Chief Bisi Akande’s claims regarding the #EndSARS movement suggest external American influence through the “Obi-dients.” The article examines how Nigerians often attribute their political problems to foreign intervention, particularly the USA. This inclination detracts from recognizing local agency and accountability in shaping their political landscape. Historical context shows a trend of blaming external forces for internal discontent, which needs reevaluation to empower citizens in reclaiming their narrative.
In a recent interview, former Osun Governor, Chief Bisi Akande, suggested that the EndSARS protests in Nigeria were a conspiracy against Bola Tinubu, alleging that those who ambushed him were “the Obi-dients,” a well-organized group allegedly funded by America. Akande’s claims raise questions about the motivations behind attributing the actions of Nigerians to foreign influence without evidence, illustrating how narratives can shape political discourse.
The choice of naming the USA as the source of this alleged funding reflects a broader pattern in Nigerian society. When discussing their challenges, many Nigerians connect their country’s struggles to Western institutions like the IMF and World Bank, portraying these organizations as manifestations of larger systematic issues. This mindset feeds into a narrative that the USA is responsible for Nigeria’s economic and political problems, obscuring local accountability.
Akande’s assertion highlights a common sentiment in Nigeria, where speculation about foreign manipulation often overshadows the agency of Nigerian citizens. Instead of recognizing that it was their votes that led to significant political changes, some citizens attribute these outcomes to external forces. This perspective can overlook the genuine motivations of Nigerians who participated in protests, driven by discontent with their government.
Historical context is vital; the EndSARS protests were not isolated events but part of a global reaction to systemic corruption and injustice, mirroring movements elsewhere. The sentiment in Nigeria reflected the frustrations experienced globally, making it less about foreign interference and more about local conditions driving citizen activism. Protests like Occupy Nigeria in 2012 showed that Nigerians have their own reasons for dissent.
It is ironic that some Buhari supporters now distance themselves from their roles in advancing his presidency, attributing his election to US interference instead. This shift places blame for subsequent failures on external actors rather than accepting collective responsibility for political choices made in Nigeria. Such dynamics are evident across the political spectrum regarding accountability.
Akande’s historical revisionism negates the valid frustrations that spurred protests like EndSARS. By framing these protests as externally manipulated, he undermines the lived experiences of Nigerians affected by police violence and governmental failures. Genuine movements arose from the societal discontent, drawing on global influences while being rooted in local realities.
The disproportionate focus on Peter Obi indicates a fear of losing electoral relevance amid emergent political sentiments among younger demographics. This fear is partly why they attribute his success to external funding rather than acknowledging the significant grassroots support he garnered. Akande’s narrative reflects an anxiety over shifting political tides in Nigeria.
While Akande’s claims may seem implausible today, they echo historical narratives that can influence future political dynamics. As current power structures become challenged by younger, more anti-establishment figures, the trend of linking political phenomena to foreign interference may persist, shaping discourse as new leaders emerge, using Akande’s rhetoric to explain shifts in political power.
The article delves into allegations made by Chief Bisi Akande regarding the involvement of America in Nigeria’s #EndSARS protests through a group referred to as “the Obi-dients.” It explores the broader theme of how Nigerians often attribute their problems to external forces, particularly the USA, while overlooking local agency. The discussion is framed by historical undertones of political dissatisfaction and the complex relationships between Nigerian society and foreign influences.
In conclusion, the narrative of foreign manipulation in Nigerian politics often distracts from local agency and accountability. Akande’s claims reflect a common tendency to blame external forces for internal issues, revealing deeper societal frustrations. Recognizing the genuine motivations behind protests like #EndSARS can empower Nigerians to reclaim their narrative and address the actual causes of their political and economic challenges.
Original Source: punchng.com
