By ‘Fisayo Soyombo
Oby Ezekwesili, Kingsley Moghalu
and Fela Durotoye must have woken up on Sunday morning feeling a measure of
resentment towards Nigerians. Quite thanklessly for them, these are the same Nigerians
whose votes they seek.
At Saturday night’s presidential
debate, Ezekwesili spoke about her determination to lift 80 million Nigerians
out of poverty. She talked about removing barriers in the way of service-sector
operators, as well as disrupting the current patterns of Nigerian politics and
breaking the country’s perpetual cycle of leadership deficit. Moghalu harped on
the importance of focusing on a holistic strategy for expanding small business
and employment opportunities in the rural areas, and of electing a President
who understands the economy. With the exception of “I want a Nigeria where the
son of nobody can become somebody without the help of anybody”, which made him
sound like a motivational speaker rather than a presidential material, Durotoye
made some interesting propositions, too, such as creating 30 millions jobs by
investing heavily in agriculture, housing and road construction.
Yet, more than 24 hours after the
debate, the major conversations have been about the absentees — President
Muhammadu Buhari and Atiku Abubakar — rather than the performance of the trio.
How riled Ezekwesili, Moghalu and Durotoye must be — even if they won’t admit
it — that their presence at the debate is being undermined by the relentless
talk about the absentees. This development has clear implications; I will come
back to that.
On the back of an error-strewn
showing at APC campaign rallies all week, we have to extol the political
innocence of anyone who expected Buhari to turn up at Saturday’s debate. In
Kogi on Wednesday, Buhari slipped; were it not for the vigilant hands of his
entourage, we might have had to deal with the ugly sight of our President sprawling
on the floor. Apart from physically slipping, Buhari also made a slip of the
tongue, claiming to have assumed office on May 19, 2015 whereas it was May 29.
In Kaduna on Friday, he tripped; had a chair not be somewhere in sight, the
President might have ended up on the deck. On Thursday in Delta, Buhari
bizarrely described Great Ogboru, the APC governorship candidate, as the
“governortorial candidate” — a phenomenal linguistic invention he made after
first calling Ogboru “presidential candidate” and subsequently “senatorial
candidate”. The same day, he also mixed up the dates he was Petroleum Minister,
giving it as 1978-79 instead of 1976-78. Put in the mix his underwhelming
showing at Wednesday’s town-hall interaction during which Vice President Yemi
Osinbajo was largely his saving grace, and there was no way Buhari would be
debating. His advisers who shielded him from the debate did their job well.
Their selfish gain, though, is Nigeria’s loss. We will come back to this, too.
Conversely, Atiku’s 59th-minute-of-the-eleventh-hour
withdrawal is a spectacular own goal — not so much because of the missed
opportunity but because of the unintended exposure of the egotistical agenda
oiling the electioneering machinery. Perhaps Atiku didn’t realise it, he didn’t
necessarily need Buhari at that debate. The President may be his biggest
obstacle to the presidency but the debate was no referendum on the Buhari
administration. It was a forum for him to sell himself to the Nigerian
electorate — to again defend himself against his popular perception as corrupt,
his US trip and, more importantly, his plans for creating jobs, revitalising
the economy and restructuring the country, three important anchors of his
campaign. Anyone who has ever heard Atiku speak extempore will agree that he
has never been found wanting in communicating his agenda for Nigeria. On
Saturday, he proved even he had underestimated himself. Big, big missed
opportunity.
Atiku’s explanation of the
walkout has left a bitter taste in all our mouths. His explanation of coming
for a “presidential debate, not a candidacy debate”, and his allusions to
Buhari’s unavailability to defend himself, is self-damaging. Apparently, Atiku
came for a presidency debate, not a presidential debate. Atiku considers Buhari’s
absence “a slight on ALL of us and our democracy” but doesn’t think his own
absence carries exactly the same significance? In any case, it is hypocritical
of him to censure Buhari for giving us the middle finger on debate day.
Olusegun Obasanjo, whose running mate he was, did not debate in 1999. Atiku is
not on record anywhere to have publicly condemned it, or to have persuaded him
otherwise in private. Buhari refused to debate in 2015 yet Atiku was one of his
biggest backers; had Buhari given him front-line recognition in his government
after his ascent to power, perhaps Atiku would be here today defending a
debate-shy Buhari for 2019. But karma can be vicious, and Atiku can have no
complaints.
Atiku has since clarified that
his only condition for attending a debate is Buhari’s attendance. There is no
denying that Atiku has always wanted to be President. He tried in 1992 without
luck; he has tried again every election season since 2007. But his current
attempt is evidently laced with vendetta; it is his chance to avenge his
consignment to political oblivion by a man whose presidency he immensely
contributed to securing. Vendetta and ego are two of the potentially numerous
unedifying sub-themes of the Atiku presidential aspiration.
Coming back to Buhari, this isn’t
the first time an incumbent President will be shunning the debate. Umaru Musa
Yar’Adua skipped it in 2007; Goodluck Jonathan skipped the first of the two
major debates in 2011 (leaving the contenders to boycott the second, which he
participated in alone). But this is the time we must be most worried — because
Buhari’s absence wasn’t completely occasioned by arrogance, but also by
senility and the necessity to avoid a calamity. A President who can’t sit at a
two-hour debate without embarrassing himself cannot last another four years
without shaming us all.
The presidential candidates of
the alternate political parties, with whom I kicked off this conversation, must
be wondering why their performances have assumed lesser significance to the absence
of ‘Butiku’, as coined by Ezekwesili. The answer is simple: 2019 is still about
PDP and APC. It won’t continue forever, hopefully, but they have a say in how
quickly the PDP-APC hegemony will be broken. May 29, 2019 may not witness the
swearing in of a Moghalu, Ezekwesili or Durotoye as President, but not long
after, we will know if they’re opportunistic presidential aspirants or they’re
truly here to stay. We will know if, by 2023, these alternate parties would
have recognised the need to fuse into a third force to be represented by only
one but supported by all of them. We will see if they dismember their campaign
teams or expand them over the next four years to build that structure that will
count against them at the polls next month.
I have said it before and I will
restate it: 2019 is already a lost opportunity for Nigeria. A second Buhari
presidency is very likely, Yet Buhari, no matter how well-intentioned he is, is
no longer in charge of even his own cabinet, much less the country. His coming
back, if it happens, will be catastrophic. An Atiku presidency remains a
probability; if it happens, the PDP looters already hovering over him will
spearhead it. One potential consequence is that our treasury will be afflicted
by kwashiorkor. And the alternate parties? Their debate can’t even overshadow
the absentees — how do they hope to win?
Click to signup for FREE news updates, latest information and hottest gists everyday
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com