Undertow

RIVERS State governor Nyesom Wike is as colourful as the suspended chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Adams Oshiomhole.

Both are hyperbolic, sometimes hysterical, too instinctive, love to speak on all issues, no matter how mundane or provocative, and are regarded as fearless and indiscriminate in choosing and engaging their enemies.

It does not matter who the enemies are, or just how highly-placed or insignificant: an enemy is an enemy, one to be engaged rather than avoided.

Mr Wike, a lawyer, is an educated but no less coarse variant of former Ekiti State governor Ayo Fayose. Of all the governors today, including the insensitive and self-important Nasir el-Rufai of Kaduna State, the Rivers governor is easily the most remarkable for the earthy sense of humour that festoons his statements.

Mr Wike cannot be restrained when he is animated by governance and politics, nor mollified when he is enraged by opposition or dissent.

Former president Goodluck Jonathan and Dame Patience used to arrest the attention of Nigerians and tickle their midriffs in their days in power.

But since the dour former army general Muhammadu Buhari mounted the throne, an unremitting humdrum has settled on Nigeria, a humdrum that has in the past few years been relieved only by the activities and unguarded utterances of Mr Wike.

The Rivers governor has added colour to politics, drama to what is otherwise a tragedy, and replaced open revolt with brinkmanship.

What do his enemies think of him? It is hard to say, but they know what his friends think of him: that his essential self is more theatrical than malicious, a man who lends his guttural voice to his passion and blows his top at the drop of a hat.

No contemporary governor concentrates attention on his person and personality like Mr Wike. There are of course parallels in the Second Republic; what with the likes of Oyo State governor Bola Ige whose constant resort to the classics, epigrams and sarcasms rile his enemies to no end, Kano State governor Abubakar Rimi and his successor Bakin Zuwo whose irreverence and iconoclasm nearly tore their state apart,

Anambra State governor Jim Nwobodo whose debonair looks sometimes got the better of him and illustrated his strategic mistakes in positioning the Jim Vanguard against the Ikemba Front.

Thank God, then, for Mr Wike for relieving the country’s boring politics with his unique voice, short-lived intemperance and shoot-first-ask-questions-later approach to opposition politics.

Indeed, if he cares to know, the country is enamoured of his undiscriminating style which sees him fighting political leaders and causes inside and outside his party.

Since he assumed the governorship of Rivers State, he has not said or done anything as colourful as his view of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) leaders, who were bent on imposing Edo State governor Godwin Obaseki on the PDP as candidate in September’s election.

Mr Obaseki had recently defected from the APC and joined the PDP after conferring with Mr Wike and other PDP governors in the zone. Until Mr Wike likened party leaders backing the Edo governor to tax collectors, it was thought that Mr Obaseki had secured the support of everyone that mattered.

In their haste to get him to join the PDP, Edo PDP leaders simply overlooked their governor’s divisive politics and invited him in.

The nature and conditions permitting Mr Obaseki’s crossing to PDP became, it would appear, more evident following Mr Wike’s recent outburst.

He said: “I told them that in Edo State, we must handle the issue carefully and carry everybody along. They must respect human beings and not behave like tax collectors.

They said because an order was obtained from a Federal High Court in Port Harcourt, then I am responsible. I have had sleepless nights to resolve the issue in Edo State.

The Governors of Edo, Adamawa and Delta States know what I have done to resolve the issues in Edo State. As a result of this senseless accusation,

I have pulled out of Edo State settlement. My integrity matters…They are tax collectors. Let them challenge me and I will come out with more facts.

Nobody will rubbish me by raising false accusations against me. I will fight back.” He said enough in that statement to convey a wide range of emotions and dispositions, ranging from displeasure to candour, chastisement and insomnia.

That was not the first time he would whip up sentiment by taking on PDP chiefs.  On September 11 last year, he thoroughly cleaned out the committee set up by the PDP to investigate the emergence of Ndudi Elumelu as the minority leader of the House of Representatives.

Without mincing words or attempting to shy away from indelicateness, he expressed his conviction that the committee was the most corrupt in the history of the party.

He did not stop there; the veteran warlord went further to publicly thank Former Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Rt Hon Austin Opara, for withdrawing from the committee by not entangling himself “in the illegal activities of the tainted committee”.

In his telling offensiveness, he said: “The committee set up by the PDP on the illegal emergence of Ndudi Elumelu is the most corrupt committee ever set up by the party.

We thank our worthy son, Austin Opara, for withdrawing from that committee, so that he is not entangled in the illegal activities of the tainted committee.

We are warning PDP to be careful not to toy with Rivers State. The state has all it takes to withstand the PDP and fight the party to a standstill.

Rivers governor is not one of those governors that anyone can cajole. He is not one of those governors that will kowtow to illicit activities.”

Indeed, even though the PDP has been a regular subject of his ire, he is usually prepared to gut anyone who criticises him for his convictions.

If they breathed too deeply or even swallowed noisily enough to irk him, he would descend on them with all the precision and boldness of an axe on a log.

Thus, he made no bones about denouncing some PDP governors as nocturnal sycophants and even managed to stick one in the presidency’s side while at it.

In September 15 last year, he matched temper with speech and fumed: “We are the only state that the Federal Government refused to pay us our money used to execute Federal projects because I don’t go to see him in the night and I won’t go.

He is not my friend, he is not doing well, but he won in court; should I say that the court did wrong? No. President Buhari, congratulations, but carry Nigerians along. Unify the country, the country is too divided. I am saying what is right. What I will do, I will do, what I will not do, I will not do.”

If that were not indicative enough of the governor’s marauding censoriousness, his audacity moved him to match the PDP grit for grit in 2018 when the party tried to move its convention and the presidential primaries from Rivers State.

He blatantly cautioned that, “Nobody should dare Rivers State any longer. Enough is enough. PDP should know that we are not a punching bag. We are not people you can use and push. We are not harlots. Whenever you want, you come. When you finish, you push us aside.”

In April this year, a visibly exasperated Mr Wike accused powers in Abuja of attempting to introduce COVID-19 into his state through the express agency of some 22 Exxon Mobil Staff and the pilots who flew them into his state. Public chagrin directed at him for detaining his suspects prompted him to lash out in his peculiarly vehement style.

“They said civil aviation is under exclusive list and I heard there was a Minister who was quoting Law and I said the Minister should go and release them now.

We are in a democracy not a military government where you will sit down somewhere in your own office and direct me. I am not one of those Governors that will beg you for you to help me. Beg you for what? The right things must be done, especially for something that is killing people.

Every day, you hear new cases. They are not happy that there is no new case in Rivers State. They are not happy, so their own is that let us do something that will make them have new case in Rivers State.

Exxon Mobil brought in 22 of their members into Rivers State without testing. So, even if they have Coronavirus, they should enter?”

The governor’s mannerisms and oratory may appear hyperbolic, humorous, comic, and resistant to the finer graces that should emanate from his office, but his belief in what he says and his unwavering boldness in denouncing affairs which run afoul of his paradoxical moral compass  render his comments on the Edo imbroglio credible.

How could you not love the lovable rascal, Mr Wike? Indeed, so far, the PDP has released a statement lacking in Mr Wike’s distinguished conviction concerning the absence of tax collectors in their party, but it is difficult to shake off the feeling that the incendiary Rivers governor did not best his interlocutors.

By UnderTow

Presidential spokesmen Femi Adesina and Garba Shehu have acquire a reputation for combativeness in the discharge of their duties as the president’s image-makers. In the past few weeks, they have been in the eye of the storm, verbally cutting, thrusting and scalding critics and opponents, most of whom they describe in unsavoury language and have promoted as enemies of the presidency.

Their combativeness is probably a product of how they perceive their official duties as presidential spokesmen, especially since they assumed office in 2015. As senior journalists, they were not known to veer towards the hysterical when they edited newspapers or wrote columns. They were not always temperate as writers, but were guilty of occasional hyperboles, yet they were generally well honed, restrained and hardly exceeded the boundaries of journalistic etiquette. As presidential spokesmen, however, the two experienced media men have transformed into something close to unrecognisable. Are they too far gone to be helped?

It is pointless making references to how they have responded to those who criticise or attack the president or the presidency. From all indications, every successive month offers opportunity to reassess the two spokesmen whose official attitudes have merged into one indistinguishable whole, and whose verbal and written responses have become acerbic, unsparing and relentless.

Perhaps they enjoyed a honeymoon with the critics and enemies of the president in the early months and years of the Muhammadu Buhari presidency, but no one remembers that brief interregnum today. What they remember are the spokesmen’s bilious rage and the searing and unforgiving manner they give short shrift to critics. Indeed, no month passes without verbal and literary cannons being launched against the ‘enemy’ from the spokesmen, sometimes in quick succession, sometimes in synchronised terror, regardless of public misgivings.

No sooner had Mr Adesina finished taking on the Northern Elders Forum (NEF) days ago, which he accused of being irritants and featherweights, than Mr Shehu charged into the Coalition of Northern Youth Groups (CNG), describing them as spoilsports of democracy. In both NEF and CNG, as in nearly all instances, critics of the Buhari presidency hardly go beyond calling out the president on his democratic, economic, and security policies records, often remonstrating with the president and his team gently and reasonably, but sometimes harshly.

Last Sunday, the NEF had issued this warning signed by its leader, Ango Abdullahi, a professor of Agriculture: “Northern Elders Forum (NEF) is alarmed at the rising insecurity of communities and their properties in the North. Recent escalation of attacks by bandits, rustlers and insurgents leave the only conclusion that the people of the North are now completely at the mercy of armed gangs who roam towns and villages at will, wreaking havoc. It would appear that the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari and governors have lost control over the imperatives of protecting people of the North, a constitutional duty that they swore to uphold.

The situation is getting worse literally by the day as bandits and insurgents appear to sense a huge vacuum in political will and capacity which they exploit with disastrous consequences on communities and individuals…Our current circumstances in the North clearly demonstrate that President Buhari’s administration has woefully failed to achieve either. This is unacceptable. We demand an immediate and comprehensive improvement of our security in the North. We are tired of excuses and verbal threats which criminals laugh at, and our fellow citizens see as a clear failure of leadership which they see as part of them. Enough is enough.”

Mr Adesina was angry and contemptuous in his response to Prof Abdullahi. Said he: “We are not surprised by this latest statement by Prof. Abdullahi, and our past position on what his group represents remains unchanged: a mere irritant and featherweight.

The former vice chancellor signed the statement under the banner of Northern Elders Forum (NEF). Hearing that title, you would think the body was a conglomeration of true elders. But the truth is that NEF is just Ango Abdullahi, and Ango Abdullahi is NEF. NEF is merely waving a flag that is at half-mast. President Buhari steadily and steadfastly focuses on the task of retooling Nigeria, and discerning Nigerians know the true state of the nation. They don’t need a paper tiger to tell them anything.” It was clear the presidential spokesman ignored Prof Abdullahi’s complaint, choosing instead to denigrate him and focus entirely on his person.

Almost as if taking a cue from Mr Adesina, Mr Shehu also took on the coalition of northern youths who were voicing the same complaints. Led by Nastura Sharif, the youths had taken to the streets to protest against mounting insecurity, and had even called for the resignation of some members of the Buhari government.

Not only was Mr Sharif arrested, some of the protesters were also picked up, and the police insisted they would be prosecuted because their demands had become political and were designed to instigate bad blood against the government. Though public pressure led to the release of the protest leaders after two days, and the police had egg on their face, it did not dissuade Mr Shehu from opening his mouth and putting his foot in it. Said Mr Shehu in his reaction to the CNG protests: “For a start, if the group dared to issue such a comment under non-democratic method, they would have met a swift and harsh retribution from a dictatorial government. They should thank their stars that we are operating a truly democratic government, where the rights of free speech are guaranteed and protected.”

Both presidential spokesmen often speak as if they regret Nigeria’s democratic experiment, as if they long for military dictatorship to curb the people’s, and particularly protesters’ obstreperous tendencies. The constitution under which the president was elected also gives certain inalienable rights to the people, just as it spells out the duties and responsibilities of the government.

Neither Mr Adesina nor Mr Shehu is at liberty to pick what pleases them from the constitution on behalf of the president. Indeed, far more than his spokesmen, the president has generally been more restrained than his image-makers. The presidential spokesmen think that a dictatorship would help them discharge their responsibilities more easily. They are wrong. But perhaps they speak longingly of dictatorship unconsciously, without meaning to. In any case, given the intensity of public push-back, the spokesmen should by now have realised that they have propounded and propagated dictatorial tendencies far more easily than anyone in the presidency.

Many commentators, including this column, now firmly believe that since 1999, no presidential spokesman has been more intolerant of public criticism than Mesrrs Adesina and Shehu. Their image-making job is made far more complicated and unduly difficult by the disposition, not to say indisposition, of their principal, the president.

President Buhari’s political, social and economic ideas and policies are generally inchoate, uninspiring and often contradictory. Not only is the president himself unable to enunciate his ideas well, he is also unable to give them the vigorous push required to sell them to the people. In such circumstances, where critics and experts constantly pick holes in those policies and the global environment grows more hostile, the Buhari presidency is likely to be assailed by criticisms and denunciations. Unfortunately for Messrs Adesina and Shehu, the president has often met those challenges with curious imperturbability, if not outright silence. It, therefore, behoved presidential spokesmen to defend the indefensible.

But there is nothing to suggest that such a task must be handled with the natural nastiness that is unbecoming of their office as spokesmen. Ex-president Olusegun Obasanjo might seem from hindsight a better and more agile president than President Buhari, but between 1999 and 2007, the former military general was universally hated and reviled. He had not purged himself of his military culture and hangover, his critics snorted, and he sometimes gave the impression that he knew everything, even pretending to sham intellectualism.

But neither of his spokesmen, Tunji Oseni or Remi Oyo, descended to the nastiness and intolerance that Messrs Adesina and Shehu luxuriate in. No one could also argue that ex-president Goodluck Jonathan was a leadership treasure, a man full of ideas and inspiration. To many Nigerians during his years as president between 2010 and 2015, Dr Jonathan was incompetent, embarrassingly hesitant, and undeserving of a second term. In fact, at a time, the eminent zoologist regarded himself as the most insulted African head of state, insults he thought impatiently he did not deserve. But his spokesman, Reuben Abati, as frustrated as he was in the face of intransigent critics, and though eager to justify the unjustifiable, hardly descended to the cesspool, preferring at worst to merely skirt its fringes.

Messrs Adesina and Shehu may have very unpleasant public relations jobs to do given the nature and peculiar circumstances of the Buhari presidency, but they have never managed to give the impression that they are doing it as an unpleasant burden. They seem to love the acerbic responses they give to the most minute of provocations, and are ecstatic launching into tirades at the least criticism. They enjoy the abuse they dish out to enemies, and have indeed contributed copiously to the lexicon of presidential tirade. There must be something in them that makes them amenable to the facilities of the cesspool.

But can they change? It is doubtful. Can they be pressured to adopt a new and more moderate style? It is hard to say. What is clear, however, is that their style and approach are not inspiring and may even make more enemies for the president. The urgent task is to persuade them to try something new, something elevated. But who will undertake the task of reforming the two spokesmen is as important as whether they can be persuaded to treat the pearls of reform cast before them with the depth and circumspection fitting their offices and their journalistic antecedents.