the implementation of austerity measures at different times in our history and programmes such as the structural adjustment programme (SAP) of the 1980s. A less identified way is the revolving door system. Many of those who have played central technical and political roles in national decision-making worked at different times in these institutions and at times return to them. For example, Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala worked for 25 years with the World Bank, eventually becoming its Managing Director, Operations. It was in between this period that she served as the country’s Minister of Finance and effectively the unofficial prime minister. Another example is Obiageli Ezekwesili who became the World Bank's Vice President for the African Region right after serving as Nigeria’s Minister of Education. 

In the period leading to the elections, the ruling class again demonstrated their subservience to their imperialist masters. The presidential candidates of virtually all the leading capitalist parties headed to Chatham House to unveil their electoral programmes. Even the head of the electoral body, INEC had to go there to seek validation. 

A worrisome development is that imperialist footprints might go beyond the economic, ideological and political to include the military if care is not taken. Barely two years ago the President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari called on the United States to move the headquarters of AFRICOM from Stuttgart to Africa! This is arrant nonsense. And the excuse that was used to justify this nonsense is the continued violent conflicts with armed non-state actors. We will not be surprised if similar calls become more trenchant from Tinubu. But we will have to resist any such development. 

Tanya: According to you, what are the most urgent climate justice demands in Nigeria, and can the governments be held accountable for taking meaningful action on climate change and environmental justice?

Baba: The climate crisis has had a huge impact on Nigeria. The case of the despoilation of the Niger Delta is globally known, from the mobilization of the Ogoni people, and other communities in the region, as well as environmental rights activists. 

There are also a lot of other reasons why any serious-minded person should take the environmental emergency seriously and commit to a robust response. Nigeria has the highest rate of deforestation in the world. We have lost over 14 per cent of the country’s primary forest over the last decade, to logging, timber export, construction, and subsistence agriculture. 

Desertification plays a key contextual role in the increasingly violent conflicts between farmers and pastoralists, with more than one-third of the country’s landmass severely affected. Lake Chad which used to be the sixth largest lake worldwide shrunk by 90% over the last forty years. 

Floods have also become annual occurrences since 2012, resulting time and again in the deaths of hundreds of people and well over a million people displaced. Last year, over 600 people were killed and 1.4 million people displaced. Each year, government agencies issue warnings without taking concrete steps to relocate poor people in flood paths. 

It is thus shocking that the capitalist politicians who bothered to speak about climate change at all during their campaigns were dismissive of this important subject. The Labour Party candidate, Mr Obi said that he is “going to be aggressive in other areas” because it is “not more important than securing the people” as if these were mutually exclusive aims. 

The president-elect, Mr Tinubu said “We need to open our eyes, shine them and tell the West, ‘If you don’t guarantee our finances and work with us to stop this, we are not going to comply with your climate change’” as if climate change is merely something of concern to the West. 

Indeed the only party with a radical position on “the climate change emergency and eco-social justice” is the eco-socialist African Action Congress (AAC) which is an affiliate of the Coalition for Revolution (CORE). It commits to playing an active role in the global climate and environmental justice movement because “action in our country alone will not be enough” to stop the “planetary calamity” that capitalist activities that drive climate change are driving the world towards. 

In the light of a government that fails to appreciate the importance of a radical anti-climate change program, the AAC and other environmental justice campaigning bodies in the country will have to mobilize the working people to put pressure on the Nigerian state to take measures that will address land degradation, combat biodiversity loss, reduce flood incidents, and fight all forms of pollution. This will be centred on fighting the economic and political power structures that promote the climate crisis and environmental emergency. 

And they will have to build alliances with other groups and progressive movements in the global south and worldwide in the fight to save the earth. As we know, the system needs to change and not the climate. 

The Internationalist Archive