The Nation Newspaper

Category: Sunday

  • Trump’s ‘guns-a-blazing’ threat to Nigeria

    Trump’s ‘guns-a-blazing’ threat to Nigeria

    In his popular essay, titled “Politics and the English Language,” the famous English writer George Orwell notes: “Political language … is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

    On 1 November, 2025, on his social media platform, Truthsocial.com, President Trump posted: “If the Nigerian Government continues to allow the killing of Christians, the U.S.A. will immediately stop all aid and assistance to Nigeria, and may very well go into that now disgraced country, ‘guns-a-blazing,’ to completely wipe out the Islamic Terrorists who are committing these horrible atrocities. I am hereby instructing our Department of War to prepare for possible action. If we attack, it will be fast, vicious, and sweet, just like the terrorist thugs attack our CHERISHED Christians! WARNING: THE NIGERIAN GOVERNMENT BETTER MOVE FAST!”

    This follows the 31 October, 2025 message in which he wrote: “Christianity is facing an existential threat in Nigeria. Thousands of Christians are being killed. Radical Islamists are responsible for this mass slaughter. I am hereby making Nigeria a “COUNTRY OF PARTICULAR CONCERN” — But that is the least of it. When Christians, or any such group, is slaughtered like is happening in Nigeria (3,100 versus 4,476 Worldwide), something must be done! … We stand ready, willing, and able to save our Great Christian population around the World!”

    Over the years, some Christian priests and ethnic advocates have been promoting internationally the claim that Christians were being killed, for being Christians, in Nigeria by Muslims and ‘Fulani herders’. Videos of Bishop Wilfred Anagbe of the Catholic Diocese of Makurdi, Benue State, and Rev. Ezekiel Dachomo of the Church of Christ in Nations (COCIN) based in Barkin Ladi, Plateau State, are trending on social media in this regard. After a while, the narrative of the occurrence of genocide against Christians gained traction in the United States, and Republican Senator Ted Cruz spearheaded the recent move to pass legislation to declare Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern.

    After President Trump’s declaration, representatives of an Igbo group were shown rejoicing in a video on social media. The group also wrote a letter dated 2 November, 2025 to the president in which it said, “The American Veterans of Igbo Descent (AVID) sincerely and warmly welcome the recent designation of Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC) by your administration. We express our deep gratitude for this action, which offers renewed courage to Christians in Nigeria to continue practicing their religion. The whistle blower behind this genocidal act is Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, who prophesied the killing of Christians by the terrorist groups sponsored by the government years ago.”

    On 1 November, 2025, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu issued a release on his X handle, in which he wrote: “The characterisation of Nigeria as religiously intolerant does not reflect our national reality, nor does it take into consideration the consistent and sincere efforts of the government to safeguard freedom of religion and beliefs for all Nigerians. Religious freedom and tolerance have been a core tenet of our collective identity and shall always remain so. Nigeria opposes religious persecution and does not encourage it.” President Tinubu also asserted: “Since 2023 [when he assumed office], our administration has maintained an open and active engagement with Christian and Muslim leaders alike and continues to address security challenges which affect citizens across faiths and regions.”

    Moreover, the BBC’s Joseph Winter, in a 3 November, 2025 report titled, “Trump tells military to prepare for ‘action’ against Islamist militants in Nigeria,” noted: “Groups monitoring violence say there is no evidence to suggest that Christians are being killed more than Muslims in Nigeria…” Similarly, a 5 November, 2025 report by Michael Crawley of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation titled, “Trump’s claims of Christian persecution in Nigeria bump up against facts. A long-running insurgency in northern Nigeria has killed thousands, Christians and Muslims included,” noted: “There has also been ongoing violence in other parts of northern Nigeria that has at times been depicted as fighting between Muslims and Christians, although access to land and resources is at the heart of the conflict, according to research by the International Crisis Group, a Belgium-based conflict-prevention organization.”

    Specifically, the International Crisis Group’s 26 July, 2018 Report No. 262 on Africa stated: “The conflict between herders and farmers in Nigeria, centred in the Middle Belt but spreading southward, has escalated sharply. Since September 2017, at least 1,500 people have been killed, over 1,300 of them from January to June 2018, roughly six times the number of civilians killed by Boko Haram over the same period.”

    Governor Charles Soludo of Anambra State, who belongs to the Igbo ethnic group and is himself a Christian, also noted: “I’m pretty convinced that Nigeria is doing quite a whole lot to safeguard lives and property, and like I said before, this conversation about banditry and killings and so on requires deeper national conversation and introspection. In this part of the world, Eastern Block, we are 90 something percent Christians, and the insurgence that we are faced with here and around the South-East is Christians-on-Christians. The people in the bushes and so on killing, kidnapping others, they are called Christians; some bear the names Christian, Emmanuel, Peter, James, John and so on. So, it’s much wider than this categorization of … Christian-Muslim.”

    Moreover, in spite of the famed intelligence gathering capabilities of the technologically advanced countries which have invaded different countries in the past, such invasions have been shown to have been based on faulty or false intelligence, and the war plans have been known to have miscarried disastrously. For example, a 26 October, 2015 CNN report by Jethro Mullen, on the war on Iraq and the killing of Saddam Hussein, stated: “‘I can say that I apologize for the fact that the intelligence we received was wrong because, even though he had used chemical weapons extensively against his own people, against others, the program in the form that we thought it was did not exist in the way that we thought,’ [British Prime Minister Tony] Blair said in an exclusive interview on CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS that airs Sunday.”

    Read Also: How Nigeria should deal with Trump’s military threat

    History has shown that when an invasion is framed as a religious war, it complicates matters. For instance, in response to the 11 September, 2001 Al-Qaeda bombings in America, President George W. Bush said: “This crusade, this war on terror, is going to take a while.” The word “crusade” triggered the image of carnage and devastation by Christian military expeditions motivated by the desire to capture the Holy Land from Muslims, as Peter Waldman and Hugh Pope reported in a 21 September, 2001 article in the Wall Street Journal titled, “‘Crusade’ reference reinforces fears war on terrorism is against Muslims.” This article is alternatively titled, “Some Muslims fear war on terrorism is really a war on them.”

    More recently, in a 22 July, 2025 article titled “George W. Bush saw Iraq war as ‘crusade,’ declassified British reports say,” in Straight Arrow News, Alan Judd reported: “President George W. Bush viewed the 2003 invasion of Iraq as a ‘crusade’ by ‘God’s chosen nation,’ according to newly released documents from Britain’s National Archives.” There were also upbeat declarations that Iraqis were going to be so pleased with the invasion that they would meet the American troops with bouquets of flowers. However, the troops were met with stiff opposition, as some saw them as “crusader armies”. Iraq also became precariously divided and a virulent insurgency and strain of terrorism developed.

    In the circumstance, the situation of Christians in the country became worse, and many of them had to flee Iraq. A 5 March, 2021 Associated Press report titled “Timeline of disaster and displacement of Iraqi Christians,” stated: “Iraq was estimated to have nearly 1.5 million Christians before the 2003 U.S.-led invasion that toppled … Saddam Hussein. … Now, church officials estimate only a few hundred thousand, or even less, remain within Iraq’s borders. The rest are scattered across the globe, resettling in far-flung places … Many of those who remain in Iraq feel abandoned, bitter and helpless, some wary of neighbors with whom they once shared feasts and religious celebrations, Muslim and Christian alike.”

    On 19 March, 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama ordered an airstrike on Libya on the excuse that it wanted to save Libyans from the dictatorship of Col. Muamar Ghaddafi. This led to the killing of Ghaddafi and some of his children. It also led to the devastation of the country, the collapse of governance, the growth of insurgency and terrorism which spread to other parts of Africa, and the disruption of the lives of Libyans, including those who called for or collaborated with the U.S. invasion. Even the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, John Christopher Stevens, was killed by the Libyan resistance on 11 September, 2012. President Obama was later reported to have admitted that failing to plan for the aftermath of the invasion was the “the worst mistake” of his presidency.

    Considering the Libya experience, President Trump’s claim that if America invades Nigeria, “it will be fast, vicious, and sweet” is presumptuous. True, a war is by nature “vicious”, but expecting it to be “short” and “sweet” is not justified, as various military interventions show. A notable example is the U.S. intervention in Somalia and the concomitant humiliating Black Hawk Down episode of 3 October, 1993. The U.S. military operation to arrest some of the fighters of Somali warlord Mohammed Farah Aidid which, reportedly, had been planned to last only one hour became bogged down and took over 15 hours, saw two U.S. Black Hawk helicopters shot down by Aidid’s supporters, 18 U.S. soldiers killed, 78 wounded and 300 or more Somalis dead.

    Arlene Levinson’s 16 January, 1994 Los Angeles Times report of the operation has this long title: “Dead soldier dragged through Somali streets a modern-day unknown: Mogadishu: Pentagon says naming the mob’s victim serves no purpose and would only pain those who loved and lost him.” According to the report, the corpse of “a U.S. soldier was dragged like a dead dog through the dust of Mogadishu by jubilant Somalis. … Only four days later, President Clinton announced troops would withdraw from their mercy mission within six months, by March 31, 1994. The withdrawal was … inspired in great part by the revulsion of the American people when they saw the humiliating spectacle made of that one slain soldier.”

    Many commentators recall that whenever the U.S. intervenes in a country, the invaded nation more often than not ends up more devastated. It is this history that has accounted for the widespread and growing opposition to President Trump’s threat to invade Nigeria which many see as actually meant to plunder the country’s natural resources.

  • How Tinubu turned panic into purpose amidst Trump’s CPC, war-mongering

    How Tinubu turned panic into purpose amidst Trump’s CPC, war-mongering

    The just-concluded week may have been one of the most trying yet revealing phases of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration. It tested not only the resilience of Nigeria’s diplomacy but also the inner calm and strategic depth of the man at its helm. From the storm stirred the previous week by Washington’s sudden designation of Nigeria as a “Country of Particular Concern” to President Donald Trump’s reckless threat of military action, the just concluded week underscored the defining difference between political theatrics and statecraft. Tinubu chose the latter, and prevailed.

    What began as a diplomatic aberration rapidly spiralled into a global spectacle. In place of the customary notes verbales or state-to-state diplomatic correspondence, President Trump announced Nigeria’s CPC designation and hinted at a possible invasion through social media posts, an unorthodox and dangerously inflammatory approach that seemed calculated to provoke confusion, panic, and international embarrassment. It was the sort of provocation that had previously succeeded elsewhere, forcing smaller nations into hasty capitulation. But not this time. Not under Tinubu.

    Those familiar with Tinubu’s political temperament were not surprised. From the moment the Trump announcement broke on October 31, the Nigerian President refused to flinch. For days, he maintained a dignified silence while assessing the situation and guiding his team away from reactionary outbursts. Where some of his officials initially responded in the heated tone Trump’s social-media assault invited, Tinubu insisted on composure and coordination. By mid-week, Nigeria’s messaging had shifted from defensive indignation to strategic diplomacy.

    His message was clear: Nigeria will not be bullied. At Thursday’s Federal Executive Council (FEC) meeting, President Tinubu broke his silence in firm, measured words. “We will defeat terrorism in this country,” he said, reaffirming that Nigeria’s security challenge, though grave, is being confronted with renewed vigour and unity of purpose. “Do we have problems? Yes. Are we challenged by terrorism? Yes. But we will overcome the CPC designation. Nigeria is one happy family, and we shall spare no effort until we eliminate all criminals from our society.”

    By Friday, he amplified that message on his verified X handle, @officialABAT, rallying global partners to support Nigeria’s intensified campaign against terrorism instead of indulging in misinformation. “We will spare no effort and leave no stone unturned in our mission to eliminate criminals from our society. We urge our allies to stand firmly with us as we amplify our fight against terrorism”, he wrote.

    The composure and clarity in those lines stood in contrast to Trump’s provocative rhetoric. It was a moment of statesmanship, one that calmed a jittery nation and reassured international observers that Nigeria was not descending into a diplomatic free-fall.

    Analysts familiar with Trump’s style have often noted his preference for “deluge diplomacy”; using chaos and media noise to pressure opponents into concessions. But in this case, Tinubu’s quiet defiance short-circuited that script. Rather than rushing to Washington in panic, Nigeria opened a diplomatic channel with the United States through normal state procedures. According to the Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, on Thursday after the FEC, “channels have been opened. We prefer that this situation is solved diplomatically.”

    Read Also: How Nigeria should deal with Trump’s military threat

    He also underlined that Nigeria remains a stable democracy that respects religious freedom and is tackling insecurity without discrimination. “The killing of even one Nigerian citizen is of concern to the government,” he said, emphasizing that no nation should exploit such tragedies for political theatre. His statement was echoed globally: within days, China, Russia, ECOWAS, and the European Union all publicly affirmed their support for Nigeria’s sovereignty, urging Washington to respect bilateral norms.

    Even as the storm brewed abroad, the machinery of governance continued unhindered at home. Thursday’s FEC session, which might otherwise have been overshadowed by the diplomatic row, instead became a symbol of steady leadership. President Tinubu not only reaffirmed Nigeria’s resolve to overcome terrorism but also presided over significant governance milestones.

    Two new ministers were sworn into the Federal Executive Council; Dr. Bernard Mohammed Doro from Plateau State and Mr. Kingsley Tochukwu Udeh from Enugu State—filling vacancies created by the departure of two cabinet members. Their appointments, one a pharmacist-lawyer and the other a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, underscored Tinubu’s continued commitment to professional competence and regional balance.

    But it was the finance briefing by Minister Wale Edun that captured the administration’s reform energy. Edun unveiled the next phase of economic reforms designed to push Nigeria’s growth rate to seven percent by 2027. “The next phase of reforms will remove barriers holding back investors,” he announced. “We will review tariffs and import restrictions to stimulate productivity and investment.”

    Despite global uncertainty and political headwinds, he reported robust economic signals; GDP growth at 4.23 percent in Q2, inflation easing to 18 percent, and foreign reserves rising beyond $43 billion. The $2.35 billion Eurobond oversubscription, Edun noted, was proof of investor confidence in Nigeria’s economic trajectory. “The market shrugged off political considerations and focused on the fundamentals,” he said. For a country supposedly under siege, the numbers told a different story: confidence, not panic.

    The week also brought a clear presidential directive that resonated across Nigeria’s educational sector. On Tuesday, President Tinubu told the Minister of Education, Dr. Maruf Tunji Alausa, that he “does not want to hear of strikes in the education sector again.” It was both an instruction and a warning, one that captured his administration’s focus on stability as a precondition for progress. The government, the Minister revealed, “has literally met ASUU’s demands,” and negotiations are continuing to ensure uninterrupted academic calendars nationwide.

    In a period when the nation’s attention could easily have been diverted by international drama, Tinubu’s insistence on practical domestic governance, from education to economic reform, sent a powerful message: Nigeria is not a nation frozen by threats but one determined to grow beyond them.

    As the week ended, it became evident that the attempt to humiliate Nigeria had failed. Instead, the episode reinforced Tinubu’s image as a leader capable of absorbing shocks without losing focus. His steady tone contrasted sharply with Trump’s bombast, and by choosing calm diplomacy over confrontation, he restored global respect for Nigeria’s sovereignty.

    To many observers, it was a test of leadership Tinubu passed with distinction. He neither played the victim nor the aggressor. He chose engagement, not submission; resilience, not rhetoric. In doing so, he transformed a moment of danger into one of renewed confidence, domestically and internationally.

    Nigeria today stands taller for it. Its allies have rallied behind it, its economy remains on track, and its government continues to deliver reforms in critical sectors. Amid turbulence, Tinubu has shown that true strength lies not in the loudness of response but in the steadiness of resolve.

    As he put it succinctly: “We face challenges head-on and remain steadfast in our commitment to engage partners and champion Nigeria’s interests on the diplomatic front. We are confidently asserting our presence on the global stage, guided by unwavering calm, clarity, and a strong sense of purpose.”

    That, indeed, is the mark of leadership under fire—and the quiet victory of Nigeria’s President in a week the world will long remember.

    Beyond holding Nigeria’s side up firmly against Trump’s diplomatic bullying, President Tinubu’s week brimmed with engagements that reflected his trademark balance between governance, empathy, and nation-building. From mourning and mentorship to cross-border diplomacy and cultural celebration, the President moved deftly across the human and political landscape.

    On Monday, he condoled with the family of Chief (Mrs.) Esther Olufunke Arthur-Worrey, describing the late matriarch as “a woman of grace, fortitude, and faith,” even as he celebrated Professor Ademola Adenle, the Nigerian scholar who won the inaugural World Academy of Sciences–M.S. Swaminathan Award for Food and Peace. Tinubu hailed the honour as a global badge for Nigeria’s intellectual leadership and the nation’s growing recognition in sustainability research.

    By Tuesday, his focus turned to the private sector. In a heartfelt message to billionaire industrialist Femi Otedola, he lauded the Geregu Power chairman’s vision, philanthropy, and contribution to national progress, one that continues to inspire Nigeria’s next generation of business leaders.

    Midweek, the President mourned Major-General Abdullahi Mohammed, a former Chief of Staff to Presidents Obasanjo and Yar’Adua, honouring his pioneering role in building Nigeria’s intelligence architecture. By Thursday, he was celebrating two national icons—veteran journalist Olusegun Adeniyi, whom he called “a voice and conscience of many Nigerians,” and Minister of Steel Development Shuaibu Audu, whom he praised for “reviving Nigeria’s steel dream.”

    Friday captured Tinubu’s essence as both statesman and unifier: congratulating Omoyemi Akerele on her Earthshot Prize victory, saluting Dr. Reuben Abati at 60, hosting the Sultan of Sokoto in a bid to deepen interfaith harmony, felicitating the Emir of Borgu on his tenth anniversary, and receiving Sierra Leone’s President Julius Maada Bio at the Villa—rounding off a week that combined diplomacy, devotion, and quiet strength.

  • SNAPSONG 273

    SNAPSONG 273

    Random Snaps

    Let us start this week’s song

         By counting the lurid colours

    Of Okigbo’s “painted harmonies”

        And the riveting magic of their endless music

     Dance through the streets

         To Ojaide’s drum

    Tall like the leaping tonalities

         Of his Children of Iroko

     Countless reeds in the tide

         Of Bekederemo’s relentless Delta

    The prescience of the paddle which fore-

         Told the proverb of the pen

     One canoe-length from Okara’s Nun 

         Whose ravaged water crawls towards the sea

    Its fish oil-fried, belly-up, aloud with imprecations

         At cannibal oil riggers and their looting acts

    Read Also: APC clears Peter Obi’s polling units as early results trickle in

     Bundles of dissident sticks,

         Ofeimun’s “new brooms”

    Went to work in the marketplace

         A clean covenant in their patriotic ardour

     When Ogundipe prompted us to

         Sew the old days  

    She rallied every thread in the ancestral spool

         And the loom which ensured our robe

    * In order of appearance in this poem, references to Christopher Okigbo, Tanure Ojaide, JP Clark-Bekederemo, Gabriel Okara, Odia Ofeimun, Molara Ogundipe-Leslie.

  • Trump’s war against Nigeria

    Trump’s war against Nigeria

    Religious and political leaders in Nigeria have been generally ambivalent over United States President Donald Trump’s plan to levy war of some kind on Nigeria, a country he contemptuously dismissed as disgraced. If Christian leaders oppose him, they fear the church might consider them as apostates indifferent to the plight of their persecuted members. If Muslim leaders oppose the US plan, they also fear they might be equated with the terrorists who have laid the Northeast and Northwest waste. Worsening the dilemma for faith leaders is how to agree on the definition of genocide. But they really don’t need a definitional consensus anymore than they need to agree on the genocide’s varying and largely inaccurate statistical underpinnings. Even US officials who have spoken on the so-called Christian genocide in Nigeria have based their arguments on conflicting and, in some cases, deliberately concocted data.

    Analysts and commentators have also encountered their own dilemmas over the genocide claims. If they present arguments about Mr Trump’s real aims, mostly different from his stated claims, they risk being judged as callous and cruel in their disregard for the thousands of lives lost to killers, particularly in the Middle Belt of Nigeria. And if they suggest that supporting the attack on terrorists in Nigeria would probably enable a solution to Nigeria’s terrorism problem, they risk being described as naïve or mentally insufficient. More than one week after Mr Trump first spoke about attacking Nigeria to deal with its terrorism problem, there has been no consensus on his justifications. There is unlikely to be any such consensus. Support for or opposition to the US plans is divided almost in almost equal half between Christians and Muslims. Pragmatists and patriots are smothered in-between the two dominant and unyielding groups.

    It is significant to note that the lobbyists who took the Christian case to the US, including the Catholic Bishop of Makurdi Diocese, Bishop Wilfred Anagbe, stopped short of framing the massacres in Benue State as religious genocide. They hinted very strongly that the killings were in many ways ethnic cleansing related to an orchestrated plan to grab and rename their lands. They wanted the US to intervene, but there was nothing in their letters and speeches that suggested they wanted unilateral military intervention. Their primary quest was for the US to pressure the Nigerian government, re-designate the country as a Country of Particular Concern in order to attract a welter of sanctions and naming and shaming of terror financiers and sponsors, and perhaps join the Nigerian military to wage war against the rampaging militias to force them to give up confiscated lands. But Mr Trump, seeking diversions from his domestic troubles, has gone a step further by threatening to attack Nigeria and using intemperate and contemptuous language. The lobbyists now have little choice but to associate with the US plan and claim credit for the ululation the Trump threat has raised.

    Indeed, given the acclamation the threat has elicited, particularly in the South and Middle Belt, many journeymen activists have tried to associate with the humiliating US campaign against Nigeria. Labour Party chieftain and former presidential candidate, Pat Utomi, swore he also lobbied the US against Nigeria and the killings. A US-based military veteran group associated with the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has also claimed responsibility for stirring the US into bellicosity, and they have published one of the letters they wrote to that effect. A faction of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) last week chose the awkward moment of these times to petition the US Embassy in Nigeria against the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) which they accuse of fostering dictatorship. And the African Democratic Congress (ADC) has hemmed and hawed over the Trump threats, suggesting that while they fear the consequences of an attack, they nevertheless blame the government of the day for getting the country into this pretty pass.

    Read Also: EFCC returns N42.5m to 70-year-old widow defrauded by banker

    Only a few people among those brave enough to voice their feelings have warned that US intervention in Nigeria, despite the genuineness of the cause of the Middle Belters, is not and cannot be altruistic. They judge US interventions, some of which were undertaken for supposedly good reasons, to be bloody, disruptive, retrogressive, indiscriminate, and generally inimical to the victim country. Nigeria would not be an exception should the US carry out its plan. In any case, they queried, who would monitor and punish US racism, uncontrollable gun violence, and bureaucratic and institutional contradictions? The few Nigerians who chose not to be enthusiastic about the invasion threat argue that the US is surreptitiously interested in economic exploitation of Nigeria as well as checkmating Chinese and BRICS influence. They suggest further that there are many more countries on the list of Countries of Particular Concern who are not being threatened with invasion because they are either in the US orbit already, such as some Middle Eastern countries, or are Asian countries who have either sucked it up to Mr Trump or are too powerful to be messed with.

    What is clear in all the analyses of the terror war in Nigeria is that massacres are taking place in various parts of the North, including in Christian and Muslim towns, with casualties almost evenly spread. Though the situation has improved considerably, the failure to put an end to the killings quickly has exposed Nigeria to unsavoury threats and categorisation. It is embarrassing that the country may now obviously redouble its effort to curb terrorism on account of the US threat. But whether that will be enough to cause the warmongering American president to stand down remains to be seen. There are reports of backchannel diplomatic engagements ongoing; however, the Nigerian authorities must be mindful of the fact that they represent 230 million people, the largest and preeminent concentration of Black people in the world. In the final analysis, despite their many failings, including in the battle against massacres and genocides, Nigerians are mindful that whatever they, they represent the world’s Black people, and will prefer to die on their feet than on their knees. This is not sentiment. They know that Mr Trump has undisguised contempt for Blacks inside and outside the US, regards Nigeria as a disgrace, and remains a bully without any moral compass. Yes, they recognise the enormous military power of the US, but they also know that that power had repeatedly come unstuck in the face of war with Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, and Iraq among others.

    While America may be rightly concerned about the killings in the Christian areas of Nigeria, it imperiously and suspiciously feigns ignorance of the killings in Muslim states. If Mr Trump truly wants to help, he knows what to do, and everyone in Nigeria, including those who are foolishly egging him on, knows what he should do. But the path he has chosen, if executed, may tragically complicate the war on terror for Nigeria, and the country, if it survives the intervention, may never be the same again. As many countries have shown in recent decades, no one can predict the course of a war, no to talk of how it ends. Everything is often open-ended. The past one week has been so frenetic that it is uncertain the country has ever felt this way before, with a threat of invasion looming over it. Mr Trump confesses himself to be evil and undeserving of heaven; but it is such a man that some groups in Nigeria have made their champion. He glamourises war and bloodshed, and has repeatedly connived at the mistreatment of Blacks and Hispanics, and sneered at international law, but some Christian leaders shrug their shoulders. For Mr Trump, might is right. Once such a man gets a foothold in Nigeria, there is no telling what the unscrupulous and rapacious politician and businessman will do.

    Sadly, the combination of Fulani exceptionalism and religious prejudices in the North had long stunted government’s response to overt acts of bureaucratic unfairness, discrimination, and perversion of justice. It is hoped that rather than being defensive, the North will use this moment to recalibrate its culture, policies and jurisprudence. Might may be right for some powerful groups in Nigeria; but as events have shown, much more might can be imposed from outside. For years, Nigeria was unable to expose terror financiers and courageously deal with sponsors in high places. For years, it was unable to unite its people behind great national causes. And for years, lands had been forcibly seized by militias and cleansed of their original owners. Now, an unscrupulous outsider is calling Nigeria to question. If Nigeria wishes to oppress its minorities or those who are ethnically and religiously different, then it must strive amorally to be like the US, China, North Korea, India, Russia, et al, who are too strong to be questioned by outsiders or imposed upon. Until Nigeria acquires such muscles, it had better put its house in order. But even after restructuring the country and finding a political equilibrium by which to ensure stability and peace, it must still need to rearm, fund scientific research in missile (ballistic missiles) and anti-missile (interceptors) programmes, and establish itself as a continental military power. Its benevolent neutrality and schoolboy approach to power are unprofitable and continue to expose it to the kind of predatory and humiliating remarks by Mr Trump. Who ever thought the day would come when the most populous black nation on earth would be exposed as impotent and ridiculed, ridicule partly conjured by Nigerians destitute of national pride and identity?

    Trump breathes threats against Nigeria, Oct 31

    “Christianity is facing an existential threat in Nigeria. Thousands of Christians are being killed. Radical Islamists are responsible for this mass slaughter. I am hereby making Nigeria a ‘COUNTRY OF PARTICULAR CONCERN’ — But that is the least of it. When Christians, or any such group, is slaughtered like is happening in Nigeria (3,100 versus 4,476 Worldwide), something must be done! I am asking Congressman Riley Moore, together with Chairman Tom Cole and the House Appropriations Committee, to immediately look into this matter, and report back to me. The United States cannot stand by while such atrocities are happening in Nigeria, and numerous other countries. We stand ready, willing, and able to save our Great Christian population around the world!”

    Imperial, warmongering Trump on Truth Social, Nov 1

    “If the Nigerian Government continues to allow the killing of Christians, the U.S.A. will immediately stop all aid and assistance to Nigeria, and may very well go into that now disgraced country, ‘guns-a-blazing,’ to completely wipe out the Islamic Terrorists who are committing these horrible atrocities. I am hereby instructing our Department of War to prepare for possible action. If we attack, it will be fast, vicious, and sweet, just like the terrorist thugs attack our CHERISHED Christians! WARNING: THE NIGERIAN GOVERNMENT BETTER MOVE FAST!”

    Sen. Ted Cruz sponsors legislation against Nigeria, Nov 4

    “I’ve been pushing legislation to designate Nigeria a CPC and to impose sanctions on the Nigerian officials responsible. Thank you to President Trump for your leadership in imposing the designation, and more broadly, for fighting to stop the murder of Christians in Nigeria. Now we should take the next step and hold Nigerian officials accountable. I intend to be very explicit about who they are in the coming days and weeks.”

  • Terrorism: Tinubu needs contingency plan on Mali, AES

    Terrorism: Tinubu needs contingency plan on Mali, AES

    There are no immediate indications that Mali, one of the three countries that last year exited ECOWAS and invited Russia as patron saint, is close to falling into the hands of the Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), the al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist organisation operating in Mali and in some parts of West Africa. But it could. The JNIM, which is also operating in Burkina Faso and Kwara State, Nigeria, is already strangulating Mali’s capital city of Bamako by grounding the city and suffocating its fuel supply. It plans to weaken the city and the administration of Gen. Assimi Goita before launching a final attack to decapitate the government. If that should happen, President Tinubu, who is enmeshed in dispute with the United States, will have one more headache to pacify, probably a much bigger headache than the US challenge.

    The Russian Africa Corps, to which Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger made recourse after sacking the French and Americans, has not been as effective as the Malians hoped. Mali’s relations with Algeria to the North has also been strained, leading to the abrogation last year of the 2015 Algiers Accord which initially kept insurgency at bay in those barren regions of Mali’s north. Turkey has tried to muscle in, supplying drones and other military equipment, but it has also begun to waver. With few or no friends left, and its fellow Alliance of Sahel States (AES) members encumbered by insurgencies of their own, Mali has become a sitting duck. Worse, it has become a turf where both Ukraine and Russia fight proxy wars, with Ukraine allegedly but indirectly supplying JNIM with drones and intelligence to tie down and deplete the Africa Corps.

    The fuel blockade orchestrated by JNIM has lasted for weeks, and Bamako has seemed to be helpless to secure its fuel supply routes. Worse, Mali itself has become a fractured society, with ethnic tensions rife in the northern and central regions, while purges in the military and bureaucracy have become rampant as insurgency appears intractable. In short, Mali is teetering on the brink. While it may not necessarily fall in the near term, its survival is not guaranteed in the long run. The fall of Mali began quietly and insidiously, but is now gathering momentum. Should a worst-case scenario become a reality, it may engender a domino effect on the other two AES members and, apocalyptically, the larger sub-region. If nothing significant is done to curb the tilt towards catastrophe, the Arab Spring’s bloody torch may pass to West Africa as the new terrorism hub.

    Read Also: EFCC returns N42.5m to 70-year-old widow defrauded by banker

    This is where President Bola Tinubu comes in, despite his ordeal with the gung-ho and warmongering American president, Donald Trump. The job of visioning for West Africa and even securing it against jihadism lies squarely with the Nigerian president. With a population of about 230 million people and GDP of almost $188bn, only Nigeria can muster the will and the force to lead the effort to checkmate the jihadist rampage threatening the region. It won’t be easy, especially in light of the ill-advised exit from ECOWAS of the AES. That exit has not only isolated the three countries and their military juntas, it has made them considerably vulnerable to disintegration. President Tinubu must lead ECOWAS to prepare a contingency plan for the region. Yes, he needs to mind Mr Trump’s warmongering and evil relish as well as be prepared to be shaken by his menacing rhetoric; but notwithstanding, the ominous interplay of jihadist and political forces by the AES and the entire sub-region demand his attention. He desperately needs to multitask, and hopefully can find the small body of thinkers who can help him through this difficult and dangerous times.

    As part of his anticipations, President Tinubu must prepare ECOWAS to deploy a powerful force if the situation deteriorates. After all, JNIM militants have found their way into Nigeria. They will do worse if they find the leeway to enact their brutality. In addition to the Mali challenge, which is perhaps the worst of the three AES states, President Tinubu must prepare for extraordinary upheavals in Burkina Faso and Niger. Jihadists are targeting the sub-region. Unfortunately, Nigeria cannot wish the caliphal danger away anymore than it can mollify the ghoulish relish in Mr Trump’s turbulent soul. Keeping Nigeria together, preparing for 2027 election, contending with those who never reconciled themselves to his 2023 victory, and now having to deal with the excitable and morally unmoored Mr Trump can task the ingenuity of the most gifted juggler. President Tinubu has to find the political dexterity to juggle these many iridescent balls in the air.

    It is sad that the AES chose this perilous moment to engage in mindless escapism and isolationism, when the challenges of the region calls for cooperation and introspection. By now the rest of ECOWAS, a few of which had probably briefly toyed with also embracing the weakened Russia, must be disillusioned. Let President Tinubu harvest that disillusionment and rally the region behind his savvy plan to extricate West Africa from the jaws of jihadism. Mr Trump may not have shed enough blood to sate his narcissism, but West Africa has, on the other hand, haemorrhaged more than enough to fancy the bloody but ephemeral interventionist policies glamourised by a US administration seeking foreign adventures to mask his domestic troubles.

  • PDP faces appalling dilemma

    PDP faces appalling dilemma

    What started as a trickle of ‘deserters’ in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has become an avalanche threatening to bury the leading opposition party. In the past few months, and especially in the past few weeks, the PDP has lost a number of states, scores of national lawmakers, and hundreds of state legislators. It in effect allowed a small wound to become gangrenous, thus making the frenzied exits enormously difficult to curb and the storm almost impossible to quieten. Alarmed that its elective convention was days away, the party desperately tried to keep up appearances and force a healing. Unfortunately, that abrasive effort to paper over the cracks has exposed it to a chasm far worse than it ever imagined in nearly three decades of existence.

    Of all the complications it feared, it is doubtful whether it thought the courts could take the wind out of its sail as peremptorily as it did late last week when it dismissed its preconvention formalities, judging them a breach of the law. Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja, deploying idiomatic jurisprudence, ruled that the PDP had failed to observe its own constitution in planning its convention. He warned that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) should not recognise the outcome. But the party remains defiant, however, citing a Supreme Court judgement enthroning party supremacy in such matters. In the next few days, when push comes to shove, and the litigants push their rights in the face of a stalling appellate court, it will be determined whether that defiance is not just braggadocio.

    Read Also: Relief for commuters as Warri-Itakpe rail services resume

    The party will be wondering how it got to this pass. From the Olympian height of commanding about 31 states to a miserable and almost concessionary eight, it is not certain that the party would not imagine that more could still be taken from them, the biblical equivalence of ‘whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him’. The party should be cheerful that its case is not as hopeless as the African Democratic Congress (ADC), which so far cannot see the forest for the trees, or the Labour Party (LP), which is at the mercy of its infanticidal parents.

  • 2027: dangerous fixation with peripherals

    2027: dangerous fixation with peripherals

    Even before last month’s coup stories began to circulate and fuel anxiety and speculations, Nigeria’s political elite have been far less circumspect or sanguine about their country’s politics. The coup stories will not go away quickly, as everyone now understands, but perhaps the elite would find the inspiration to begin recognising the dangers posed by their extreme focus on political peripherals. Here are a few reasons the elite must begin to slow down and be less schizoid about the nature and course of their politics. By focusing almost exclusively on the person of President Bola Tinubu, his idiosyncrasies and ethnicity, Nigeria’s ‘eternal’ fault lines become more reinforced than ameliorated. Something is clearly not right about the methods the elite have chosen to drive home their arguments or compete for relevance and office, a fact that probably explains why following the All Progressives Congress (APC) victory in 2023, there were calls for a coup d’etat, and later conspiratorial mass protests to reverse the gains of democracy and clip the unseen fingers helping the country to recalibrate and balance its politics away from ethnic and religious pivots. That political modus operandi may in fact explain why the coup stories of last month have lingered, and why many believe there was probably a plot after all.

    Firstly, the United States president Donald Trump’s right-wing politics has paradoxically made the world less safe and many Western countries more insular and self-absorbed. Should Nigeria come to any mishap, it is unlikely to find succour anywhere or apologists who would argue the country’s case and help modulate the consequences of a potential fracture. The US is narrowing its borders against foreigners; the United Kingdom is inadvertently fuelling the rightist and extremist politics of the Reform Party’s Nigel Farage; and rightwing politics, with special focus on anti-immigration regulations, is taking over Europe, further constricting any relief for Nigerians. Reworking and fixing Nigeria is, therefore, the crying need of the moment. Unfortunately, the Nigerian elite are oblivious of the danger their peculiar form of politics has elicited.

    Secondly, Nigeria is not too big to fail. The elite and their parliaments, not to talk of the drafters of Nigeria’s malleable constitution, may live in denial and suggest that national unity is inviolate and not subject to negotiation, but more has been said and done by the elite to degrade that tentative unity rather than nurture it. Apart from Somalia which has been unravelling for 24 years, Sudan has also become the poster child for political and governmental dysfunctionality. It first split into two, with South Sudan carved out of the country in 2011, then in April 2023, civil war broke out about four years after President Omar al-Bashir was toppled. The army and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) are now locked in a deadly struggle for the ravaged country, with some analysts fearing that Sudan could further split into east and west. The Sudanese tragedy is a study in elite recklessness which produced alienation of the less developed southern part, empowered the Janjaweed Arab militia (from which the RSF was birthed) to brutally pacify the Darfur region, and finally predisposed the country to further balkanisation.

    Read Also: Relief for commuters as Warri-Itakpe rail services resume

    Sudan mirrors Nigeria in many ways. When the elite (doctors, health workers, lawyers) ignited protests on the streets of Khartoum, the al-Bashir presidency fell in a matter of months and was replaced by a civil-military leadership, which upon further protests fell apart until civil war broke out in 2023. At every election cycle in Nigeria, some powerful groups lose out. If that loss is not handled well, as it is happening now, and is compounded by economic hardship, discontent could fester to the point of incitement. Among the opposition, there has been little effort to appreciate the economic realignment and rejuvenation taking place, partly because the positive effects of the realignment have not been substantially felt among the poor. Massive economic rejuvenation is taking place amidst dramatic social and political realignments, but the opposition, given the nature of Nigerian politics, will de-emphasise progress and focus on the inconsistencies, contradictions, immiseration, and policy reversals of the administration. The fixation with peripherals is mainly due to the displacement of powerful members of the political elite, the controversiality of some of the government’s economic policies, and the panic that some of the policies might actually be effective thus leaving the opposition to muckrake and centre their attacks on the person and affiliations of the president.

    There is a lot to fix about Nigeria; but it is dangerous to let the effort be inspired by self-centred and shortsighted politics. If the elite are not restrained by either the existential crises undermining peace and development in the continent or the unwelcoming racial and political atmosphere wafting over Europe, Asia and the Americas, centrifugal forces may take over. Opposition is essentially about policies, to a little extent about style, and certainly not about exploitation of ethnic and religious fault lines. The elite must be aware of the cataclysmic effects of deliberately promoting instability or letting divisions ossify in a country still susceptible to fracturing over small differences. Incendiary speeches, sponsorship of domestic revolts, and copycat embrace of the political dynamics unsettling other countries need to give way to responsible politics that take cognisance of the day after tomorrow. Whether the government and the opposition like to hear it or not, Nigeria’s survival is more threatened today than at any time in its history, partly because of the dangerous interplay of global forces.

  • Soyinka, visa revocation and parallels

    Soyinka, visa revocation and parallels

    Death and life, says the bible, are in the power of the tongue. Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka willed his visa revocation by making his Green Card to ‘have an accident’, a forerunner of the revocation of his B1/B2 visa. Hazarding a few guesses for the revocation, he believed that what happened to the Green Card was probably the ‘new facts that came to light’ to attract the United States response. He also suggested that his unyielding criticisms of President Donald Trump, whom he likened to former Ugandan president Idi Amin in Whiteface, might have played a role in the revocation. Notwithstanding the visa revocation, and certain that his judgement of the style and policies of Mr Trump was accurate, the laureate hinted he might still do some creative work with the American president as the protagonist. The professor may indeed be prescient, but it is unlikely that even he anticipated the dystopian nature American society and immigration controls have assumed. The Green Card accident and the visa revocation have fortuitously saved him the embarrassment and torment he would probably have encountered on trips to the US.

    If a lot of fight was still left in the old warhorse Prof. Soyinka, and he both spoke and acted the fight in his convictions about the depressing manifestations of US democracy, particularly in respect of the upending of the old rules-based international order as well as the decline and warping of American values and global leadership, other participants and activists on the Nigerian scene have spoken themselves into a very different kind of trouble they neither have the ethical mooring or courage to face. It is not every commentator that speaks himself into trouble that does it from a noble or altruistic point of view. Unfortunately, it is also not all the time that an undiscriminating public can tell the difference. Last March, a youth corps member, Ushie Uguamaye, spoke herself into foolish trouble when she admitted her participation in a ‘rant challenge’. Her ignoble confession did not rob her of significant public support, a sad commentary on the decline of values in Nigeria and a reflection of ethnic, class and political polarisation. ‘Lagos smells,’ she had posted, and ‘President Tinubu was a terrible president’, she added. She apologised for her description of Lagos, but it was obvious she did not mean it, but declined to apologise for insulting the president, anchoring her adamancy on what she said was her constitutional right to free speech. Of course, she ignored her obligation and oath as a corps member. Activists lent her wild support.

    Last week another harebrained netizen, Innocent Chukwuma, openly and in offensive language advocated on X (Twitter) a coup d’etat in Nigeria, inspired, it was clear, by happenings in other parts of Africa, particularly the Alliance of Sahel States (AES). Here is what Mr Chukwuma posted: “A coup in Nigeria is needed. Dispose of APC, suspend the Nigerian Government, and join the AES. That is all we need now. It will happen eventually. Nigerians, the military needs your support now! Only them can save this country.” In another post, he said: “The @#*&! in Aso Rock has basically sold this country to the West, and they run our intelligence apparatus. Only the military can reset this country. Support them.” It does not matter to him and others who lionise his idiocy that Mali is in far bigger trouble than it can ever bargain for, and Burkina Faso is propped on insane propaganda. Nor is he discomfited by his mendacity about the president selling Nigeria to the West at a time US president Donald Trump is busy declaring Nigeria a country of particular concern, preparatory to declaring it a terrorist state deserving of American military action to ‘protect Christians’.

    Read Also: Relief for commuters as Warri-Itakpe rail services resume

    Activist Omoyele Sowore, who jumps on every anti-establishment controversy, gave Ms Uguamaye, alias Raye, huge support. It was expected. His lifestyle and politics are dysfunctional, and without any reflection, projects that warpedness onto national issues. He lives and thrives on discord and chaos, a member of the army of chaotic activists dedicated to dismantling Nigeria in line with some global doomsday predictions. To lend support to a self-confessed ranter embarking on a challenge to determine who was the nastiest on social media is an indication of failure of home training or psychological imbalance. But Mr Sowore was not the only one to lend support to Raye; many media houses and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) also did, thereby turning her into a cause célèbre. The constitutional right to free speech is of course inalienable, but there are always limits. When Mr Chukwuma advocated a coup on X, the consequences are not limited to him, whether he is arrested or ostracised. It strikes at the core of Nigeria’s stability, especially at a time when a few African countries are succumbing to extra-constitutional methods for regime change. Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger Republic, Sudan, Madagascar, Guinea, Gabon – all pejoratively described as belonging to the African coup belt – have truncated their democratic experiments. Some analysts have suggested that if current speculations about a foiled coup in Nigeria turn out to be factual, the plotters were probably encouraged by the public calls for military intervention.

    The social media has given rise to all kinds of extremism, particularly verbal and rhetorical terrorism. It encouraged the false narrative of EndSARS massacre in Nigeria, fuelled the Nepalese and Madagascar revolts, and gave fillip to the Tanzanian election protests regardless of President Samia Suluhu Hassan winning 98 percent of the estimated 32 million ballots according to the electoral commission. A few Western countries have made bland statements about the situations in the coup-ridden countries of Africa and those in the grip of electoral violence, but none issued a warning or note of caution regarding the January 2021 attack on the US Capitol. Decades of self-deprecation and de-marketing have pushed Africa to the precipice. And that de-marketing is fuelled in Nigeria by civil society groups, activists, political opposition, militias, insurgents, traditional and social media, and the gullible populace indifferent to economics but allergic to hardship.

    But the worst is about to come for Nigeria. Under President Trump, the US has become the world policeman, bombing and bullying its way around the world, and destroying post-World War II rules-based international order. It has re-designated Nigeria a country of particular concern while ignoring its own past and contemporary history of racism, gun violence, police discrimination, a justice system tilted against Blacks, and now creeping authoritarianism. Seizing upon the largely fallacious campaigns of some Nigerians and US lawmakers and private groups, Mr Trump has called for action against Nigeria to ‘save Christians’. Whatever methods of involvement it chooses to deploy are bound to complicate ethnic and religious relations in Nigeria, worsen counterinsurgency operations, destabilise the country, facilitate illegal mineral exploitation and expropriation, and perhaps predispose the country to state failure or new alliances to the East. The US approach is unprecedented. It is not designed to build, unite, or stabilise; it is fashioned to fracture and engender large-scale instability in the West African sub-region. But all this is happening because a few Nigerians, by their rhetoric, suborning of foreign interests, and neocolonial orientation, are exposing their country to plunderers.

    However, by failing for more than 15 years to rein in insurgency in the Northeast and banditry in the Northwest, and by being unable to curb the madness in the Middle Belt states of Benue, Nasarawa and Plateau, many local victims and aggrieved individuals as well as international observers have gone away with the impression that what is happening in Nigeria is not ethnic or economic struggle for land and mineral resources, but religious genocide. Yet, the attackers are largely foreigners who received training and arms from non-state actors following the collapse of Libya. The US had designated Nigeria a country of particular concern for nearly a decade, together with Mr Trump’s new darlings Syria, Pakistan and even Saudi Arabia; but the Nigerian media has painted the news as if the declaration was fresh or recent. If Nigeria can muster the will and the military muscle to undertake a final push against the lawlessness that has overtaken parts of the country, it may buy time to resolve its economic crisis and find a workable and fairly permanent solution to its structural and existential questions. But it does not have the luxury of time. If US meddling is allowed, in line with the lobbying of some Nigerian interests, there is no assurance that the country will survive. And if chaos ensues, no one, not the complainants nor the groups complained against, will be spared the consequences of anarchy. For decades, many Nigerians have spoken disaster, death and tragedy upon their country, with politicians leading the way and activists following hard on their heels; now their words are returning to haunt them in a way they may be unprepared to live with.

  • The steward, strategist, listener, reformer, patriot in Tinubu

    The steward, strategist, listener, reformer, patriot in Tinubu

    There are weeks in governance that simply pass through the calendar; then there are weeks that stamp a leader’s imprint on the psychology of a nation. The past week belonged firmly in the latter category for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. It was a week the President strengthened the guardrails of the Republic, re-anchored state authority on constitutional vigilance, rebuked the cynicism of those who doubt Nigeria’s rise, and again demonstrated, before citizens and critics alike, that leadership is not omniscience but the humility to reassess, recalibrate, and act courageously for the collective.

    It was, in essence, a distillation of the Tinubu doctrine: proactive security, principled nationalism, people-centred correction, and a fierce industrial patriotism that places Nigeria, not foreign appetites nor elite conveniences, at the centre of economic decision-making. In a turbulent world and a region where fragility often masquerades as fate, Nigeria has a President whose instincts are to anticipate, reorganise, and insist on outcomes. And last week, that instinct was on full display.

    Security is not merely about physical might; it is about clarity of mission, unity of command, and the moral courage to demand excellence. On Monday, President Tinubu met the newly appointed service chiefs at the State House, following sweeping changes in the military hierarchy. The reshuffle itself was an act of state stewardship, a deliberate reinforcement of Nigeria’s armed defense architecture at a time when enemies mutate and opportunists test the nation’s resolve.

    General Olufemi Oluyede took command as Chief of Defense Staff, with Waidi Shaibu leading the Army, Kevin Aneke heading the Air Force, and Idi Abbas steering the Navy. It was not just a personnel change — it was a signal: the era of complacency is over, and nothing short of decisive victory against insurgents, bandits, and destabilisation cartels will suffice.

    READ ALSO: Femi Kuti reveals secret of longevity in music industry

    And yet, the President did not stop at administrative reform. He crowned action with philosophy on Thursday when he decorated the new chiefs. It was a charge steeped in urgency, clarity, and national expectation: “We cannot allow the crisis that began in 2009 to persist any longer. It is time to defeat the enemies. Be innovative, pre-emptive, and courageous. Nigerians expect results, not excuses.”

    In one sentence, the Commander-in-Chief reframed Nigeria’s counter-insurgency approach from reactive to offensive. He went further: “Let us smash the new snakes right in the head.”

    This was not metaphorical aggression; it was policy direction. Terrorists thrive on anticipation gaps, he closed that window. They exploit inter-agency silo mentality, he outlawed it by presidential directive: “Work together, compare notes, exchange information, and defeat this enemy once and for all.” He promised support and demanded accountability. He mourned the fallen and honoured their families. He thanked soldiers for reclaimed territories and refused to allow complacency.

    This is not the language of a ceremonial head; it is the voice of a wartime leader. And make no mistake, Nigeria is at war with forces who neither respect her sovereignty nor share her future. Tinubu’s message was unequivocal: they will not win.

    Leadership, in its purest form, is not infallibility. It is the capacity to act in public interest, refine decisions when confronted with new realities, and remain open to the moral pulse of the nation. This week, President Tinubu embodied that virtue.

    After consultations with the Council of State, he had earlier approved a list of 175 beneficiaries for presidential clemency. The public reaction was swift — especially around certain names whose offences struck deep emotional chords in the national conscience. The President did not stonewall. He did not rationalise. He did not retreat behind bureaucratic armour. He listened. He reviewed. He corrected.

    He removed 55 names, insisting that national security, victims’ rights, and public confidence could never be sacrificed on the altar of process. He relocated the Prerogative of Mercy Secretariat to the Ministry of Justice to tighten controls and tasked the Attorney-General with stricter guidelines. And he delivered the ultimate moral message: mercy is noble, but justice is sacred.

    In the words of Presidential Adviser Bayo Onanuga: “He is not afraid to reverse himself if he feels an error has been made. That is strength, not weakness.”

    It is worth underscoring — in a political culture where ego often trumps empathy, President Tinubu showed maturity. A genuine leader knows that listening is not surrender. It is service.

    If the security realignments showcased a decisive Commander-in-Chief, the economic decision unveiled a nationalist economist. Long before becoming President, Tinubu’s philosophy was clear: Nigeria’s resources must develop Nigerians. This week, that principle found expression in a quietly made, profoundly strategic decision, one whose implications will reverberate through Nigeria’s industrial future.

    On October 21, 2025, a fact only revealed publicly days later, the President approved a 15% import duty on petrol and diesel. Not to punish citizens. Not to burden the struggling. But to send an irreversible signal: the age of importing jobs and exporting opportunity is dying.

    For decades, Nigeria’s status as Africa’s top oil producer has been paradoxical, crude exporter, fuel importer; dignity compromised, economy constrained, future mortgaged. With local refineries finally entering production, policy had to align with national interest.

    By tilting the market in favour of domestic refining, Dangote’s mega refinery, modular plants in Edo, Imo, and other regions, the President is building a bridge to energy independence. As analysts rightly observed, “this duty is not a burden. It is a bridge — from dependence to independence.”

    It is industrial policy, not sentiment. It is job creation, not short-term populism. It is economic sovereignty, not foreign dependency.

    Nations do not rise by luck; they rise by nurturing strategic sectors and protecting infant industries until they mature. Tinubu has chosen the path every competitive nation has once chosen — from the U.S. steel industry to South Korea’s electronics revolution. He has chosen future prosperity over present applause. That is statesmanship.

    Taken together, these actions form a coherent philosophy: Security is foundational, not symbolic; governance is moral courage plus humility; economic sovereignty is a patriotic obligation; Listening to citizens is strength, not capitulation. Nigeria must own its future — militarily, economically, psychologically.

    This is not accidental governance. It is strategic statecraft. It echoes his earlier battles; currency unification despite political risks, student loans for equity in opportunity, global economic diplomacy that repositions Nigeria in the world. Every decision leans toward one principle: Nigeria must stand on her feet, not on borrowed crutches.

    For Nigerians bruised by years of insecurity, economic disruption, and institutional paralysis, Tinubu’s actions last week do more than manage crises. They reaffirm a contract; a contract to lead with resolve, adjust with humility, and envision a nation where justice and security are not elite commodities but universal guarantees. For the cynic, leadership is about optics. For the statesman, it is about outcomes.

    The President told the service chiefs: “We are in a hurry to celebrate peace”. He told Nigerians through his actions: We will build a nation where mercy is disciplined, security is uncompromised, and national wealth circulates at home, not offshore. And he told the world: Nigeria is not a weak state. It is a rising state reclaiming its agency.

    If the week’s headline events, the decisive military reset, the humble recalibration on clemency, and the nationalist fuel-duty policy, revealed the architecture of President Tinubu’s leadership, his other engagements through the week stitched together the fabric of a leader fully present: honouring history, inspiring the present, and engineering the future.

    It began on a note of gratitude and national memory. On Sunday, the President celebrated two icons of culture and service — veteran journalist Oloye Lekan Alabi at 75 and former Culture Minister, High Chief Edem Duke, at 70. Both men, torchbearers of Nigerian heritage and public duty, were praised for lives spent in elevating the nation’s narrative. In a week dominated by security and economic headlines, Tinubu reminded the country that national identity is also shaped by storytellers, cultural diplomats and civic architects.

    On Monday, he extended the same respect to pillars of democratic transition and generational mentorship, elder stateswoman Margaret Shonekan at 84, and Senator Abu Ibrahim at 80, whom he described as “a principled statesman and brother.” It was a nod to political memory, a leader rooted in history, refusing to detach governance from gratitude.

    Mid-week brought global and generational bridges. On Tuesday, Tinubu hosted Denmark’s Bestseller CEO, Anders Holch Povlsen, deepening Nigeria’s investment diplomacy and signalling that his industrial-nationalist vision embraces both domestic capacity and international capital. By Wednesday, the President honoured legal luminary Kola Awodein at 70, and in the same breath celebrated a rising star — NASENI Chief Executive, Khalil Halilu, 35 — proof that in Tinubu’s Nigeria, age is neither barrier nor entitlement; merit is.

    He continued that theme by praising female leadership and civic grace in Alhaja Adiat Subair at 80, then honoured Lagos’ revered monarch, Oba Rilwan Akiolu at 82, affirming traditional stools as partners in the republic.

    Thursday was policy and innovation day. Beyond the security charge, the President launched NINAuth — a leap in digital sovereignty. He praised Senator Osita Izunaso’s unwavering political service, and then capped the day with a global economic stroke: approving a National Carbon Market Framework to unlock up to $3bn annually.

    The Tinubu Doctrine in Motion

    The week under review will be remembered not for the events themselves, but for what they reveal about the man steering the ship of state. Tinubu’s leadership last week fused firmness with fairness, resolve with reflection, nationalism with strategy. In a world where leaders often choose applause over principle, he chose Nigeria.

    In crushing threats, correcting errors, and constructing economic resilience, he has signalled that the era of improvisational governance is fading, giving way to strategic, self-confident statecraft. Nigeria does not merely need a president; it needs a steward, a strategist, a listener, a reformer, and above all, a patriot. In the week in review, President Tinubu was all of these.

    And as the nation braces for the seasons ahead; confronting threats, seizing opportunities, and forging destiny, one truth grows clearer: Nigeria is under a leader who knows that history rewards not those who avoid storms, but those who steer through them. And steer he has begun.

  • Simply a citizen journalist

    Simply a citizen journalist

    Those who have attempted to write, or even those who are accomplished authors and writers, will testify that it is no mean feat to consistently write, and maintain a column, for close on 20 years.

    Why does the writer describe himself as a Citizen Journalist? Are there other types of journalists who may not quite qualify as ‘citizens’, though they may be carrying valid National ID cards?

    Google offers that “in the internal creative drive that motivates a writer to create, or the social role of a writer, is the conscience of society. 

    The internal conscience is the writer’s inner sense of purpose, driving them to write intentionally, and to hold themselves accountable, while the social conscience refers to a writer’s duty to expose societal wrongs, advocate for the vulnerable, and hold the powerful accountable through their work”.

    For me, this sums up what I think the writer has spent the last 20 years, or so, doing, that is, serving and probing, while holding himself accountable.

    I recall the story of TheNews/Tempo stable of publications. Right from the get-go, the founders rejected the notion of unbiased, neutral journalism. They chose, ab initio, the partisanship on the side of the disadvantaged, marginalised and voiceless Nigerians who were labouring  under the yoke of military misadventure in Nigerian Politics.

    Thus, they registered the company, not with their own names, but with the maiden names of their wives, and sought funders who did not expect financial reward.

    Orebe’s journalism has not been about newsreporting, which should be unbiased and fact – based. Rather, his journalism has been about commentary, Education,  intervention and mobilisatþion.

    And in these, he never had a chance to be neutral” –

    Hon. Idowu Obasa, Industrialist, former Chairman, Onigbongbo LCDA, and Lead Presenter of ‘SIMPLY … during the Author’s 80th birthday celebration.

    READ ALSO: Obi Cubana blames solo-ownership culture for African business failures

    Book: Simply A Citizen Journalist. 

    Author: Femi Orebe.

    Publishers: Mindscope Africa, Lagos.

    Year of Publication: 2025

    Amazon Link:https://a.co/d/dXnfY77

    Reviewer: Olakunle Abimbola, Editorial Board member/columnist, The Nation Newspaper, Lagos.

    I will start this review, of ‘Simply A Citizen Journalist’, with two very popular Yoruba sayings. (1) “Omode gbon, agba gbon, la fi da’le Ife” and (2) “Ogbon ol’ogbon ki je ka p’agba ni were”. 

    Both, translated roughly into English, mean ideas — or more narrowly, wisdom — is no monopoly of the aged or of the youth. That means a liberal mind soaks in ideas from far and wide: young or old, familiar or strange.

    So, the greatest strength of this collection of column essays (from 2006 to 2025), is its eclectic mix. It is a  616-page

    book, going by the Publisher’s preface.  The work draws from far and wide, foreign and local, sweet and sour, over a range of issues. But lo! That’s its greatest weakness too. The author, liberal and extremely polite, rather gives these ideas full “probative value”, as the lawyers say when jousting in the court, especially when they support his view point.  But more on that, presently.

    In the Preface, the Publisher, Okanlomo Seye Adetunmbi of Mindscope Africa,  detailed the book’s structure. 

    He spoke of five sections: “Reminiscences”, “Interrogative Political Essays”, “Mixed Cogitative Writings”,”Commendations, Reflections and Tributes” and “Reviewed Books”, as duly listed under the Table of Contents. 

    In his Preface, the Publisher shared, with readers, the rigour that went into shaping these five sections — and did a rather convincing job of that.

    But hey, a caveat emptor!  You want to dive into this huge ocean?  Then, you had better be a consummate swimmer, but not that cocky one the Yoruba warn against, that drowns with his skills!  The author, need I say again, is humble to a fault!  He also writes in clear, flowing and sparkling prose that just comes alive! 

    But don’t be deceived: his logic and rigour take no prisoners!  So, to best enjoy him, you must bring, to the table, your own counterpart intellectual humility.  Who knows?  You’ll probably take home a few new words, extremely readable as he is!  He comes to the party with a rich vocabulary — as expected of a rich mind and a lover of words.

    In this work, Orebe writes about others: persons, issues and places, though with his native Ekiti — of which he is immensely proud, with absolutely no apologies! — central in his thinking.  It’s as the Avatar, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, said: you can’t be a good Nigerian without first being a good Yoruba man. 

    So, from this tome, he oozes the Awo paradigm of patriotism: proud son of Are Ekiti, refined Ekiti gentleman all his long life, unapologetic Yoruba nationalist, and a very patriotic Nigerian. 

    He is very proud of his country, yes.  But he is also very angry at any thought that Nigeria, tremendously gifted, could be punching below its immense weight!

    Except you thoroughly understand these critical fundamentals, you just might not fully appreciate the passion — frothing and exciting — that the author brings to bear on each and every topic on which he sets his sharp mind, and applies his flowing pen.

    Which is why former President Olusegun Obasanjo is perhaps, in this book, the Ekiti “Enemy No. 1” — “enemy” here in inverted commas. But if by Ekiti, Obasanjo could hardly do anything right, then Dr. Kayode Fayemi, an Ekiti son in whom the author is well pleased, could hardly do anything wrong! 

    But on this too, the author seems to follow the pathway of another great Nigerian, the humble-to-a-fault, Gen. Yakubu Gowon, former military Head of State.  I don’t know if Orebe sees eye-to-eye with Gen. Gowon.  But the polished General always said he would always honour his elders; and sort out his mates.  But those younger than him?  To those, he’d never be cavalier: for you never know what they’ll become tomorrow!

    This Gowon-like humility, towards the far younger folks, seem to drive Orebe’s love for former Governor Fayemi, in power and out of it.  That’s clear from  many essays in this book.  Sure, that Fayemi halo is far from universal.  But tell me which public figure’s is?  Suffice it to say that the author respects anyone, of any age, that adds value.  That intellectual bent is very clear from these beautiful column pieces. 

    Indeed, that has been my impression of him, since I have had the privilege of knowing him at The Nation. Which is why I wondered: why me, when he asked me to do this review.  Why not his battery of brilliant and erudite protégés, young and old?  Besides, he could have phoned — and I would have jumped to make his day.  But no!  He  personally come to ask, bearing his tome!  Such humility!  God bless you sir!

    Simply A Citizen Journalist teems with the glut of polished humanity in the author’s cultured universe.  This prompts, in your mind, that famous quip — “Show me your friends, and I will tell you who you are!” — as you meet that galaxy.  That’s the cultivated world to which the columnist speaks.

    The first of the two Foreword pieces was written by Prof. Richard Adeboye Olaniyan, his teacher as a History undergraduate at the then University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo Univeristy), Ile-Ife. The second, by Dr. Dapo Fafowora, a retired ambassador and respected, former columnist with The Nation Newspaper.

    In “A stint in University Administration”, he listed Prof. Hezekiah Oluwasanmi, the iconic vice-chancellor that shaped the golden age of the old UNIFE; Chief S. J. Okudu, the lengendary Registar at the University of Ibadan, Nigeria’s first university, Prof. Ladipo Akinkugbe, ex-UI, famed medic and scholar, and first Principal of the University College, Ilorin (now University of Ilorin), Dr. Christopher Kolade, the famed Mr. Integrity that just passed on, Prof. Wole Soyinka, Nobel Laureate: the quintessential normative force and voice against moral and allied decay in Nigeria, etc.

    Move over to his heroes in “Tributes”, and who do you find?  Nelson Mandela, Barack Obama, Bola Ahmed Tinubu (now Nigeria’s president), Dr. Amos Akingba, Chief Deji Fasuan, Justice Olajide Olatawura, Chief Alex Olu Ajayi, Chief JGO Adegbite.

    The others are: Prince Julius Adelusi-Adeluyi, Prof. Sam Aluko, Prof. Jide Osuntokun and Prof. Bolaji Akinyemi (in a single tribute piece), the “Moremi” of Ekiti, the late Mrs. Funmi Olayinka, the other half of the Fayemi stolen mandate, recovered after three years, but who died of cancer before their term ended, Prof. Kayode Osuntokun, Sesan Ogunro, and Chief Samuel Bamidele Felegan, among others. 

    Add to this stellar list the suave, highly respected and unassuming General Ipoola Alani Akinrinade, whose Agbajo Yoruba Agbaye (Yoruba World Congress) the columnist toasted to no end as a must for every Omoluabi Yoruba, across partisan aisles.

    Of course, Prof. Oladipupo Akinkugbe also made the list, not shutting out Christ’s School Ado-Ekiti at 80 (in 2013) — the school that produced the author, and many, if not most, of the Ekiti icons that dominate his “Tributes”.

    Now, what does this tell you about the Orebe world?  It’s a universe of excellence — brilliance that teems with character — a twin-attribute lacking in today’s Nigeria. 

    Take “Nelson Mandela’s 12 avatars” (29 July 2007).  It was the author’s cultured, yet candid way, of telling the fresh ex-president how he had traded true greatness, ala Mandela, for a near-pariah status, despite his global clout — no thanks to his “do-or-die” voter heist of 2007, aside his collapsed Third-Term gambit.  Still, he scolded Obasanjo with love, even suggesting how he could repair his battered image.

    So, honest but brutal candour runs through the entire collection: his anger that Nigeria was a joke at 50 (12 September 2010); that the insane pay structure of the National Assembly could bankrupt the country (29 May 2011); his prescribed leadership for Nigeria: referencing the Edo/South West ACN gubernatorial class of Adams Oshiomhole (Edo), Babatunde Fashola (Lagos), Rauf Aregbesola (Osun), Ibikunle Amosu (Ogun), Abiola Ajimobi (Oyo); and Labour Party’s Olusegun Mimiko (Ondo). He reckoned the bumbling President Goodluck Jonathan, at Abuja, could pick up one or two things from this sub-national ensemble (5 June 2011).

    Other major issues that he treated were restructuring and the national question, in his endless engagement with other minds, on Nigeria’s unitary federalism — what an oxymoron! 

    Indeed, he always went back to this topic: as the unrepentant Awoist and unflappable post-June 12 progressive that he is. 

    The ludicrous 16-is-greater-than-19 stance of PDP Plateau Governor, Jonah Jang, who lost the Nigerian Governors Forum election to Rivers Rotimi Amaechi, but went to church for thanksgiving for his “win”! (28 July 2013).  The war-without-end among the Afenifere grandees, the Afenifere younger elements’ futile efforts to settle these ancestral feuding and the eventual birth of the Afenifere Renewal Group (ARG).

    Indeed, what other topic of the age did he not treat?  The Ekitipanupo intellectual-fest on Nigeria?  The Yoruba Academy and its brilliant DAWN: the Development Agenda of Western Nigeria?  The odyssey of Justice Ayo Salami, then President of the Court of Appeal, for doing right by Ekiti voters, by helping to retrieve the Fayemi/Olayinka stolen mandate?  

    Boko Haram and its variant of banditry and kidnapping for ransom? The Fayose second coming in Ekiti, and the shame of a “photochromically” rigged election by the Jonathan Presidency, even as Governor Fayemi and his Ekiti progressives fought to the death?  The EndSARS riots of 2020? Or: What I call the Orebe-Buhari puzzle? 

    The Orebe-Buhari puzzle! The columnist backed Gen. Muhammadu Buhari to the hilt as the APC candidate. But as President, he also railed at him, with no less ferocity, during that southern hysteria against the “Fulani herdsmen” and “nepotism”!

    In fairness though, outside the bogey of an alleged Fulani rogue force, surreptitiously taking over Yoruba forests for evil motives, he still showed the former President grace, understanding and empathy. 

    Of course, he also wrote on COVID-19, the direst public health pandemic, so far, of this 21st century.

    In this tome, posterity would find the true spirit of the age, as captured by a fecund, influential and significant columnist.  That’s why it should prove a priceless collection for any tertiary education library worth its name.

    Also, though not a career politician, his role — and his darts — in helping to shape Nigeria’s progressive politics, especially in his native South West, made a compelling reading. 

    He was “Saul” in pushing the Akin Omoboriowo’s gubernatorial cause.  But he turned “Paul” by backing Governor Michael Ajasin, after Omoboriowo had crossed over to the ruling National Party of Nigeria (NPN).  Thus, he reinforced his Yoruba progressive credential.  That, in the terrible violence of the period, made the difference between life and death!

    Still, his family — nuclear and extended — was caught up in that 1983 Ondo State electoral violence, which buried the Second Republic (1979-1983).  Though the author and his young family of four: his wife and three young children escaped unscathed, his brother-in-law was felled in it all!  This bitter-sweet tale honed his progressives bona fides.

    Why, there was even a grim humour to it all: the military take-over also buried his new job as Board Chair, Sungas Ltd, an Odua Investment subsidiary.  But all his nuclear family could offer was a mock celebration: “No more chairman!  No more chairman!”  His wife and treasured young brood won’t touch politics — not even with a long pole!  Yet, his mother-in-law, Mama Chief (Mrs) Adeyinka Fagbola, the one they called AG MOTHER in Ile – Ife, was among the first eleven, in Chief Awolowo’s Action Group (AG), at Ile-Ife!

    Is the collection perfect?  No.  Hardly any work is — and that takes us back to how the columnist liberally quotes from others, and gives all of them full probative value, to reinforce his point of view. 

    In truth, most of those voices do justice and add value, as the Obama and Fayemi takes, which the columnist fulsomely quoted, in his Mandela obituary piece. 

    But a few of them too end as flabby emotions.  A good example is a University P

    rofessor, so irked at the huge pay to National Assembly members, he asked that the Senate be abolished.  The author promptly agreed.

    Well, just imagine.  By population, Ekiti and Bayelsa are among the tiniest Nigerian states.  What, if you abolish the Senate, six members represent Ekiti in House of Representatives; against 24 representing Kano!  Won’t tiny Ekiti shriek marginalization?

    That’s the point!  Federalism is no mere label.  Rather, it’s a rigorous concept, to balance the interest of the tiny against the mighty, in a federal territory.  So, with all due respect, suggestions to abolish the Senate, because the cost is prohibitive, is emotive rather than rigorous.  Any thinking that suggests that reminds one of that quip: if education is expensive, try ignorance!

    On the technical side, the book’s editing is tight.  But not so tight, the proof-reading.  Many compound words: e.g. “short-lived”, “people-friendly”, etc, which ought to have been hyphenated, roll out as two words.  But happily, these glitches hardly define the work.  The chapter heading/text contrast and display, for reader-friendliness, could be better.  But again, vintage pictures, at various stages of the author’s long and illustrious life, were used to break the monotony of text.

    Now, on a lighter note! The Irish, James Joyce, wrote on his alter ego, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (1916). Baba Femi Orebe, in whose honour we are here gathered, turned 80 on September 24.  Happy birthday sir!

     But in his tribute of 28 September 2025: “Salute to citizen journalist extraordinaire”, the Snooper in The Nation Sunday, Tatalo Alamu, was in a rare impish mirth, away from his grumpy jeremiad, over the collapsing “post-colonial state”!  He recalled how, a editor of Cobra, that militant UNIFE campus magazine, created one “posthumous” Love me Obere — to fend off, he warned, any legal complications!  To which the suspect would gamely respond to his mischievous teasers: “Awon omo radarada!” — infernal rascals!

    No prize for guessing right: it’s Tatalo’s impish portraiture of our grandee at 80 as a dashing, cerebral and sociable young man!  Even at 80, he remains the ever dapper one!

    I will end by congratulating the   Orebe family, starting with the matriarch, Mama Atinuke Orebe, whose abiding sweetness, the patriarch always spares no superlative to vouch.  To their three lovely offspring, and their own spouses and children, you’re indeed blessed to belong to such a lovely family.

    But my parting words to him would be this: Baba, it’s those same words you used to honour your late mentor, Prof. Oladipupo Olujimi Akinkugbe, when he turned 80 in 2013:  Wa daigbo sir!  May you live longer than your hero in health, wealth and an ever acute mind!

    Thank you, ladies and gentlemen for your attention.