by Christopher Day
This summer a massive strike movement threatened to topple Nigeria's military government. The defiance of Nigerian oil workers, like the Zapatista uprising this January in México, is an indication of some of the new forms of struggle that are emerging in response to the new social, economic and political conditions we call the "new world order."
The two-month-long strike movement which was finally crushed in early September had its roots in the June 1993 Nigerian presidential election. That election, which was "supposed to" end over a decade of military rule, was a contest between two parties created and sponsored by the military government of then-ruler General Ibrahim Babangida. The choice was widely viewed by Nigerians as false, but when millionaire business man Chief Moshood Kashimawo Abiola of the moderately left-leaning Social Democratic Party won, the election was annulled by Babangida.
Mass strikes and public demonstrations forced Babangida to resign and install a civilian ruler, Ernest Shonekan, who was generally regarded as a puppet of the military. Repression was directed at all sections of the democracy movement, including the anti-authoritarian Awareness League, which had a number of its leading figures arrested. The thin veil of civilian rule was promptly torn away in November when another General, Sani Abacha, seized power and announced plans for an elected national constitutional convention.
As the June 27 convention date began to approach, it became clear that the convention would not be allowed to address the complex ethnic, linguistic, and religious issues that divide the country. Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa with roughly 93 million people, obtained independence from Britain in 1960. Like the rest of Africa, Nigeria inherited colonial borders that slice through ethnic groups and bring together peoples with very little in common. In 1967 the Igbo of eastern Nigeria declared independence, sparking a bloody civil war that lasted until 1970. Since then the Nigerian military has been particularly resistant to any suggestions about the decentralization of power in Nigeria to its constituent regions. But ethnic and regional divisions represent profound disparities in Nigeria, so the refusal to address them led various ethnic and regional organizations, unions, and a fledgling democracy movement to boycott the election of delegates to the constitutional convention.
The National Democratic Coalition demanded that the military rulers step aside and allow Abiola to form an interim civilian government. On May 28 Abiola announced that he would form a government, on June 11 he declared himself President of Nigeria and went into hiding. Abiola was finally arrested on June 22 after addressing a public demonstration. The next few days saw mounting demonstrations in Lagos for the release of Abiola. On June 29 the constitutional convention was adjourned by the government after meeting for only one day. On July 4 members of Nigeria's two oil workers' unions went on strike, demanding that Abacha step down and Abiola be placed in office. On July 6 Abiola was officially charged with treason. The next day soldiers began to replace some of the striking oil workers, threatening to use the death penalty against anybody who interfered. By July 12 strikes had spread to all sectors of the work force in Lagos, including the government. On July 14 a nation-wide work stoppage was called, and within a week the strike had taken hold in the southwestern towns. On July 18, 20 people were killed in demonstrations in Lagos. There were demonstrations in Benin City and Akure, and the homes of prominent, former government officials were attacked in many towns. On July 26, as government troops were firing tear gas and bullets into the air against demonstrators, leaders of the democracy movement refused to meet with Jesse Jackson because of his ties to Babangida.
In August the struggle intensified. On August 3 police killed five people in street battles with demonstrators, and the five-million member National Labor Congress called on its members to join the strike movement. On August 21 Frank Kokori, head of the National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers, and 25 other leaders of the strike movement were arrested. Two days later Abacha named new chiefs of both the army and navy, signaling a likely military crackdown. The government disbanded the executive committee of the National Labor Congress and, by September 5, the strike movement had effectively come to an end as increasing repression drove many to return to work. On September 6 the crackdown came as General Abacha decreed that his government had absolute powers, including the power to override judicial decisions, and banned several major newspapers.
While the strike movement in Nigeria finally went down to defeat, it marks an important development in the global struggle against authoritarian power, and raises questions that revolutionary anti-authoritarians everywhere need to grapple with.
The recent struggle in Nigeria and the ongoing struggle in México both involved mass autonomous organizations of the oppressed classes fighting for what is often called "bourgeois democracy." In México, the Zapatistas demanded fair elections, and in Nigeria the workers demanded that a multi-millionaire be seated as president. Anarchists may be tempted to dismiss these demands as illusions. This is a mistake. The demands for democracy are demands for greater space in which to struggle. Around the world the reorganization of capitalism, represented by International Monetary Fund-imposed austerity measures and free-trade agreements like NAFTA and GATT, are pushing people to the breaking point. Monolithic dictatorships like the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) in México or the military in Nigeria are a major obstacle to any effective resistance to these international forces.
In both México and Nigeria the movements obtained almost instantaneous international sympathy, making it difficult for the major capitalist powers to openly support the governments. The proliferation of communications technology has made it next to impossible for any government to control the flow of information to the rest of the world in the manner that was common as recently as a decade ago.
In both countries, anti-authoritarian politics have played an important role. In México, the Zapatistas have invoked the anti-authoritarian spirit of Magonismo and Zapatismo and demanded the decentralization of power and the reinstatement of the right of collective land ownership. In Nigeria, which has long traditions of non-authoritarian social structures among the Igbo, the 1,000-member Awareness League, an anarcho-syndicalist organization affiliated with the International Workers Association (IWA/AIT), has participated in the demonstrations and strikes since the 1993 election annulment.
The collapse of Leninism as a credible revolutionary ideology has created openings for explicitly anti-authoritarian movements around the world. But these openings confront these movements with the sorts of dilemmas that were easily avoided when our politics were more marginalized. We cannot afford to engage in self-righteous and glib sloganeering when hundreds of thousands of people are in the streets fighting to be free and looking for serious answers.