Lagos — Any president, any government, any leader, any individual or group of people who refuse to accept that tomorrow is always defined by today will be compelled to accept the consequences of the non acceptance of the linkage between today and tomorrow. In the same vein, the relationship between today and tomorrow cannot but be the same as the relationship between yesterday and today. In other words, African leaders emphasise today to the detriment of tomorrow. As a result, when tomorrow comes to become today, they are confronted with problems they cannot solve, simply because they have not seriously foreseen the problems. This is precisely what is responsible for the current imbroglio in the Cote d'lvoire.

The Cote d'lvoire, which was before the demise of Houphouet-Boigny on 7 December 1993 regarded as the most politically stable in Africa is currently engulfed in a fratricidal war in which neither the incumbent government of Laurent Gbagbo nor the rebels can win with ease. In an attempt to help find a solution to the problem, it is important to look back at the political history of the Cote d'lvoire and seek understanding of what went wrong with the system and which the Ivoiriens acquiesced to but which are causing the problems of today in the country. Essentially, there are three factors: the factor of Houphouet-Boigny as president, the nature of the Ivoirien experience.

First, on the issue of personality, President Houphouet-Boigny was a dictatorial democrat that emphasised his culture and customs in political governance. Although he was not an intellectual of the type of Leopold Sedar Senghor, he had the "memory of an elephant comparable to that of the Griots of Mandigue," to borrow the expression of Bechir Ben Yahmed of Jeune Afrique.

He was quite kind, very accommodating, very African but very intolerant of criticism, constructive or not. He loved power and did not want to share it with anybody. It is on record that he did not want to name or talk about his succession. In fact, his close collaborator quoted the last statement of Houphouet-Boigny, who was variously referred to as Le Vieux (Old Man), Le Sage (Wise Man), Nana (Baoule word for Grandfather), Dean of African politics, etc, at the last minute before his death thus: "je vous en prie, je ne veux pas de deux presidents" (please, I do not want two presidents." His close collaborator then assured him that "Non Monsieur le President, dormez tranquille. Tant que vous serez en vie, il n'y aura qu'un president (No, Mr. President, sleep well. For as long as you are alive, there will only be one president). In other words, even at the point of death, he still wanted to go to heaven with power. It is therefore understandable if he accepted multi-party system in 1990 against his wishes and why he held on to power from 1957 until 1990 by all means.

It is important to recall his Baoule ethnic background and the fact of his Akan traditional chieftaincy title, both of which were brought to bear in the political governance of the country. Akan is a linguistic sub-division of the Twi-speaking Ivoiriens who live in the Eastern part of the Cote d'lvoire and Ghana. By Akan tradition, a chief has ultimate authority over his followers. This is one of the philosophical basis upon which Houphouet-Boigny predicated his governance. He believed that he should always have ultimate, if not absolute, authority over the country. Indeed, he had ultimate authority as President of the Cote d'lvoire. He was generous, altruistic, peace seeking and easy-going while in power as was expected of any Akan chieftain.

Houphouet-Boigny was at times called the "social security" of West Africa because he always provided financial assistance to Heads of States, either incumbent, retired or ousted, but who were in need. For instance, he assisted the children of Hamani Diori of Niger Republic, Maga and Apithy as well as Mathieu Kerekou and Soglo of Benin Republic. He assumed responsibility for the training of the children of Moussa and Mariam Traore in France. Contrary to the xenophobia of his countrymen, Houphouet-Boigny opened the country's doors widely to foreigners, especially Africans. He had non- lvoirien counsellors and treated them as if they were members of his own nuclear family.

What happened in 1992 and 1993 was that, for some months in 1992, President Houphouet-Boigny went for medical treatment. Again, in 1993, he was away to Europe for more than six months and his health was increasingly failing. The Prime Minister, Alassane Ouattara, wanted to deputize for him on the basis of Article 24 while the President of the National Assembly, Mr. Konan Bedie, was also eyeing the presidency on the basis of Article 11. Indeed, Mr. Ouattara attempted to take over by convening a cabinet meeting to discuss the 1994 budget. He was accused of a constitutional coup d'etat. He could not do much as the President was flown home only to die few days after, that is on 7 December 1993. Mr. Konan Bedie seized the opportunity and declared himself President of the Republic of Cote d'lvoire. Thus, the problem of succession was raised and was not resolved with the demise of Houphouet Boigny. His death only provided for unhealthy rivalry and competition. The war in the Cote d'lvoire as at today cannot be separated from this rivalry for succession and this brings us to the last factor, the nature of the Ivoirien society and particularly the myth of African unity and integration.

In the Cote d'lvoire, most of the commercial spaces are occupied by Nigerians. Senegalese, Malians, Burkinabes etc have held political offices in the country. Ivoirien law did not allow for discrimination against "foreigners" under Houphouet-Boigny. The situation appears to be changing now. In this regard, a foreigner is not necessarily an individual who does not have the nationality of the Cote d'lvoire. A naturalized Ivoirien can still be a foreigner. Anyone born in the country and who might have acquired the nationality of the country by the principle of place of birth can still be a foreigner. The specific case of Alassane Ouattara is a good example. It is one of the reasons for the political unrest in the country.

Since Konan Bedie succeeded Houphouet-Boigny in December 1993, he made all efforts to ensure that Alassane Ouattara was prevented from contesting any presidential election. He introduced a new electoral Code which provided for the criterion of full blooded citizenship as a condition for eligibility for presidential election. The opposition contested it and boycotted the 1995 presidential elections, which enabled Konan Bedie to have a landslide victory. Konan Bedie won the election but did not solve the problem. His administration had many problems. It was not a surprise that he was ousted on 24 December 1999 by General Robert Guei. The coup was popular. However, the problem was to be compounded by Robert Guei, who engineered the writing of a new Constitution which requires that a presidential candidate must be of Ivoirien origin, that is, his parents must both be Ivoiriens by blood descendance. He must not have had another nationality etc. The constitution was adopted in 2000 and has been in force since then.

But since the then OAU and the ECOWAS, in consonance with their Declaration of Political Principles according to which no government that came to power would be condoned, the government of Robert Guei was short-lived. General Guei was compelled to organise new elections in which he participated contrary to world opinion. The election produced Mr. Laurent Gagbo as President but the election was at best very controversial.

The Northerners, who were Muslims, supported Alassane Ouattara, regardless of whether he was a 'half' or a full citizen. The international community asked Laurent Gbagbo to organise fresh elections in order for him or whoever wins the election to enjoy popular legitimacy but he refused. This is one major basis of the crisis in the country. Not only are the supporters of Alassane Ouattara against Laurent Gbagbo, a new rebel group, the Movement for Social Justice, emerged last week. It is seeking to avenge the killing of Robert Guei and a revision of the constitution.

In the light of the foregoing, there is the problem of double standard in the citizenship of the Cote d'lvoire. Secondly, the idea of a foreigner-lvoirien becoming the President is creating problems and therefore must be well explained to everyone. Thirdly, the winning of an election by majority vote does not necessarily confer legitimacy. Legitimacy can only exist if all parties participate in the election or do not contest it. Consequently, the war in the Cote d'lvoire is legitimacy-related.

Thus, for as long as politicians manipulate constitution writing and talking about unity, on the one hand, while working against it, on the other, there will always be violence. Politics in Africa is that of untruth and that is why Africa has not been able to progress. After Houphouet-Boigny, Ivoiriens are now facing the truth but Nigeria should not reciprocate Houphouet-Boigny's policy of 'Biafranisation of Nigeria'. Nigeria should help to find a lasting solution to the problem as an honest broker and in the spirit of regional brotherhood.