Here comes Tinubu’s baptism of fire [OPINION]

By Simon Kolawole

An American immigration officer caught me unawares with a probing question. I was doing a research on five oil-producing countries on a comparative scale with Nigeria to draw out lessons for our leaders on policy environment, windfall management, upstream-downstream linkages, local content, and operations of national oil companies. I had travelled to Washington, DC to use the libraries of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In my hand was a book, ‘The Paradox of Plenty: Oil Booms and Petro-states’, authored by Terry Lynn Karl who explored why the oil boom of the 1970s produced disappointing outcomes in some countries, Nigeria inclusive.

“So, what do you think Nigeria’s problem is?” the immigration officer, who obviously saw the book, asked me. I was not expecting that. Until 2006, my answer to every question about “Nigeria’s problem” had always been “corruption”. I never had to think twice. The evidence was everywhere. However, upon deeper reflection — after studying the development trajectories of many countries across the world — I had come to realise that as big a problem as corruption was, incompetence would give it a run for its money. That was how I began to develop and peddle my pet theory that for Nigeria to break out of underdevelopment, our leaders must be BOTH patriotic and competent.

“Umm,” I stammered a response to the officer. “I think it is—”

He cut in, with a smile: “Let me help you. Some countries have political problems. Some have economic problems. Nigeria has both political and economic problems.” What a summary!

The recent (or ongoing) protest in Nigeria reminded me of this conversation. There were clearly two aspects to the protest: there were those complaining about the economy and there were those playing politics. It was very glaring. Those interested in the economy were complaining about the price of garri and the cost of running government. Those playing politics were waving the Russian flag (ignore the lie that it was the flag of the Nigerian military) and calling for President Vladmir Putin to help overthrow President Bola Tinubu’s government. Some of the protesters said Tinubu should resign and hand over to Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, who came second in the 2023 presidential election.

Governor Uba Sani aptly captured this about the violent protest in Kaduna, his state. “When you see children within the ages of nine, 10 and 14 now raising the flag of another country, you will agree with me that it’s well designed, sponsored by some elements who are calling for anarchy in their own country. They took advantage by using the psychology of those children, knowing fully that here in Northern Nigeria, our people are close to our neighbouring countries, such as Niger Republic, making them to believe that what happened in Niger Republic can happen in Nigeria; what happened in Burkina Faso can happen in Nigeria and what happened in Mali can happen in Nigeria.”

I read several comments in WhatsApp groups and the platform formerly known as Twitter. Some suggested that the north was ganging up against Tinubu and would do anything to regain political power in 2027. One commenter argued that northerners never protested over economic hardship under President Muhammadu Buhari but have suddenly found their voice because a southerner is president. The central theory, from what I can glean, is that some northern forces are moving against Tinubu because they cannot control him. Well, I am not a fan of conspiracy theories so don’t expect me to jump on the bandwagon. In any case, I also have my own issues with Tinubu’s leadership style.

However, there is nothing happening so far that surprises me. I am well aware that the political and economic history of Nigeria did not start in 2023 or 2019 or 2015 — as you could be misled to think if you spend too much time on social media. Nigeria has always been complicated; the mistrust and competition between the north and the south has always been there. We went to war in 1967 basically as an aftermath of the 1966 coup which pitted a part of the country against another. More so, there is nothing strange about mutual suspicion in a multicultural society. Even in societies that are seemingly monolithic, there is still room for rancour. There is no perfect society in the world.

I am not suggesting that all conspiracy theories are false. Some things are too striking to be coincidental. Some of the protests and violence in the north are definitely politically motivated and have nothing to do with the inflation rate. Why would protesters invade the Kano government house? The state is governed by the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), not the All Progressives Congress (APC), so why should Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf be the target of protesters when the macro-economic policies are orchestrated by the APC-led government in Abuja? Why should Tinubu be asked to resign and be replaced by Atiku when the constitution is clear on who succeeds him?

Being president of Nigeria is no tea party. Challenges must come. Conspiracies must surface. Let us look back a bit. When President Olusegun Obasanjo was in power, he faced quite a number of crises in his early days. Perhaps, the biggest was the introduction of Sharia criminal code by 12 northern states. Shari’a had always been for civil affairs, but it was being scaled up to criminal matters which had been the exclusive preserve of our criminal laws. Zamfara state, which in 2000 became the first to adopt the Sharia criminal code, amputated the hand of Bello Buba Jangebe, a cow thief, to show that it meant business. Two women were sentenced to death for adultery in other Shari’a states.

Obasanjo’s initial response was to fiercely condemn and threaten the Shari’a states but having seen the brick wall ahead of him (there were unconfirmed rumours that the Supreme Court was going to rule in favour of the states), he decided to calm down. It seemed to me that he realised, and accepted, that it was a political challenge that he needed to handle with tact. He changed rhetoric, saying that there was the “real Shari’a” and the “political Shari’a”. He predicted that the “political Shari’a” would soon fade out. Today, it appears only Kano is still operating Shari’a in a newsworthy format with the frequent breaking of bottles of beer and mass arrest of “immoral” mannequins.

It was not easy for Obasanjo. The Shari’a riots between 2000 and 2002, mostly in the north-west, claimed thousands of lives. It was bloodshed upon bloodshed. As if this was not enough trouble, Jos, Plateau state, exploded. The riot of September 2001, sparked off by some seemingly innocuous development (they said one Christian lady walked past a Muslim praying ground or one Muslim politician got a political appointment ahead of a Christian — all sorts of theories), led to the deaths of at least 1,000 persons. Jos has not known peace since then. Obasanjo also faced an impeachment process in 2002. His supporters blamed his travails on northerners who wanted power back in 2003.

It may also interest us to recall that some anti-Obasanjo protesters called for the military to overthrow him, although they did not fly the Russian flag. Rather, pro-Osama bin Laden and “Death to America” rallies were common in Kano. When people make it look like Obasanjo had an easy time in power, I tend to think time has erased our memory. He had it rough and tough, some of his own making and some out of political intrigues. He survived and somehow got a second term. But he managed to unite almost the entire country against himself with the ill-fated third term agenda. Overall, he played the complicated politics of leading Nigeria and implementing economic reforms.

Tinubu is now facing his own baptism of fire. How will he handle it? Will he play the regional card by insisting it is a northern conspiracy against him in order to gain the sympathy of southerners, most of whom voted against him in 2023? Will he engage in pragmatism — “give a little, take a little” — in order to keep his northern friends onside? There is no card he plays that will not come with a price. The regional card can backfire and make Aso Rock hotter for him (President Goodluck Jonathan definitely has a story to tell about this) but some southerners will be happy if it will eventually lead to balkanisation. The pacification card will require changing his style but it may hurt his ego.

Running a delicate country like Nigeria requires a lot of tact. Many presidents discover this too late, to their own hurt. As the US immigration officer told me, we have both economic and political problems. These are hefty weights. Fixing the badly broken economy is a monumental challenge on its own, but at least it is largely a technical issue. Managing political interests in a complex polity is another thing altogether. It requires a different skill set and mindset. What did Obasanjo get right (or wrong) when he faced his own baptism of fire in the games of policy, power and politics? What did other presidents get right (or wrong)? I am curious to see how Tinubu will handle his own baptism.

Culled from TheCable