The last Northerners standing Monday, 17 January 2011 00:07 Mahmud Jega mmjega@dailytrust.com, 08054102925
I was still dizzy with sleep at 11am last Friday, having stood up all night to report on the PDP convention, when my friend Umar phoned from Funtua. He was driving through that commercial town in Katsina State on his way to Sokoto that morning, and when he stopped to refuel, he said he saw a large group of men, young and old, huddled together in the harmattan cold to discuss the issue of the moment.

They were in mournful mood, Umar said; they were saying, in unison, that the very large Katsina State delegation to the PDP convention the previous night, which they watched live on television, had betrayed them by voting for President Goodluck Jonathan.

As the day wore on, the dozens of text messages and phone calls I received indicated that the mood of the Funtua men was the same in many parts of the North. Angry text messages described Governors Ibrahim Shema, Murtala Nyako, Sule Lamido, Aliyu Doma, Ibrahim Idris, Isa Yuguda, Danjuma Goje and Bukola Saraki in unprintable terms.

On the other hand, Governors Aliyu Wamakko, Mu’azu Babangida Aliyu, Sa'idu Usman Dakingari and Mamuda Aliyu Shinkafi, as well as Kano PDP leader Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, were hailed in the text messages as “true sons of the North” and “true heirs of the Sardauna.”

Well, well. Someone sent me a text message that day charging that the minority of Northern delegates that voted for Atiku Abubakar at the convention did so “on sentimental regional grounds.” That could be true. What will he however say of the Southern delegates, more than 99% of whom voted for fellow Southerner Dr. Goodluck Jonathan?

Anyway, I personally did not expect a different result from what obtained on Friday. Last Monday, I noted in this column that no PDP governor, no matter how unpopular, was defeated in the party’s governorship primaries, and even departing ones easily anointed their successors. How then could you expect the sitting president to be defeated in his own primaries?

Now, even though the idea that another Northerner should complete the hypothetical Yar’adua second term gained a lot of support in the North in the past one year, the idea of a Northern consensus candidate, such as was championed by the NPLF, was not greeted with a lot of enthusiasm. This was partly due to the aspirants that were thrown up--not the most popular fellows in the North--and partly because President Jonathan’s mild character made it difficult to turn him into an Obasanjo-like hate figure.

Still, the whole back and forth debate for and against “zoning” [actually, power rotation] since mid-last year put the Northern governors in quandary, forcing a majority of them to vote for “zoning” at a summit in Kaduna last July.

Governors’ opinion is very important here, because political events and processes in this country over the past decade have shown them to be the political force with the greatest ability to deliver delegate votes at primaries as well as to deliver general election votes, by hook or by crook.

Now, the President of the Federal Republic, even a powerful one such as Obasanjo, cannot really deliver delegates or popular votes on his own. However, since he controls the party’s national officers as well as other instruments such as the police, EFCC and [until recently] INEC, he can and does control the state governors. It looks like INEC is now gone from the president’s bag of electoral tricks, but he still has many other tools, including the Federal Treasury.

Ordinarily, given that self-interest directs a Nigerian politician’s actions, any state governor, especially a PDP member, would love to be in the President’s good books, even if the President is unpopular.

Until recently, governors did not care very much about popularity, believing as they did that factors other than popularity win elections here. However, last year’s changes at INEC, and the electoral commission’s new body language of apparent independence, has had a psychological impact on the governors. For the first time since 1999, they are beginning to think that perhaps the will of the people could prevail in April’s elections.

As such, a governor may want to support the president for his own political self-interest, but he must also look over his shoulder at public sentiment in his home state.

Southern governors have no problem in this regard, since there is a general sympathy for President Jonathan in their states, especially in the Niger Delta states. Their personal self-interest therefore coincides with their constituents’ wishes.

It was the Northern governors that faced and still face a dilemma, especially since the presidential elections will hold before the governors’ own elections in April. Many of them already face a serious challenge from General Muhammadu Buhari’s CPC. The last thing they want is to be accused of betraying the Northern consensus and the desire of the North to hold on to the presidency in 2011-15.

That, in addition to other factors, helps to explain the overwhelming vote for Atiku by the Sokoto, Kebbi, Zamfara, Niger and Kano delegates. Otherwise, Atiku Abubakar is not particularly popular in the old Sokoto area, due to statements he made during the 2003 campaign. He said in Gusau that he would not visit those states again if they did not throw out their ANPP governors [they didn’t, in 2003].

Atiku was not particularly popular in Kano State either, because he once said that the North East region was marginalised by the North West. However, Kano’s PDP chapter is in a tough 3-way race against CPC and the ruling ANPP. It therefore needs a lot of Federal support, but then, if the delegates had been seen to have voted for Jonathan at the convention, Kano’s volatile youths could have made life difficult for them.

Though Jonathan won all the other Northern states apart from these five, Atiku’s relatively good showing in Bauchi, Borno, Yobe, Kaduna, Adamawa and Taraba suggests that he would have won those states if not for the forceful intervention of governors and, in some cases, ministers.

The Northern governors’ fear, in summary, is that if the president were to lose the election on April 9, then most of them would go down to defeat the following week. Now, even if Jonathan wins the election but he loses in a particular state, that state’s PDP governor will be in deep trouble the following week.

Given the feelings across the North at the weekend, the possibility is high that Jonathan will not be able to carry many Northern states in the April elections.

I am saying this despite a text message that someone sent to me, saying there will be no Northern backlash because Jonathan won 14 of the 19 Northern states and FCT at the convention. Now, my dear friend, winning the PDP delegates is one thing; winning the popular vote is another thing altogether.

The Anenih-style manoeuvre at the convention that allocated ballot boxes to states [Jonathan's people say it was Atiku that invented it] clearly violated the spirit, if not the letter, of secret balloting. As a newspaper commentator, I am not complaining because it turned out to be a boon for political analysis.

Its main purpose, though, was probably to enable the Chief Fixer Tony Anenih to actualise his threat in Port Harcourt to “fish out” and punish anyone, or at least any governor who did not deliver his state to Jonathan.

That may have been Anenih’s purpose, but the manoeuvre has also backfired, at least in the North. It has now enabled the voters to fish out the governors and delegates that voted against the people’s wishes at the PDP convention and probably deal with them at the polls in April.

johndoe,

so south will win without northern vote? i pity your brains man.

please read below


The last Northerners standing Monday, 17 January 2011 00:07 Mahmud Jega mmjega@dailytrust.com, 08054102925
I was still dizzy with sleep at 11am last Friday, having stood up all night to report on the PDP convention, when my friend Umar phoned from Funtua. He was driving through that commercial town in Katsina State on his way to Sokoto that morning, and when he stopped to refuel, he said he saw a large group of men, young and old, huddled together in the harmattan cold to discuss the issue of the moment.

They were in mournful mood, Umar said; they were saying, in unison, that the very large Katsina State delegation to the PDP convention the previous night, which they watched live on television, had betrayed them by voting for President Goodluck Jonathan.

As the day wore on, the dozens of text messages and phone calls I received indicated that the mood of the Funtua men was the same in many parts of the North. Angry text messages described Governors Ibrahim Shema, Murtala Nyako, Sule Lamido, Aliyu Doma, Ibrahim Idris, Isa Yuguda, Danjuma Goje and Bukola Saraki in unprintable terms.

On the other hand, Governors Aliyu Wamakko, Mu’azu Babangida Aliyu, Sa'idu Usman Dakingari and Mamuda Aliyu Shinkafi, as well as Kano PDP leader Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, were hailed in the text messages as “true sons of the North” and “true heirs of the Sardauna.”

Well, well. Someone sent me a text message that day charging that the minority of Northern delegates that voted for Atiku Abubakar at the convention did so “on sentimental regional grounds.” That could be true. What will he however say of the Southern delegates, more than 99% of whom voted for fellow Southerner Dr. Goodluck Jonathan?

Anyway, I personally did not expect a different result from what obtained on Friday. Last Monday, I noted in this column that no PDP governor, no matter how unpopular, was defeated in the party’s governorship primaries, and even departing ones easily anointed their successors. How then could you expect the sitting president to be defeated in his own primaries?

Now, even though the idea that another Northerner should complete the hypothetical Yar’adua second term gained a lot of support in the North in the past one year, the idea of a Northern consensus candidate, such as was championed by the NPLF, was not greeted with a lot of enthusiasm. This was partly due to the aspirants that were thrown up--not the most popular fellows in the North--and partly because President Jonathan’s mild character made it difficult to turn him into an Obasanjo-like hate figure.

Still, the whole back and forth debate for and against “zoning” [actually, power rotation] since mid-last year put the Northern governors in quandary, forcing a majority of them to vote for “zoning” at a summit in Kaduna last July.

Governors’ opinion is very important here, because political events and processes in this country over the past decade have shown them to be the political force with the greatest ability to deliver delegate votes at primaries as well as to deliver general election votes, by hook or by crook.

Now, the President of the Federal Republic, even a powerful one such as Obasanjo, cannot really deliver delegates or popular votes on his own. However, since he controls the party’s national officers as well as other instruments such as the police, EFCC and [until recently] INEC, he can and does control the state governors. It looks like INEC is now gone from the president’s bag of electoral tricks, but he still has many other tools, including the Federal Treasury.

Ordinarily, given that self-interest directs a Nigerian politician’s actions, any state governor, especially a PDP member, would love to be in the President’s good books, even if the President is unpopular.

Until recently, governors did not care very much about popularity, believing as they did that factors other than popularity win elections here. However, last year’s changes at INEC, and the electoral commission’s new body language of apparent independence, has had a psychological impact on the governors. For the first time since 1999, they are beginning to think that perhaps the will of the people could prevail in April’s elections.

As such, a governor may want to support the president for his own political self-interest, but he must also look over his shoulder at public sentiment in his home state.

Southern governors have no problem in this regard, since there is a general sympathy for President Jonathan in their states, especially in the Niger Delta states. Their personal self-interest therefore coincides with their constituents’ wishes.

It was the Northern governors that faced and still face a dilemma, especially since the presidential elections will hold before the governors’ own elections in April. Many of them already face a serious challenge from General Muhammadu Buhari’s CPC. The last thing they want is to be accused of betraying the Northern consensus and the desire of the North to hold on to the presidency in 2011-15.

That, in addition to other factors, helps to explain the overwhelming vote for Atiku by the Sokoto, Kebbi, Zamfara, Niger and Kano delegates. Otherwise, Atiku Abubakar is not particularly popular in the old Sokoto area, due to statements he made during the 2003 campaign. He said in Gusau that he would not visit those states again if they did not throw out their ANPP governors [they didn’t, in 2003].

Atiku was not particularly popular in Kano State either, because he once said that the North East region was marginalised by the North West. However, Kano’s PDP chapter is in a tough 3-way race against CPC and the ruling ANPP. It therefore needs a lot of Federal support, but then, if the delegates had been seen to have voted for Jonathan at the convention, Kano’s volatile youths could have made life difficult for them.

Though Jonathan won all the other Northern states apart from these five, Atiku’s relatively good showing in Bauchi, Borno, Yobe, Kaduna, Adamawa and Taraba suggests that he would have won those states if not for the forceful intervention of governors and, in some cases, ministers.

The Northern governors’ fear, in summary, is that if the president were to lose the election on April 9, then most of them would go down to defeat the following week. Now, even if Jonathan wins the election but he loses in a particular state, that state’s PDP governor will be in deep trouble the following week.

Given the feelings across the North at the weekend, the possibility is high that Jonathan will not be able to carry many Northern states in the April elections.

I am saying this despite a text message that someone sent to me, saying there will be no Northern backlash because Jonathan won 14 of the 19 Northern states and FCT at the convention. Now, my dear friend, winning the PDP delegates is one thing; winning the popular vote is another thing altogether.

The Anenih-style manoeuvre at the convention that allocated ballot boxes to states [Jonathan's people say it was Atiku that invented it] clearly violated the spirit, if not the letter, of secret balloting. As a newspaper commentator, I am not complaining because it turned out to be a boon for political analysis.

Its main purpose, though, was probably to enable the Chief Fixer Tony Anenih to actualise his threat in Port Harcourt to “fish out” and punish anyone, or at least any governor who did not deliver his state to Jonathan.

That may have been Anenih’s purpose, but the manoeuvre has also backfired, at least in the North. It has now enabled the voters to fish out the governors and delegates that voted against the people’s wishes at the PDP convention and probably deal with them at the polls in April.

bisiaet !

you sound as if the report you just read was written today. it was in 2001! men, i laugh over people's gullibility

Johndoe

the problem with some Nigerians is we dont read but live on rumours, hearsay(the profession of no-jobbers). I am sure you have not read that article before you posted. read the article, criticise and give us your opinion. dont just throw it out like a lazy student!

I hope you guys will not be too lazy to read this. and watch the words in bold. Maybe we call Sanusi a Jihadist!!!!!!!!!!


BUHARISM: Economic Theory and Political Economy
By

Sanusi Lamido Sanusi

[LAGOS]

July 22,2002

(All views are strictly personal)

lamidos@hotmail.com



I have followed with more than a little interest the many contributions of commentators on the surprising decision of General Muhammadu Buhari to jump into the murky waters of Nigerian politics. Most of the regular writers in the Trust stable have had something to say on this. The political adviser to a late general has transferred his services to a living one. My dear friend and prolific veterinary doctor, who like me is allegedly an ideologue of Fulani supremacy, has taken a leading emir to the cleaners based on information of suspect authenticity. Another friend has contributed an articulate piece, which for those in the know gives a bird’s eye view into the thinking within the IBB camp. A young northern Turk has made several interventions and given novel expressions to what I call the PTF connection. Some readers and writers alike have done Buhari incalculable damage by viewing his politics through the narrow prism of ethnicity and religion, risking the alienation of whole sections of the Nigerian polity without whose votes their candidate cannot succeed.



With one or two notable exceptions, the various positions for or against Buhari have focused on his personality and continued to reveal a certain aversion or disdain for deeper and more thorough analysis of his regime. The reality, as noted by Tolstoy, is that too often history is erroneously reduced to single individuals. By losing sight of the multiplicity of individuals, events, actions and inactions (deliberate or otherwise) that combine to produce a set of historical circumstances, the historian is able to create a mythical figure and turn him into an everlasting hero (like Lincoln) or a villain (like Hitler). The same is true of Buhari. There seems to be a dangerous trend of competition between two opposing camps aimed at glorifying him beyond his wildest dreams or demonizing him beyond all justifiable limits, through a selective reading of history and opportunistic attribution and misattribution of responsibility. The discourse has been thus impoverished through personalization and we are no closer at the end of it than at the beginning to a divination of the exact locus or nexus of his administration in the flow of Nigerian history. This is what I seek to achieve in this intervention through an exposition of the theoretical underpinnings of the economic policy of Buharism and the necessary correlation between the economic decisions made and the concomitant legal and political superstructure.



Taxonomy


Let me begin by stating up front the principal thesis that I will propound. Within the schema of discourses on Nigerian history, the most accurate problematization of the Buhari government is one that views it strictly as a regime founded on the ideology of Bourgeois Nationalism. In this sense it was a true off-shoot of the regime of Murtala Mohammed. Buharism was a stage the logical outcome of whose machinations would have been a transcendence of what Marx called the stage of Primitive Accumulation in his Theories of Surplus Value. It was radical, not in the sense of being socialist or left wing, but in the sense of being a progressive move away from a political economy dominated by a parasitic and subservient elite to one in which a nationalist and productive class gains ascendancy. Buharism represented a two-way struggle: with Global capitalism (externally) and with its parasitic and unpatriotic agents and spokespersons (internally). The struggle against global capital as represented by the unholy trinity of the IMF, the World Bank and multilateral “trade” organizations as well that against the entrenched domestic class of contractors, commission agents and corrupt public officers were vicious and thus required extreme measures. Draconian policies were a necessary component of this struggle for transformation and this has been the case with all such epochs in history. The Meiji restoration in Japan was not conducted in a liberal environment. The Industrial Revolution in Europe and the great economic progress of the empires were not attained in the same liberal atmosphere of the 21st Century. The “tiger economies” of Asia such as Taiwan, South Korea, Indonesia and Thailand are not exactly models of democratic freedom. To this extent Buharism was a despotic regime but its despotism was historically determined, necessitated by the historical task of dismantling the structures of dependency and launching the nation on to a path beyond primitive accumulation. At his best Buhari may have been a Bonaparte or a Bismarck. At his worst he may have been a Hitler or a Mussolini. In either case Buharism drawn to its logical conclusion would have provided the bedrock for a new society and its overthrow marked a relapse, a step backward into that era from which we sought escape and in which, sadly for all of us we remain embedded and enslaved. I will now proceed with an elaboration of Buharism as a manifestation of bourgeois economics and political economy.





The Economic Theory of Buharism


One of the greatest myths spun around Buharism was that it lacked a sound basis in economic theory. As evidence of this, the regime that succeeded Buhari employed the services of economic “gurus” of “international standard” as the architects of fiscal and monetary policy. These were IMF and World Bank economists like Dr. Chu Okongwu and Dr Kalu Idika Kalu, as well as Mr SAP himself, Chief Olu Falae (an economist trained at Yale). At the time Buhari’s Finance Minister, Dr Onaolapo Soleye (who was not a trained economist) was debating with the pro-IMF lobby and explaining why the naira would not be devalued I was teaching economics at the Ahmadu Bello University. I had no doubt in my mind that the position of Buharism was based on a sound understanding of neo-classical economics and that those who were pushing for devaluation either did not understand their subject or were acting deliberately as agents of international capital in its rampage against all barriers set up by sovereign states to protect the integrity of the domestic economy. I still believe some of the key economic policy experts of the IBB administration were economic saboteurs who should be tried for treason. When the IMF recently owned up to “mistakes” in its policy prescriptions all patriotic economists saw it for what it was: A hypocritical statement of remorse after attaining set objectives. Let me explain, briefly, the economic theory underlying Buhari’s refusal to devalue the naira and then show how the policy merely served the interest of global capitalism and its domestic agents. This will be the principal building block of our taxonomy.



In brief, neo-classical theory holds that a country can, under certain conditions, expect to improve its Balance of Payments through devaluation of its currency. The IMF believed that given the pressure on the country’s foreign reserves and its adverse balance of payments situation Nigeria must devalue its currency. Buharism held otherwise and insisted that the conditions for improving Balance of Payments through devaluation did not exist and that there were alternate and superior approaches to the problem. Let me explain.



The first condition that must exist is that the price of every country’s export is denominated in its currency. If Nigeria’s exports are priced in naira and its imports from the US in dollars then, ceteris paribus, a devaluation of the naira makes imports dearer to Nigerians and makes Nigerian goods cheaper to Americans. This would then lead to an increase in the quantum of exports to the US and a reduction in the quantum of imports from there per unit of time. But while this is a necessary condition, it is not a sufficient one. For a positive change in the balance of payments the increase in the quantum of exports must be substantial enough to outweigh the revenue lost through a reduction in price. In other words the quantity exported must increase at a rate faster than the rate of decrease in its price. Similarly imports must fall faster than their price is increasing. Otherwise the nation may be devoting more of its wealth to importing less and receiving less of the wealth of foreigners for exporting more! In consequence, devaluation by a country whose exports and imports are not price elastic leads to the continued impoverishment of the nation vis a vis its trading partners. The second, and sufficient, condition is therefore that the combined price elasticity of demand for exports and imports must exceed unity.



The argument of Buharism, for which it was castigated by global capital and its domestic agents, was that these conditions did not exist clearly enough for Nigeria to take the gamble. First our major export, oil, was priced in dollars and the volume exported was determined ab initio by the quota set by OPEC, a cartel to which we belonged. Neither the price nor the volume of our exports would be affected by a devaluation of the naira. As for imports, indeed they would become dearer. However the manufacturing base depended on imported raw materials. Also many essential food items were imported. The demand for imports was therefore inelastic. We would end up spending more of our national income to import less, in the process fuelling inflation, creating excess capacity and unemployment, wiping out the production base of the real sector and causing hardship to the consumer through the erosion of real disposable incomes. Given the structural dislocations in income distribution in Nigeria the only groups who would benefit from devaluation were the rich parasites who had enough liquidity to continue with their conspicuous consumption, the large multi-national corporations with an unlimited access to loanable funds and the foreign “investor” who can now purchase our grossly cheapened and undervalued domestic assets. In one stroke we would wipe out the middle class, destroy indigenous manufacturing, undervalue the national wealth and create inflation and unemployment. This is standard economic theory and it is exactly what happened to Nigeria after it went through the hands of our IMF economists under IBB. The decision not to devalue set Buharism on a collision course with those who wanted devaluation and would profit from it-namely global capitalism, the so-called “captains of industry” (an acronym for the errand boys of multinational corporations), the nouveaux-riches parasites who had naira and dollars waiting to be spent, the rump elements of feudalism and so on. Buharism therefore was a crisis in the dominant class, a fracturing of its members into a patriotic, nationalist group and a dependent, parasitic and corrupt one. It was not a struggle between classes but within the same class. A victory for Buharism would be a victory for the more progressive elements of the national bourgeoisie. Unfortunately the fifth columnists within the military establishment were allied to the backward and retrogressive elements and succeeded in defeating Buharism before it took firm root. But I digress.



Having decided not to devalue or to rush into privatization and liberalization Buharism still faced an economic crisis it must address. There was pressure on foreign reserves, mounting foreign debt and a Balance of Payments crisis. Clearly the demand for foreign exchange outstripped its supply. The government therefore adopted demand management measures. The basic principle was that we did not really need all that we imported and if we could ensure that our scarce foreign exchange was only allocated to what we really needed we would be able to pay our debts and lay the foundations for economic stability. But this line of action also has its drawbacks.



First, there are political costs to be borne in terms of opposition from those who feel unfairly excluded from the allocation process and who do not share the government’s sense of priorities. Muslims for example cursed Buhari’s government for restricting the number of pilgrims in order to conserve foreign exchange.

Second, in all attempts to manage demand through quotas and quantitative restrictions there is room for abuse because there is always the incentive of a premium to be earned through circumvention of due process. Import licenses become “hot cake” and the black market for foreign exchange highly lucrative. This policy can only succeed if backed by strong deterrent laws and strict and enforcible exchange rules. Again it is trite micro-economic theory that where price is fixed below equilibrium the market is only cleared through quotas and the potential exists for round tripping as there will be a minority willing and able to offer a very high price for the “artificially scarce” product. So again we see that the harsh exchange control and economic sabotage laws of Buharism were a necessary and logical fallout of its economic theory.



Conclusion


I have tried to show in this intervention what I consider to be the principal building blocks of the military government of Muhammadu Buhari and the logical connection between its ideology, its economic theory and the legal and political superstructure that characterized it. My objective is to raise the intellectual profile of discourse beyond its present focus on personalities by letting readers see the intricate links between disparate and seemingly unrelated aspects of that government, thus contextualizing the actions of Buharism in its specific historical and ideological milieu. I have tried to review its treatment of politicians as part of a general struggle against primitive accumulation and its harsh laws on exchange and economic crimes as a necessary fallout of economic policy options. Similarly its treatment of drug pushers reflected the patriotic zeal of a bourgeois nationalist establishment.



As happens in all such cases a number of innocent people become victims of draconian laws, such as a few honest leaders like Shehu Shagari and Balarabe Musa who were improperly detained. The reality however is that many of those claiming to be victims today were looters who deserved to go to jail but who would like to hide under the cover of a few glaring errors. The failure of key members of the Buhari administration to tender public and unreserved apology to those who may have been improperly detained has not helped matters in this regard.



This raises a question I have often been asked. Do I support Buhari’s decision to contest for the presidency of Nigeria? My answer is no. And I will explain.



First, I believe Buhari played a creditable role in a particular historical epoch but like Tolstoy and Marx I do not believe he can re-enact that role at will. Men do not make history exactly as they please but, as Marx wrote in the 18th Brumaire, “in circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past.” Muhammadu Buhari as a military general had more room for manoevre than he can ever hope for in Nigerian Politics.



Second, I am convinced that the situation of Nigeria and its elite today is worse than it was in 1983.Compared to the politicians who populate the PDP, ANPP and AD today, second republic politicians were angels. Buhari waged a battle against second republic politicians, but he is joining this generation. Anyone who rides a tiger ends up in its belly and one man cannot change the system from within. A number of those Buhari jailed for theft later became ministers and many of those who hold key offices in all tiers of government and the legislature were made by the very system he sought to destroy. My view is that Nigeria needs people like Buhari in politics but not to contest elections. Buhari should be in politics to develop Civil Society and strengthen the conscience of the nation. He should try to develop many Buharis who will continue to challenge the elements that have hijacked the nation.



Third, I do not think Nigerians today are ready for Buhari. Everywhere you turn you see thieves who have amassed wealth in the last four years, be they legislators, Local Government chairmen and councilors, or governors and ministers. But these are the heroes in their societies. They are the religious leaders and ethnic champions and Nigerians, especially northerners, will castigate and discredit anyone who challenges them. Unless we start by educating our people and changing their value system, people like Buhari will remain the victims of their own love for Nigeria.



Fourth, and on a lighter note, I am opposed to recycled material. In a nation of 120million people we can do better than restrict our leadership to a small group. I think Buhari, Babangida and yes Obasanjo should simply allow others try their hand instead of believing they have the monopoly of wisdom.



Having said all this let me conclude by saying that if Buhari gets a nomination he will have my vote (for what it is worth). I will vote for him not, like some have averred, because he is a northerner and a Muslim or because I think his candidacy is good for the north and Islam; I will vote for him not because I think he will make a good democrat or that he was not a dictator. I will vote for Buhari as a Nigerian for a leader who restored my pride and dignity and my belief in the motherland. I will vote for the man who made it undesirable for the “Andrews” to “check out” instead of staying to change Nigeria. I will vote for Buhari to say thank you for the world view of Buharism, a truly nationalist ideology for all Nigerians. I do not know if Buhari is still a nationalist or a closet bigot and fanatic, or if he was the spirit and not just the face of Buharism. My vote for him is not based on a divination of what he is or may be, but a celebration of what his government was and what it gave to the nation.

@Mobinga

I guess he stole the money from your father's house. And your name sound like those thieves, omar bongo, mobutu, banda.

Jakumo,

Your gods are not even living things, so they cant even qualify as a snake. idiot! I wonder how people like this got access to the internet. slowpoke.

Your demons can't bite man, so Buhari will forever safe, at 69 he still looks fresh and active. what your grandfathers cannot do, you can't.

Jakumo

which demons? to hell with you and your demons. Mad man! Your use of english words speaks of psycho. Crazy pagan serving carved images, worse than ayotalloh Khumeini.

One of the best articles I have read in recent times. And I still felt the Nigerian pride while reading this. my best part of the article is below:

Muslims for example cursed Buhari’s government for restricting the number of pilgrims in order to conserve foreign exchange

This question drives my passion to get PDP out of power. Are we saying as a nation, we can only stick to PDP in government, despite 12 years of failed leadership? is democracy worth our time if we can't say no to a party and bring up another?


As long as we endorse a party after every failed term, we give them the reassurance that we support what they do.

Come to think of it, the 'TOTAL' in the subject matter is even in inverted commas! what does this tell you? It is assumed! not a fact, not the truth!

And we have dozens of contributors arguing, when Beaf's subject line is even fraudulent!

thread of thieves like jonathan. i am out of here!

Jarus, Aisha2.


We need to take this off front page. it is too bad at this age for us to be smearing the image of this man on hearsay. And I know the pro-jonathan guys sees this as the only falsehood they can use to kill this man's noble credentials. The more we continue to overflog this, the more other religions are showing how hatred for Islam lives in their hearts! It is sickening, and BEAF & JAKUMO are the arrowheads of this useless, campaign that can give them no joy.

IKAY88, the anti-Buhari people will never believe Buhari's position even if he stands in front them and explains his position. they are worse, unrepentant religious bigots!

@Frosbell,

so what is the difference between police force & military? Buhari has been out of military for 15 years, Ribadu like 3 yrs ago. who has blended well in civilian society ever since? anyway i still love your analyis. i like Ribadu, but too restless and aggressive for me at this point.

@Beaf

Same Ribadu that said they checked NPA records and nobody (including Bode George) was indicted? same dirty records that nailed the man under Farida Waziri?

@Beaf

You have remained hopeless and clueless in defending you candidate despite all allegations against him. All you can do is to keep maligning Buhari, leaving your candidate, GEJ to wallow in his ballesssness. you are such an insincere debater and deceiving contributor like your sponsor GEJ.

Gen Buhari!

Welcome, I have been holding fort for you as the team lead for Buhari Team in another thread. In your absence, we were able to win a soul to our side, Frosbell.

All others remain grounded in their christian and ogun fundamentalism.

@ Sapeleguy,

You just dont understand that without Buhari, Idiagbon was nobody. it takes leadership to allow your deputy to be the face of your government, something obj and yaradua could not accept!

this beaf guy is just insane! not surprised though, all GEJ supporters, including professors, have lost their senses to the power of incumbency and Gej money

You trying to tag Buhari a thief? Even the generations before you, including those that had power to jail, could not find him a thief.

Defend you guy now, If you keep quiet on all these GEJ blunders, your silence means you admit!

@ikay88

thanks, read the article before. good enough to reinforce my stand on him


@yeswecan,

I hope this religious bigotry of yours will get you to heaven!

@beaf
could have at least checked the above before making stupeed comments in support of a religious fanatic. It is easy to conclude that under a Buhari govt, Boko haram would become yesterdays joke as Nigeria will become a full fledged terrorist state, led by a man with disregard for rule of law and anything that isn't on the fanatical religious right wing.


Now I know how daft you are. So Nigerian can still be a terrorist state, with all the complexities. i doubt if you are a Nigerian.

Why dont you defend your man misdeeds as clearly stated. I have said Buhari made some mistakes and is wiser now, i have challenged and even won someone on this thread to our side, that he is not a fundamentalist. can you just defend GEJ and let us see who you can convert to your side? You have really gone paranoid with your religious beliefs!

@kobojunkie,

Nice analysis. you really took your time to nail that!


By the way, you have not told us your candidate, or maybe i have not seen the thread contribution on that.

@ALL

If you are either a Buhari or Ribadu supporter, we should not be arguing since CPC and ACN alliance are still open (CPC represented Buhari at the ACN convention. what we should be discussing is how the partnership will work out, considering Buhari's popularity in the North (19 million votes in 2 elections from that part) and Ribadu's popularity in the west.

@beaf

why you dey rant? Just prove that your guy has balls to fight corruption. we that are supporting Ribadu and Buhari obviously are not sponsored because people who are not in power do not attract support.

this is where you got it wrong. when did you start noticing Jonathan? deputy gov, gov, vee pee. Jonathan became popular when he became president and that goes for ibb, obj, ibb, abacha -2million man match!

People who support inept human beings in power are always suspected to be state-sponsored, and I suspect you.

Lagosboy,

Thanks for joining me in congratulating Frosbel. We are on track!

@Beaf'

I have read your link article by levi? do you think deeply after reading an article. Decree 4 was a law meant for a people that had lost hope in values, never believed in them. Do you know that information censorship is what has kept china together? Nigeria had that time needed to be reformed, and what do you do to a deranged, drug addict. you take him to an isolated rehab centre, closed to the world and get him reformed. when done, you introduce him back to the world. this is what Jerry Rawlings did with Ghana, communist still does it with china, and this was what Buhari intended doing then, not now. the scenarios have changed!

PDP primaries free and fair? after your guy has exchanged automatic tickets for corrupt governors for their delegates votes. Supports Akala of all people, sylva a failure in bayelsa. did you hear the announcement that a brown envelope containing dollars was found on the ground? $7000 to each delegate? I believe this because your was so daft as to offer Tunde Bakare and Odumakin of all people $50000 in aso rock. your guy has proved that he can give away anything including his balls for his ambition. we shall see in april

And Jonathan will fight corruption? Beaf, your guys is worse than Ribadu or Buhari, he is corrupt, easily influenced, does not have balls of his own. at this Buhari and Ribadu has proven that they can go for the kill. What about your man, only Ibori since May last year.

Fellow NLanders.

I do admire Nuhu Ribadu. he really has the drive for anti-corruption, but he did it in a careless manner just the way Buhari did in 1983 to '85. But Ribadu was not the problem, it was the institution and the structure that did not allow him to be independent of Obasanjo. Reminds me of the law of independent counsel which produced Kenneth Star, a man who became more powerful than the american president. Clinton did mention it in his book that it is his greatest regret to have signed that bill that gave rise to that role. but where is that law and that position of independent counsel today? thrown into the trashcan! we need something close to that bill that will make EFCC absolutely independent but now powerful than the positon of President.

Having said that, Buhari still remains my best option because Ribadu will fight corruption with reckless abandon- the way he talks displays this. He has not learnt from his mistakes, his excesses in riding a car over his oga, promoting impeachment of Alams & dariye with lawmakers that did not form a quorun, and talking of Tinubu being the most corrupt governor whose corruption is of international dimension, and exonerationg Bode George of a crime that still ended up jailing him under Yar'Adua Government. If Ribadu wins the presidential election on his first attempt, he will reinforce these mistakes as just. Does Ribadu knows how to build infrastructures? where is the experience? only in crime fighting and anti-corruption? Dora could as well do be a better president as she was completely blameless in tackling corruption in NAFDAC. Buhari on the other hand displayed same excesses in his own time as military head of state, but has grown wiser, and has shown his love for democracy by consistently contesting for president in 2 elections, challenging rigging in court even when his party then decided to pull out - he attended every single session of the court and Yar adua was lucky with a 3-2 split vote. A military background, but he has proven that a gun used in 1983 is not fit for these times, hence his achievable feats at the courts. Anti-corruption will remain his greatest drive, and it will not be with the same youthful exuberance he used in 1983. People say generational shift and i refuse to trust my generation - 30s to 50's - who have never tasted power. the few that have done have faltered, including Ribadu himself. power intoxicates and nigerian power even gets you drunk. that is why i go with a Buhari, who has seen it all. at 69, he has seen everything that could make him steal money, yet he remains a modest man whose means can be easily traced. at least, i have not seen any newspaper report or even rumour telling me he owns this company, owns this estate, owns a fleet of cars, has a house in Abuja. Someone who was Minister of Petroleum, NNPC chairman, governor, PTF chairman. where are his contemporaries. IBB is swimming in money, obj is swimming in money, danjuma has 2 oil wells he is confused over. List all the generals of his time, and you will see this man stand out

This is what I want, a tested integrity, not an untested one that can fall to the excess of Aso Rock power. 4 years for this man, and Ribadu can take over, after having been a governor, a senator, learning the robes.


Beaf, Please defend this: Jonathan is not an option - refused to arrest Uduaghan (when removed by court) who was mentioned in the case that jailed ibori'S wife in UK, gave akala, sylva of all people automatic tickets, is frollicking with Anenih who threatened delegates from SOUTH SOUTH in the presence of GEJ, is backed by Obasanjo, offered SNG $50,000 transport money in Aso Rock, spend NGN 10 billion on October 1 celebration, continue to grapple with security challenges Jos and even Abuja, makes confusing statements on critical national matters, blatantly denied zoning when he was part of the arrangement, has a wife who is using her NGO to fund her husbands' campaign (backed with facts i can't put on this thread), agreed for speaker and senate president to buy their official residence, made a useless Gbenga Daniel a campaign coordinator, set up more federal universities when the ones we have have not been fully built to their capacity in almost average 20 years of creation. released a senate leader on murder charges in less than 24 hrs and flew him on a chartered plane from ibadan to abuja because disgruntled national assemblies threatened to give their votes to atiku if he does do so. was completely dumbfounded and clueless on what to do on ATIKU's attacking speech and had to consult david mark, bankole, and obasanjo in the full glare of television cameras before making his own, drab, speech. this man has no balls!

yeswecan,

can you trust yourself, the new generation if you taste power? i am sure you will steal more money than Obj, IBB, and abacha combined.

@beaf

Keep posting lies. Saraki investigated! calling that name kills your position. NPN senate leader? the Leader of the corrupt version of the Senate NPN of those days. it's like saying Omisore tried Abacha for killing Kudirat! look for another thing to say. read between the lines of every article you read and make constructive conclusion my friend.

Fellow NLanders.

I do admire Nuhu Ribadu. he really has the drive for anti-corruption, but he did it in a careless manner just the way Buhari did in 1983 to '85. But Ribadu was not the problem, it was the institution and the structure that did not allow him to be independent of Obasanjo. Reminds me of the law of independent counsel which produced Kenneth Star, a man who became more powerful than the american president. Clinton did mention it in his book that it is his greatest regret to have signed that bill that gave rise to that role. but where is that law and that position of independent counsel today? thrown into the trashcan! we need something close to that bill that will make EFCC absolutely independent but now powerful than the positon of President.

Having said that, Buhari still remains my best option because Ribadu will fight corruption with reckless abandon- the way he talks displays this. He has not learnt from his mistakes, his excesses in riding a car over his oga, promoting impeachment of Alams & dariye with lawmakers that did not form a quorun, and talking of Tinubu being the most corrupt governor whose corruption is of international dimension, and exonerationg Bode George of a crime that still ended up jailing him under Yar'Adua Government. If Ribadu wins the presidential election on his first attempt, he will reinforce these mistakes as just. Does Ribadu knows how to build infrastructures? where is the experience? only in crime fighting and anti-corruption? Dora could as well do be a better president as she was completely blameless in tackling corruption in NAFDAC. Buhari on the other hand displayed same excesses in his own time as military head of state, but has grown wiser, and has shown his love for democracy by consistently contesting for president in 2 elections, challenging rigging in court even when his party then decided to pull out - he attended every single session of the court and Yar adua was lucky with a 3-2 split vote. A military background, but he has proven that a gun used in 1983 is not fit for these times, hence his achievable feats at the courts. Anti-corruption will remain his greatest drive, and it will not be with the same youthful exuberance he used in 1983. People say generational shift and i refuse to trust my generation - 30s to 50's - who have never tasted power. the few that have done have faltered, including Ribadu himself. power intoxicates and nigerian power even gets you drunk. that is why i go with a Buhari, who has seen it all. at 69, he has seen everything that could make him steal money, yet he remains a modest man whose means can be easily traced. at least, i have not seen any newspaper report or even rumour telling me he owns this company, owns this estate, owns a fleet of cars, has a house in Abuja. Someone who was Minister of Petroleum, NNPC chairman, governor, PTF chairman. where are his contemporaries. IBB is swimming in money, obj is swimming in money, danjuma has 2 oil wells he is confused over. List all the generals of his time, and you will see this man stand out

This is what I want, a tested integrity, not an untested one that can fall to the excess of Aso Rock power. 4 years for this man, and Ribadu can take over, after having been a governor, a senator, learning the robes.


&Marvix,

Please defend this: Jonathan is not an option - refused to arrest Uduaghan (when removed by court) who was mentioned in the case that jailed ibori'S wife in UK, gave akala, sylva of all people automatic tickets, is frollicking with Anenih who threatened delegates from SOUTH SOUTH in the presence of GEJ, is backed by Obasanjo, offered SNG $50,000 transport money in Aso Rock, spend NGN 10 billion on October 1 celebration, continue to grapple with security challenges Jos and even Abuja, makes confusing statements on critical national matters, blatantly denied zoning when he was part of the arrangement, has a wife who is using her NGO to fund her husbands' campaign (backed with facts i can't put on this thread), agreed for speaker and senate president to buy their official residence, made a useless Gbenga Daniel a campaign coordinator, set up more federal universities when the ones we have have not been fully built to their capacity in almost average 20 years of creation. released a senate leader on murder charges in less than 24 hrs and flew him on a chartered plane from ibadan to abuja because disgruntled national assemblies threatened to give their votes to atiku if he does do so. was completely dumbfounded and clueless on what to do on ATIKU's attacking speech and had to consult david mark, bankole, and obasanjo in the full glare of television cameras before making his own, drab, speech. this man has no balls!

thanks for the honour, Jarus! I am at your service. where dem dey?

@gangar

dont understand you. so where is it stated that sharia must be implemented on non-muslims?

@yeswecan

Ribadu is my second option, but he will commit same mistakes Buhari committed in 1983, a young,incorruptible man who will go to the extreme fight corruption. i'll rather prefer the older version of him. Old men, including women like Golda Mier of Israel did well as presidents!

@Truly

I had wanted to reply these guys, but your response are good enough.

But may I add:

Buhari was NNPC chairman and Minister of Petroleum when all the major refineries in this country were built- check records

What PTF achieved in 4years in terms of infrastructural development (I know so many roads in the southwest that still carry the PTF sign) cannot be rivalled by obasanjo's 8 year rule (Anenih).

2.8 billion and PTF - where is the report indicting him - never add of one.

These guys are just disgusting. Now I posted his interview on Sharia, which was their major focus before, now they are coming from the angle that can never hold water. even Obasanjo and the elites couldn't hold him on that