Cross River State in Nigeria has entered a season of political argument, with citizens expressing disappointment and anger towards the current administration. Governor Bassey Otu has become the latest target of criticism, with many attributing the state's development challenges to his leadership. The complaints are familiar, including abandoned or deteriorating infrastructure, insufficient new projects, and poor development across local governments. These concerns deserve scrutiny and accountability, but there is a risk that legitimate dissatisfaction may turn into irrational irritability.
The tendency to attribute every accumulated failure of the state to the current government while forgetting the historical context is a concern. René Girard's theory of mimetic desire provides a useful lens to understand this phenomenon. In politics, the same mimetic mechanism can operate negatively, where citizens observe political actors identifying an enemy, and the enemy becomes the object around which collective frustration is organised. This can lead to the political scapegoat becoming more important than the structural problem.
The Liyel-Duke debate has exposed the losses incurred due to lack of continuity in governance. The monumental disaster of Benedict Ayade's administration is a testament to the importance of effective governance. In contrast, the administrations of Donald Duke and Liyel Imoke had notable achievements in rural development, roads, electricity, healthcare, and infrastructure. Imoke's administration prioritised rural development, healthcare, education, and infrastructure, and he has defended continuity as a principle of governance.
Imoke recently explained that his administration continued projects inherited from Donald Duke and expanded programmes such as urban renewal, street lighting, and environmental initiatives. However, his administration cannot escape questions about the sustainability, financing, and long-term economic impact of major inherited projects, including Tinapa. Imoke attributed Tinapa's challenges to unresolved infrastructure, regulatory, and commercial problems, reinforcing the argument that ambitious projects without a sustainable ecosystem can become liabilities.
The current administration in Cross River State faces criticism for its handling of development projects. Governor Bassey Otu has been accused of not doing enough to address the state's infrastructure and development challenges. The media has also been accused of working with external forces to shut out voices of recovery and continuity, focusing instead on the governor's perceived failures.
The people of Cross River State deserve better governance and effective leadership. The state's development challenges require a comprehensive approach that addresses the root causes of the problems. The government must prioritize continuity and sustainability in its projects, rather than embarking on new initiatives that may not be economically viable. The citizens also have a role to play in holding the government accountable for its actions.
Ultimately, Cross River State must resist the temptation to scapegoat and instead focus on finding solutions to its development challenges. The government, citizens, and media must work together to promote accountability, transparency, and effective governance. By doing so, the state can move forward and achieve its development goals.
Key points
- The politics of development in Cross River State has become increasingly polarized, with citizens expressing frustration and anger towards the current administration.
- The state's development challenges require a comprehensive approach that addresses the root causes of the problems.
- Effective governance and continuity are essential for achieving development goals in Cross River State.
