[b] Uzor Maxim Uzoatu “I remember in 1985 in Africa Hall that he was for confirmation of Dr Peter Onu of Nigeria, who was acting Secretary General but Nigeria’s Head of State Gen Muhammadu Buhary was adamant in his support of Niger’s candidate, Idi Omaro, a Fulani Muslim. In a meeting, a handful of Presidents led by Nyerere met with Gen Buhary and Nwalimu begged him: ‘Please give us Peter!’ Buhary refused and forgot even to be courteous to his old peers. What was astonishing, when the vote was in favour of Niger’s candidate, the Nigerian Head rejoiced to such a degree that he was unable to control his emotions. That was a moment I witnessed and was convinced that General Buhary would not last long as a leader.” – The OAU: Reality Or Fiction by Ibrahim Daggash, former Head of Information and Communication, Organization of African Unity (OAU); pg 69; ISBN 1-9044722-25-3 It is unheard-of in history that a self-respecting leader of a country would vote against his country’s candidate in international diplomacy. But here, you have it in black and white, in a book, that former Head of State General Muhammadu Buhari would rather have a Fulani Muslim candidate from Niger instead of Nigeria’s own esteemed Dr. Peter Onu. Not even the highly revered then President of Tanzania, Julius Nyerere could make Buhari to change his mind. This kind of bizarre shamelessness is why Nigeria is the laughing stock of the civilized world. It is unthinkable that any leader, anywhere would insult his own country by backing an opponent from another country. The crude tragedy here is that it was the selfsame Buhari who made this patriotic statement: “This generation of Nigerians and indeed future generations have no other country than Nigeria. We must stay here to salvage it together.” How would the late Peter Onu have faith in Nigeria when he could not get the support of his country’s leader? It is as though the so-called leader was more interested in the ethnicity and religion of Peter Onu’s opponent from Niger than any bonds of citizenship with his Nigerian compatriot. Cry, the beloved country, as Alan Paton entitled his sad book. Attaining the great post of Secretary-General of the then OAU was a task most African countries gave their all in raising their diplomatic stakes. In Peter Onu’s case, he even had the other African countries rooting for him because of his undoubted competence only to be abandoned by the very man at the helm of affairs in his own country. Indeed Chinua Achebe was spot-on when he stated that the trouble with Nigeria stood on leadership in his classic little book The Trouble With Nigeria. A leader that cannot support his countrymen and women can only be aid to be worse than useless. [/b]

Please elections are over and propaganda should be on hold till 2018 at least na

Duru/ Dede, mentioned this today, I found it very hard to believe, so I googled it and it turns that that there are tens of sources in agreement with Duru.

This is mind blowing.
Buhari hated Ndiigbo so much that he would support a Niger republic man, over an Igbo? What right does Buhari have to accuse Any Biafran of treason.

.

mrvitalis:
Please elections are over and propaganda should be on hold till 2018 at least na

This is not about election. I am just learning of this today, and it's driving me crazy. I am imagining the kind of emotional trauma Peter Onu must have been put through, his only crime being that he is Igbo.

Please, do you have any evidence to prove that Buhari actually tried to help Peter Onu in his bid to clinch OAU Secretary General post? If you have please post it here. My head is about bursting.

pazienza:


This is not about election. I am just learning of this today, and it's driving me crazy. I am imagining the kind of emotional trauma Peter Onu must have been put through, his only crime being that he is Igbo.

Please, do you have any evidence to prove that Buhari actually tried to help Peter Onu in his bid to clinch OAU Secretary General post? If you have please post it here. My head is about bursting.

First of all buhari as a president have freedom to choose who ever he feels will benefit Nigeria the most
Am not in his mind and maybe the onu or what ever his name was didn't represent the ideological he had... .. or maybe he didn't want a Nigerian at that point to have such power and begin to power tussle with him
Please Obama did the same in the world Bank president election. .. . This things happen alot
Was it not the same buhari that supported Jonathan agricultural minister for ADB president?
Please go read more about international politices

Let me invite some people to come and enlighten me more on this issue.

cc: Barcanista, Ak47man, Euromember, Ikechuku, Duru1/ Deridegull, Curlieweed, Cheruv, bushdoc9919, Buddahmonk, Manchy7531, egift,Justcash,Mikeansy, Carnegiefan, Super1star, fr3do, Abagworo, Demdem

mrvitalis:

First of all buhari as a president have freedom to choose who ever he feels will benefit Nigeria the most
Am not in his mind and maybe the onu or what ever his name was didn't represent the ideological he had... .. or maybe he didn't want a Nigerian at that point to have such power and begin to power tussle with him
Please Obama did the same in the world Bank president election. .. . This things happen alot
Was it not the same buhari that supported Jonathan agricultural minister for ADB president?
Please go read more about international politices

Peter Onu, a civilian who was not even a politician, was going to start doing power tussle with Buhari, a military man?

He didn't want a Nigerian? really, where exactly was his patriotism? is it that he didn't want a Nigerian or he didn't want an Igbo, cos it turned out that he was happy with the emergence of a Nigel man ahead of Peter Onu. Obama's candidate in the world bank president race was a US citizen, Dr Kim.

What exactly was Peter Onu's crime? His ethnicity?

What international politics are you speaking about? The agricultural minister you speak of is a Yoruba, you have no point.

It's already post election so bone that 1985 wahala. At least Buhari got small % of votes from SE

If you can't provide a credible source to disprove this allegation on Buhari, then Nigeria as a Nation has no moral right to speak Ill of Kanu Nnamdi or seek to do any harm to all pro Biafran Igbos. Nigeria must have sealed herself as a fraud and indeed a Zoo, not worthy of any iota of patriotism by any sane Igbo man.

Ogbonnnaya Onu, Ngige, Okorocha and all other Igbo elites on Buhari train must all be...., it's a pity they have no shame and know not their history.

I find this really hard to believe. who nominated Peter Onu for the position in the first place? I am sure that if by chance Buhari was against the emergency of Onu he won't have even made it open extend to the extend that other head of states will be aware, how on earth will another country's president be begging Buhari to support his own country's candidate when the reverse is normally the case where presidents lobby for their country's representative to be voted. In conclusion I smile lies.

osifred:
I find this really hard to believe. who nominated Peter Onu for the position in the first place? I am sure that if by chance Buhari was against the emergency of Onu he won't have even made it open extend to the extend that other head of states will be aware, how on earth will another country's president be begging Buhari to support his own country's candidate when the reverse is normally the case where presidents lobby for their country's representative to be voted. In conclusion I smile lies.

Then counter the lie with truth. An article with a credible source will do.

Peter Onu was an acting Secretary General of UN, but lost the Post when election was conducted, because Buhari refused to lobby votes for him.

Either way, I want to get to the bottom of this.

ComradeAbu:
It's already post election so bone that 1985 wahala. At least Buhari got small % of votes from SE

This is not about election. This is about the position of the Igbo man in Nigeria. This is important in the light of Buhari recent appointments.

mrvitalis:

First of all buhari as a president have freedom to choose who ever he feels will benefit Nigeria the most
Am not in his mind and maybe the onu or what ever his name was didn't represent the ideological he had... .. or maybe he didn't want a Nigerian at that point to have such power and begin to power tussle with him
Please Obama did the same in the world Bank president election . .. . This things happen alot
Was it not the same buhari that supported Jonathan agricultural minister for ADB president?
Please go read more about international politices

Care to elaborate? And for it to be equivalent, please prove that Obama backed a non-American for the post where an American was also running for the position.
I'm waiting...

Op check this thread.

I could not believe that would come from her, and I just wondered whether she was being deliberately dishonest, or simply gullible. Well, just for the records: When Dr Edem Kodjo vacated his seat as Secretary-General and the OAU could not elect a successor, Dr Peter Onu, as the most senior official was asked to head the OAU Secretariat as Acting Secretary-General from 1983-1985. Indeed, in 1985 when a new Secretary-General was to be elected, several countries requested Nigeria to nominate Dr Onu to run for the election, but General Buhari refused. Ironically, when Edi Oumarou, who came from a town in Niger less than 100 kilometres from Daura, Buhari’s hometown was elected, there were innuendos from some Nigerian papers. It was, therefore, not correct to allege that a Nigerian had once been the Secretary-General of the OAU.

https://www.nairaland.com/2112164/buhari-preferred-fulani-niger-rep

http://www.safpi.org/news/article/2012/19th-au-assembly-pitting-nigeria-against-south-africa

Paranoia

[b] A glimpse of how Buhari has betrayed
Nigeria in the past and what he is capable
of doing can be found in the book by
Ibrahim Daggash, former head of
information and communication at the
defunct Organisation of Aftican Unity
(OAU). On page 69 of the book, ‘The OAU:
Reality or Fiction’, Daggash writes: “I
remember in 1985 in Africa Hall that he
was for confirmation of Dr Peter Onu of
Nigeria, who was acting Secretary-General
but Nigeria’s Head of State, Gen
Muhammadu Buhari was adamant in his
support of Niger’s candidate, Idi Omaro, a
Fulani Muslim.
In a meeting, a handful of Presidents led
by (Tanzania’s first President Julius)
Nyerere met with Gen Buhari and Nwalimu
(as Nyerere was popularly called) begged
him: ‘Please give us Peter!’
Buhari refused and forgot even to be
courteous to his old peers. What was
astonishing, when the vote was in favour
of Niger’s candidate, the Nigerian Head
rejoiced to such a degree that he was
unable to control his emotions. That was
a moment I witnessed and was convinced
that General Buhari would not last long as
a leader.” [/b]
http://www.theopinion.ng/between-buharis-clannishness-and-nigerias-diversity/

US keeps control of the World Bank

n April 2012 the World Bank elected Dr Jim Yong Kim, a US citizen, as the next president to replace departing president Robert Zoellick. His appointment fits a long established pattern: the Bank’s governing body always elects whoever the US government nominates. Similarly, the International Monetary Fund always elects as managing-director whoever the Europeans nominate.

What makes Kim’s appointment remarkable is that it flies in the face of a crescendo of support for opening up the top positions of the Bank and the Fund to international recruitment. The G20 finance ministers and heads of government have several times reaffirmed their commitment to transparent, merit-based recruitment for the top positions. And in 2012, for the first time, well-qualified candidates from developing countries presented themselves, while Kim’s qualifications were questionable. How did the US again prevail?

The Bank’s president is elected by a vote on its board of executive directors, which is the day-to-day governing body of the Bank, with 25 seats. The bigger financial contributor states have their own seats, representing only themselves; the other seats represent constituencies of countries. The executive directors are civil servants from their respective countries. Each casts a vote weighted by the sum of the voting shares of the countries they represent.

When Zoellick announced his resignation, in February 2012, the executive board immediately “reaffirmed the importance of a merit-based and transparent process with all executive directors able to nominate and then consider all candidates”. The G24 secretariat in Washington, a small organisation which concerts views among developing country members of the Bank and the Fund, had been preparing for the opening, had approached a number of developing country candidates and discussed the organisation of a campaign. In the end two developing country candidates came forward. One was Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, a Nigerian (known just as Ngozi), the current finance minister and former managing-director at the World Bank. The other was Colombia’s Jose Antonio Ocampo, a former finance minister and current professor of economics at Columbia University, New York.

After dragging its feet, the Obama administration nominated the relatively unknown Jim Yong Kim, president of Dartmouth College. He was a medical doctor, former director of the World Health Organisation’s HIV/AIDs department, and former chair of the department of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School. His special field was mitigating the health consequences of poverty in the poorest parts of the world. He was said to be a close friend of both US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who between them had the main voice in selecting the US candidate. Clinton had earlier sought, unsuccessfully, White House permission to announce Kim’s co-author and close colleague at the Harvard Medical School, Paul Farmer, as the candidate to head USAID.

Kim’s nomination reflected a consensus in US political circles, including the Democratic Party, that the development challenge is to mitigate extreme poverty and particularly its health consequences, and that the World Bank should work less as a bank and more as an aid agency working alongside charities like the Gates Foundation and the Clinton Foundation. This same notion of the development challenge was reflected in the recent appointment of a young physician as Administrator of USAID, whose main work experience had been with the Gates Foundation and who champions the social sectors and opposes USAID working in sectors like infrastructure. On the other hand, both Ngozi and Ocampo had long experience in development as a large-scale national transformation project, including governance, economic management, education, health, infrastructure, and environmental management (1). They had been responsible for setting economic and financial policy in their countries, conducted inter-governmental negotiations, and managed large organisations, as Dr Kim had not.

One of the strongest critiques of Kim came from a former World Bank economist and current professor of development practice at Harvard Kennedy School, Lant Pritchett. Drawing the distinction between national development and humane development (mitigation of famines, pandemics, violence, in very poor parts of the world where national development has failed), Pritchett said that “[Kim’s] appointment appears to be an intrusion of the world of humane development into one of the core institutions of national development. By contrast, the nominee backed by many African countries, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, has been finance minister of Nigeria and a managing director of the World Bank ....[S]he is from the world of national development, rather than the world of humane development. What has shocked the development world is that President Obama did not seem to know the difference” (2).

The candidates travelled the world seeking support. Kim had ample resources and strong backing from the White House and Treasury, and secured key nominations before those governments had even met the other candidates (notably from the Japanese government, which has the second biggest share of votes on the board). But apart from signing a few newspaper articles on his vision for the World Bank (which had all the hallmarks of having been written by the US Treasury), Kim kept out of sight and took no part in debates arranged with the others. Evidently he was worried that his lack of experience in finance and national development would be exposed.

All three were interviewed by World Bank governors in Europe (ministers of European governments). At the main gathering Ngozi and Ocampo received standing ovations, Kim did not. A source close to the process reported: “I’ve seen some of the EU governments’ confidential reports of the interviews EU governors had with the three Presidential candidates last week. Of course they all had differing views, but a fair summary would be: Okonjo-Iweala: passionate performer, good knowledge of how the World Bank operates, but her pitch wasn’t so well set out or structured. Ocampo: best prepared, clearest ideas about where he would take the Bank, most knowledgeable on economic issues. Quite academic in style. Kim: Very committed, but limited knowledge outside health, and particularly not on finance and economics. (3)”

Another source close to the process said that the general reaction to Kim was that he would be a good executive board member — which is telling, given the lowly status of board members.
African Union summit

The African Union summit of African heads of government unanimously endorsed Ngozi. Two networks of economists sprang up in support of Ocampo, one led by a prominent Chinese economist and two heterodox Anglo economists, the other linking many Latin American economists.

The candidates were interviewed separately by the executive directors, sometimes one on one, sometimes with executive directors in groups. The “G11” group of executive directors representing developing countries met several times in the run up to the board vote. They committed themselves, several times over, to vote according to their judgment of the best candidate, irrespective of US wishes.

Two days before the vote the G11 met for several hours. Near the end they conducted an unofficial ballot. All except one voted for Ngozi. The exception was the Brazilian executive director (also representing Colombia), who voted for Ocampo. After the vote he explained that he would telephone Ocampo and invite him to withdraw his candidacy; at which point he too would vote for Ngozi, making a unanimous vote. Ocampo did withdraw in order to give Ngozi a better shot (April 13), resulting in 100% support for Ngozi from executive directors representing developing countries.

The result galvanised the Obama administration. It evidently thought that the opportunity for Obama to enter the history books by nominating a woman from an African country who was widely regarded as the best candidate did not warrant the cost of ceding the American monopoly, which could easily be construed as a symbol of Obama unwilling to stand up for America — in an election year with prominent critics declaring, “I wish this president would learn how to be an American”, and “I think it can now be said without equivocation — without equivocation — that this man hates this country. He is trying — Barack Obama is trying — to dismantle, brick by brick, the American dream” (4). And though the Bank is no longer a copious source of finance for most developing countries it is a rich source of information, especially informal political and economic information. Appointing a personal friend as president gives the Secretary of State and the Treasury Secretary an invitation to contact him at any time of day or night for a chat about what is going on in some part of the world they want to know about, and to suggest deals they would like the Bank to make or not make.

The first to break ranks were the Russians. The next day the Russian foreign minister announced from Moscow that Russia would support Kim. Soon other developing country governments began to peel away. Almost certainly they were offered bilateral deals. Several involved a promise to appoint a national to positions like chief economist, or treasurer, or head of the International Finance Corporation (the private-sector lending arm of the World Bank) in return for a vote for Kim.

When the board met to vote (in a closed meeting, with only executive directors present, no advisors, no Bank staff) it first conducted an unofficial vote to see whether consensus was likely, and then the official vote. By this time the big European countries had already swung in favour of the US nominee. The Latin Americans decided after the unofficial vote that there was no point in annoying the Americans, so they swung behind Kim. The official vote was over 80% for Dr Kim, with only the African executive directors supporting Ngozi. The Africans held out because Ngozi had been supported unanimously by the African Union’s heads of government. The World Bank communique about Kim’s appointment made no mention of the word “unanimous” — the first time ever that the president had not been appointed unanimously (even the very controversial appointment of Paul Wolfowitz in 2005 had officially been unanimous).

Within the World Bank, many non-economists, especially in health and education, welcomed Kim’s appointment. They appreciated not only his expertise in health, but also his scepticism about western agencies working with national governments of developing countries. He prefers to work closer to the intended beneficiaries — with the NGO sector and at lower levels of government. For these staff Kim’s appointment carried the promise of exciting innovations in Bank operations. Moreover, his appointment resonated with a recent backlash against economists’ long dominance of Bank thinking amongst many of the non-economists. The latter have been empowered by the ever growing significance of western country “trust funds” for financing Bank operations, which tend to promote a “social first, economic second” view. Finally, Ngozi had established a mixed reputation in people-management during her time as a Bank managing director, while Kim gave the impression of being a big improvement on Zoellick, who was known as unwilling to delegate and prone to denigrate his senior officials.
Foreordained appointment

However, most of this “contest” was theatre. It was foreordained that almost whoever the US government proposed would be appointed, for two reasons. The Americans expected that the quid pro quo for their support for the European nominee to replace the disgraced Dominique Strauss Kahn at the IMF in 2011 would be European support for the American nominee at the World Bank. The Europeans were not about to jeopardise their countries’ chances of retaining the managing-directorship of the Fund by voting against the American nominee at the Bank. The second reason was that the Obama administration’s electoral strategy in an exceptionally evenly-balanced presidential race meant it could not afford to give up a symbol of American pre-eminence. It would do “whatever it takes” to ensure that the US kept the presidency of the World Bank. In the months after Kim took office, several nationals of big developing countries were appointed to senior positions. Jin-Yong Cai, a Chinese national, was appointed as CEO of the International Finance Corporation (the private-sector lending arm) in August 2012, the first time the position has been held by a non-European. Kaushik Basu, an Indian national based at Cornell University, was appointed chief economist in September 2012, only the second time the position has been held by a non-westerner.

The story of Kim’s ascent shows that, short of a huge change in the distribution of votes, the share of the US and the Europeans at the Bank and the Fund will always be sufficient for them to protect their monopolies, provided they continue to support each other. The story equally shows how the developing countries’ distrust of each other makes it easy for the Americans to split them with bilateral deals.

Still, the good news is that well-qualified non-American candidates presented themselves in 2012 for the first time, and went through a semblance of a merit-based selection process. The contest worked to the extent that the official selection was — unprecedentedly — not “unanimous” (in the end some 70 states voted for the non-American candidate, in Africa and Latin America). The US government will probably have to cut even more deals to retain the presidency next time around; but next time may not be till 2022 if Kim is re-appointed to a second five-year term.

http://mondediplo.com/blogs/us-keeps-control-of-the-world-bank

Na wa o! God it is time you spli this country o! Haba! 1985 in 2015; for something insignificant as this? Let us live together in peace or split in peace make everybody rest. I just wish everybody could have peace and joy.

BlackPikiN:
Op check this thread.




https://www.nairaland.com/2112164/buhari-preferred-fulani-niger-rep

http://www.safpi.org/news/article/2012/19th-au-assembly-pitting-nigeria-against-south-africa

I never saw that thread. I wasn't aware of this bit of history until few hours ago!

Chukwu must save Ndiigbo from this land of our captivity. Chai! Poor Peter Onu, it could have been any Igbo man in his shoes.

The truth remains that Nigeria -as an idea of a country- is a sick joke.

pazienza:
Duru/ Dede, mentioned this today, I found it very hard to believe, so I googled it and it turns that that there are tens of sources in agreement with Duru.

This is mind blowing.
Buhari hated Ndiigbo so much that he would support a Niger republic man, over an Igbo? What right does Buhari have to accuse Any Biafran of treason.

It is called choice , would you support a man because he is from your country and prolly just prolly they didn't share the same vision ? Pls don't die in bigotry and ask down why it was the other candidate and not onu might have just been mere coincidence that the other whom he preferred was a Fulani .

spenca:


It is called choice , would you support a man because he is from your country and prolly just prolly they didn't share the same vision ? Pls don't die in bigotry and ask down why it was the other candidate and not onu might have just been mere coincidence that the other whom he preferred was a Fulani .

Are you for real? What could be more important than patriotism and loyalty to one's nation? Buhari prefers a Fulani Niger man to an Igbo Nigerian, and you are here defending the indefensible! It's like Obama choosing Okonjo over Dr Kim in the race to World bank president, simply because, he ( Obama) is a black like Okonjo. Can you imagine that?

How can Buhari preach of Nigerian unity when his loyalty lies elsewhere?

Nigeria is the greatest fraud ever known to man.

Buhari as a head of state has the choice to choose a non Nigerian over a Nigerian, but Biafrans have no choice to choose to exist independent of Nigerians?

spenca:


It is called choice , would you support a man because he is from your country and prolly just prolly they didn't share the same vision ? Pls don't die in bigotry and ask down why it was the other candidate and not onu might have just been mere coincidence that the other whom he preferred was a Fulani .

You Nigerians are incapable of honesty. Chei see reasoning!
This is why Nnamdi Kanu of radio Biafra says that anybody who says that he is a Nigerian is inherently fraudulent.
He said that if he were a foreign country and someone comes there saying he is a Nigerian, he will quickly throw that person in jail because the person is a thief and a lair.

carnegiefan:


You Nigerians are incapable of honesty. Chei see reasoning!
This is why Nnamdi Kanu of radio Biafra says that anybody who says that he is a Nigerian is inherently fraudulent.
He said that if he were a foreign country and someone comes there saying he is a Nigerian, he will quickly throw that person in jail because the person is a thief and a lair.

Their dishonesty and wickedness defies logic, damn!

Hw does dat concern yu? Amebo. What of paience jonathan dat refused to vote for jonathan.

pazienza:


Their dishonesty and wickedness defies logic, damn!

The wickedness I can understand and live with, heck all we need to do is return the favor.
The dishonesty is what is driving me nuts because I know that we Ndigbo are truth and justice lovers and seekers.
We are the only group in Nigeria that deeply believe in "ebe bere ugo bere" -a universal code of justice and equity.
We proved it once more with Jonathan.
That is why we must leave the zoo, no matter how long it takes.

Btw, who is this Ibrahim Daggash, and where can one get a hard or soft copy of that his book. I would like to confirm that his quote by myself. This is really shocking.

pazienza:


Peter Onu, a civilian who was not even a politician, was going to start doing power tussle with Buhari, a military man?

He didn't want a Nigerian? really, where exactly was his patriotism? is it that he didn't want a Nigerian or he didn't want an Igbo, cos it turned out that he was happy with the emergence of a Nigel man ahead of Peter Onu. Obama's candidate in the world bank president race was a US citizen, Dr Kim.

What exactly was Peter Onu's crime? His ethnicity?

What international politics are you speaking about? The agricultural minister you speak of is a Yoruba, you have no point.

you must be crazy Yoruba is not a human being?

pazienza:


Are you for real? What could be more important than patriotism and loyalty to one's nation? Buhari prefers a Fulani Niger man to an Igbo Nigerian, and you are here defending the indefensible! It's like Obama choosing Okonjo over Dr Kim in the race to World bank president, simply because, he ( Obama) is a black like Okonjo. Can you imagine that?

How can Buhari preach of Nigerian unity when his loyalty lies elsewhere?

Nigeria is the greatest fraud ever known to man.

Buhari as a head of state has the choice to choose a non Nigerian over a Nigerian, but Biafrans has no choice to choose to exist independent of Nigerians?

Of course Obama can choose or may choose okonjo over Kim if he feels she would do better and share the same ideology with him , just to use your analogy. See beyond religious and ethnic sentiments it is a filter which banes your reasoning. Cheers mate

spenca:


It is called choice , would you support a man because he is from your country and prolly just prolly they didn't share the same vision ? Pls don't die in bigotry and ask down why it was the other candidate and not onu might have just been mere coincidence that the other whom he preferred was a Fulani .

I don't want to get involve but come on man. Read your post again.