There are laws governing war, as there are laws governing peace. It is the tragedy of modern Nigeria that its rulers can hardly tell the difference between the two, straining as they often do, perhaps for private convenience, to juxtapose one set of laws with another and, in the consequent moral haze engendered by their laxity, interchangeably applying the two sets of laws without any scruple and across all boundaries. Last year was an illustrious one for Nigeria for many reasons. This year will be an even more eventful one for all patriots, considering that we have in effect set up a country where officials, elected and appointed, have schooled themselves both by theory and practice to undermine the law or apply it selectively. This year, we will keep the form of democracy, but deny its substance. We will continue to make laws for orderly government, but circumvent them at will. We will struggle to regulate and grow the economy, but opt for intuitive rather than scientific methods. And, trust us, we will embrace religion the more, but neither our dogmatism nor our fervency will produce a concomitant benevolence of spirit or ethical rectitude indispensable to the growth and regulation of stable and peaceful societies.
In particular, a few issues will loom very large this year much more than others, and the following two years will be shaped by how we respond to them. One of these issues is Election 2015, which the President Goodluck Jonathan government has ingratiatingly suggested is too early both to discuss and to manoeuvre over. But neither he nor his opponents will take the counsel of discretionary patience. The debate over whether Jonathan is qualified to contest in 2015 or not was smothered a long time ago. That debate will not reoccur. Nor will the question of his ethnic origins as a factor in electoral contest and performance rear its head, in spite of the fulminations of Chief Olisa Metuh, the emotive and impressionable Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) National Publicity Secretary.
The dynamics of elections may be changing in Nigeria, with performers being rewarded with a second term, but that change is slow, tedious and unreliable. In any case, while the change is discernible in some states, at the federal level, particularly as it relates to the executive arm, that change is imperceptible. Indeed, it seems that at the executive level, a different set of dynamics is at play in the consideration of who is elected president. I have read analyses suggesting Jonathan is undeserving of a second term on account of his poor performance. Roads have not been built or maintained; hospitals have been left derelict; and schools are nondescript or in some cases even mothballed. Policies have not been as vigorous as under the imposing and bellicose Chief Olusegun Obasanjo government. And Jonathan himself has neither been inspiring nor surefooted. In consideration of these elements, many analysts and general commentators, including the scientifically disputatious and the jobholding aggrieved, have tentatively suggested the president is in danger of losing a second term.
However, Jonathan’s re-election will have little to do with his performance as with the internal dynamics of his party, the PDP. He knows this, and his opponents within the party understand this. So, too, do the governors. They all know that once the party can somewhat close ranks and select a standard-bearer, the election is as good as won. This is why there will be fierce jostling and jousting within the party to either consolidate control of party structure or hijack it, as the Adamawa State example is indicating with dire consequences for everyone in the party. This year is, therefore, the time to take implacable control of party structures nationwide, and keep it impregnable until the next election, whatever it takes. Jonathan will worry about who controls the national PDP, and he will ensure it is not the governors, no matter what the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC) and National Working Committee (NWC) do. And he has Obasanjo’s presidency to learn from, including all the subterfuges and Machiavellian tactics of the former president.
More importantly, in spite of saying 2013 is too early to begin politicking, Jonathan and his opponents know this year is probably the most conducive to do all the fighting and machinations. Next year will be devoted to reconciliation. Their chances of a clean fight and healthy reconciliation will be bolstered by their idiosyncratic obsession to control and share the country’s wealth. Once they have fought and settled, victory in the elections will be a question of each governor ensuring his state is delivered to the PDP column, either in comprehensive whole or in significant part. There will of course be compromises and consensuses; and there will even be cohabitations and plain unethical trade-offs. But in the end, especially judging by the dispiriting inability of the electorate to make enlightened choices, performance will hardly matter. It is not that it will not matter at all; the problem is that it may not matter in such significant quantity as to affect the outcome of the elections.
The ongoing misunderstanding within the PDP will not snowball into fragmentation. There is too much at stake for all the disputants to endanger their collective future. If Obasanjo played hardball in Ogun in the last election, it was because he knew he would not, indeed could not, be affected by the outcome of the 2011 governorship poll. He knew that whoever won was likely to court him anyway, and could not afford to be as irreverent or suicidal as the then Governor Gbenga Daniel. In the current situation within the national PDP, Obasanjo will close ranks with his mentees in the party if the party’s grip on power at the centre should be threatened. And that threat can only materialise if the opposition unites and understands how to beat the behemoth. Emphasising PDP’s poor performance at the centre may be helpful, but it will not be sufficient to unhorse it. As recent elections in France, Russia and the United States have shown, a candidate or party must have the ability to appeal to the electorate’s emotions, and take advantage of certain shifting and indefinable properties on the ground that have shaped or are still shaping domestic politics. The paradox of politics in Nigeria is that a candidate’s performance must be extraordinarily good for him to use his records to win votes, but has to be extraordinarily bad for him to lose election. Most politicians, including Jonathan, straddle that delicate divide.
Both Jonathan and Obasanjo know what is at stake. They will put a halt to their brinkmanship at the appropriate time. While the former will push matters to the limit to see how far he can go without upsetting the apple cart, the latter will pull on the party tethers to see how much concession he can wring for himself, lather his image and, as an extra, rub the noses of his enemies in the dirt. It is left for the opposition to recognise that while divisions within the PDP in the state could conduce to some electoral triumphs, that sort of division would be hard to find or exploit at the national level. In addition, the intense struggle to fill the vacant PDP Board of Trustees (BoT) position will end anticlimactically in favour of Jonathan. Neither Obasanjo nor the late Yar’Adua conceded the position to any powerful interest but their stooges. Even the much-hyped expectation of destructive internal schism in the PDP will not happen soon except the party loses a major election.
But the PDP can indeed lose a major election. What is more, if Nigeria’s democracy is to endure and wax strong, the ruling party should lose the next poll. For instance, the party’s electoral potency could be vitiated if elections are compressed into one day. Compression will ensure there will be no room for bandwagon, or for a losing party to catch its breath and readjust its strategies mid-way into the polling. A one-day election will have salutary effect on the system, create a level playing field for all political parties, and lessen the potential for violence. It would in fact be immoral for any party to oppose the Independent National Electoral Commission’s suggestion for all the 2015 elections to be compressed into a single day.
There is a sense in which all politicians recognise that 2013 presages 2015. The internecine feuds within the PDP can be likened to a shift in the earth’s tectonic plates. There will be metaphorical tsunamis, quakes, landslides and general geomorphological disturbances; but after brief hiatuses, the party will cool down and normality will be restored. The opposition, which is expected to merge and present a common front against the behemoth, must be ready to fight the PDP at its strongest. They must not base their calculations on a weak PDP. If the ruling party weakens, that should be regarded merely as a fortuitous event, a celestial chance to drive the knife deeper into its ribs. The last general election was probably the best time to unseat the ruling party, assuming key members of the opposition had not naively thought they could take on the giant without a strong alliance. I shudder to think what fate awaits the country and its young democracy if the ruling party, which has proved inefficient and immature in managing Nigeria’s human and material resources, should retain its hold on power for 20 years in a row.
