The Good Thing about Buhari vs Atiku
In October 1987, the late Sheikh Abubakar Mohammad Gumi, a well-respected Islamic cleric, granted an explosive interview to the now-rested Quality magazine. It was on Gen. Ibrahim Babangida’s transition to civil rule programme. Gumi said: “The two-party system of government will not be South against North but Islam against Christianity. Once you are a Moslem, you cannot accept to choose a non-Moslem to be your leader. If Christians do not accept Moslems as their leader, then we have to divide the country. Nigerian unity is to try to convert Christians and non-Moslems (to Islam) until the other religions become minority and they will not affect our society.”
Who says God does not have a sense of humour? Although Gumi had died before the June 12 election of 1993, the two-party duel was indeed Muslim vs Muslim Chief MKO Abiola vs Alhaji Bashir Tofa. It was not the Islam vs Christianity confrontation that Gumi predicted. Nigerians voted for Abiola, who chose a fellow North vs South. Fulani vs Yoruba. The perfect Muslim as his running mate. The election was nightmare scenario. The election itself was preceded annulled, but the ultimate irony was that the by controversies over the introduction of the contest that eventually produced a civilian criminal jurisdiction of Sharia in 12 northern president in 1999 was Christian vs Christian Chief states. Obasanjo kicked against it, saying it was Olusegun Obasanjo vs Chief Olu Falae. And it unconstitutional. Buhari supported it, saying it was Northern Muslims that masterminded it! was the right of every Muslim. While Buhari’s There is something about Nigerians that Gumi stand endeared him to most northern Muslims, did not know. Obasanjo lost ground in the north, although this
Maybe I shouldn’t be saying this, but I am was compounded by the quest for power to relieved that the 2019 presidential election is return to the region. Obasanjo was accused of going to be a straight fight between President not honouring a gentleman’s agreement to do Muhammadu Buhari and former Vice-President only one term in office. Atiku Abubakar. This will be one presidential While Obasanjo lost the core northern states he election that cannot be easily framed along the had won comfortably in 1999 — notably Kano, toxic ethnic and religious lines. By that, I mean Bauchi, Borno and Gombe — Buhari did not the template of Muslim vs Christian and North score 25% in any of the 17 southern states. Buhari vs South sentiments. In the 2003, 2011 and 2015 was portrayed as an agent of “Islamisation” and elections, religion and ethnicity were well played stigmatised in the south, especially as he was up and this severely hurt nation-building. I am quoted in 2001 as saying Muslims should not particularly of the view that we are yet to recover vote for non-Muslims. No matter how many from the bitter power struggles since 2011. It times he denied this, it stuck. The irony, though, deeply injured “peace and unity” and we are is that the more he was hated in the south on definitely yet to heal. the account of his Sharia stand, the more he
Hopefully, the 2019 match-up between Buhari was loved by the northern masses. He won in and Atiku will mellow things. They are both 10 of the 12 Sharia states. Meanwhile, up north, northerners, Muslims and Fulani. We can reasonably Obasanjo was demarketed as an “arne” — an conclude that the ethno-religious brigade will be infidel. Things were that bad. idle for the most part. They won’t be completely Thankfully, the 2007 election was between jobless, of course. There will always be something two sons of Katsina state, Alhaji Umaru Musa for them to tweak and manipulate to whip up Yar’Adua and Buhari, as well as Atiku. Same bigotry and sectionalism, but it will be a tough ethnic group, same religion, same region. There job for them compared to the easy ride they had were no divisive sentiments to be summoned for in 2011 and 2015 when the battles were between political service. Unfortunately, Yar’Adua, who President Goodluck Jonathan, a southern Christian, won the controversial election, died in 2010. and President Buhari, a northern Muslim. It is Power was coming back to the south so soon. unfortunate we still discuss Nigeria in primordial Our fault lines were automatically activated both terms but that is the way we are. within and without the ruling PDP. There was a
Apart from the 1999 and 2007 elections, ethnomovement for “a northern consensus candidate” religious champions have always had a field day to displace Jonathan who had stepped up from during presidential electioneering. There was no his position as VP after Yar’Adua’s death. The job for them in 1999 when it was an all-Christian, polity was irrevocably poisoned and has remained all-Yoruba contest between Obasanjo and Falae. so since then. It was easier to manage our fault lines that way, Although Jonathan won the 2011 election even though the undertone was not completely against Buhari (who ran on the platform of absent. Obasanjo was vigorously portrayed as the the Congress for Progressive Change, now imposed candidate of the northern “oligarchy”; part of APC), the aftermath was devastating. some said the north wanted to keep power by His backers in the north, such as Governors proxy. Falae was, in turn, cast as the “Afenifere Murtala Nyako (Adamawa) and Sule Lamido candidate”. I can live with that, to be honest. I (Jigawa), were dubbed “reverends” and “pastors” am not as naïve as to think Nigeria would be for supporting an “arne”. This set the tone for free of ethnic prejudice at any point, but it can a troubled tenure, not helped in any way by be managed. Jonathan’s own failings as a leader. I would not
The 2003 election was a different ball game — it go into the detail of the post-election violence and was Buhari vs Obasanjo. Muslim vs Christian. all the conspiracy theories around Boko Haram
THISDAY Newspapers Limited. as well as the ensuing weaponisation of religion ahead of 2015. In fact, CAN virtually became a political party.
This explains my relief that in 2019, religious and ethnic politicking would be not be as dominant as it used to be. I still, nonetheless, expect plenty dirty fireworks — there will be a lot of talk about Atiku and corruption as well as Buhari and cronyism. I would prefer this — all day long — to the weaponisation of ethno-religious sentiments. There could be sentiments in the south over where the running mates of the two leading parties come from. But I can live with the Igbo/ Yoruba rivalry. It is usually expressed in words rather than in bloodshed. There would also be arguments that Atiku’s north-east zone has not produced a president since 1966. That’s fine. It’s not an explosive.
If the 2019 presidential election goes well without major sectionalist incidents, it may offer us an insight into another political way of managing our ethnic and religious differences in a less harmful way. It could be that when the two big parties field like-for-like candidates, there would be less ethnic rancour and less of the spill-over effects that often harm “peace and unity”. When Jonathan won the duel with Buhari in 2011, he never knew peace from some parts of the country until he lost power in 2015. And since Buhari won the rematch in 2015, he has not known peace from some parts of the country. I believe this tendency gravely hampers Nigeria’s march to development.
How does this hamper our progress? Many policies, decisions and actions are opposed not on the basis of their merit, or lack of it, but purely out of politically induced ethno-religious resentment. Opponents do and say everything to pull down the government out of resentment. Jonathan suffered this for five years. Buhari has been suffering it too. It is destabilising. That is why I am thinking that 2019 will offer a clean slate from which we can start to engage more constructively with government across all the fault lines, since neither north nor south, Muslims nor Christians would consider themselves losers this time around. At least until 2023.
My analysis may sound simplistic but it’s an experiment worth observing. It may help us identify a vital strategy for the political management of our diversity. An understanding among the political class that the big parties should be zoning their presidential slots to the same region may remove a major stumbling block to national cohesion. Sometimes, big problems are solved by small gestures. It is from our history, practice and experience that we can design what works best for us. We cannot even begin to talk about building a virile nation when we live in a perpetual state of mutual suspicion, ethno-religious acrimony and acidic antagonism. I am highly interested in this experiment.
I must emphasise this as I conclude. We can’t always run away from our nightmare. It is practically impossible to get the leading parties to bring their candidates from same zones all the time. I know that. The fact that we have a federal character system should ordinarily banish fears of domination and marginalisation. We must achieve a balance so that nobody feels excluded from the federal table. Most importantly, we ultimately see through the devices of the identity entrepreneurs. In the end, it is always about class interests, not identity or development. Nevertheless, , I am ready to observe proceedings from 2019 to 2023 and study the impact on our progress as a nation.