Category: Comments

• By Egajivwie Frank Odiri

AS the 2027 general elections inch closer, political realignments are intensifying, with opposition forces attempting to consolidate under a unified front to challenge President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s anticipated re-election bid. Central to this movement is a newly energized coalition of political heavyweights and estranged allies, now rallying under the banner of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), which has been adopted as the coalition’s official platform. Despite the growing momentum, declarations of intent, and calculated media optics, a realistic analysis of Nigeria’s current political terrain suggests that unseating Tinubu in 2027 remains highly improbable.

One of the pivotal figures driving the coalition’s resurgence is former Kaduna State Governor, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai. His increasingly vocal opposition to President Tinubu, following his exit from the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), has transformed him into a symbolic figure for anti-establishment forces within and beyond the North. El-Rufai’s role in repositioning the ADC is widely viewed as a personal political rebirth following his exclusion from the federal cabinet. Once a key ally during the anti-PDP era, El-Rufai has now recast himself as a strategic adversary, aligning with similarly disenchanted figures across party lines. While some observers believe the two men—one a technocrat, the other a master tactician—could have collaborated for national development, it appears Tinubu is playing the long game, prioritizing loyalty and stability over risky alliances.

With El-Rufai and others working behind the scenes, the ADC coalition is reportedly weighing a shortlist of potential presidential candidates. Names such as Peter Obi, Atiku Abubakar, Rotimi Amaechi, and a yet-to-be-named northern consensus figure have surfaced. However, each of these options presents its own set of political liabilities. Obi and Amaechi, as southern candidates, face the hurdle of regional sentiment in a country still heavily influenced by geopolitical balance. Despite Obi’s energetic youth support and Amaechi’s residual appeal in parts of the South-South, both would struggle to gain serious traction in the North, a region that remains electorally decisive. Northern power brokers, even those disgruntled with Tinubu, may be reluctant to back another southerner so soon after Buhari’s tenure ended just four years ago.

Read Also: Tinubu urges youth to use new media for unity, patriotism

This dilemma plays directly into the hands of Tinubu’s northern allies, who would deploy a simple but effective message: why replace a southern president with another southerner when the South is only halfway through its expected eight-year rotation? This sentiment would resonate not just with northern conservatives but also with swing voters in the Middle Belt and parts of the North-West, where regional loyalty often outweighs partisan ideology.

Alternatively, a northern candidate such as Atiku Abubakar might energize parts of the northern electorate, particularly in the North-East and some sections of the North-West. But this would immediately alienate large portions of the South-West and South-South, who widely believe that power must remain in the South until 2031. The memory of Buhari’s eight-year northern presidency is still fresh, and many southern voters, across political affiliations, would likely resist any attempt to return the presidency to the North prematurely. Even the North-Central region, traditionally viewed as a swing bloc, would be a tough sell. Atiku’s inability to win a single state in the zone during the 2023 elections remains instructive.

Beyond candidate dynamics, the coalition faces the formidable barrier of incumbency. President Tinubu occupies the most powerful office in the land, with access to the levers of federal power, appointments, security coordination, and project implementation. As with his predecessors, the sitting president has enormous tools at his disposal to build alliances, reward loyalty, and neutralize opposition. Federal appointments and strategic development interventions are already being deployed across key geopolitical zones, signaling a clear intent to expand Tinubu’s base ahead of 2027.

The APC, despite internal friction, remains the most organized political machine in Nigeria. It has nationwide structures, entrenched grassroots networks, and institutional knowledge of electoral battlefields. By contrast, the opposition is still fractured. The ADC, PDP, Labour Party, and SDP are all pulling in different directions without a unified ideology, message, or clear roadmap. The idea that this loose arrangement can produce a single, widely accepted candidate with a cohesive campaign strategy and viable path to victory is, at this stage, far-fetched.

Moreover, Tinubu is not a political novice riding on incumbency alone. He is a seasoned strategist who spent years building alliances, cultivating loyalty, and managing the political ecosystem from the shadows before stepping into the presidency. Since assuming office, he has continued to consolidate power through calculated appointments, policy manoeuvres, and outreach to previously skeptical constituencies. Even regions that gave him low support in 2023 are beginning to see increased federal presence—a deliberate effort to recalibrate regional sentiment ahead of the next polls.

Finally, there is the question of national mood and the unwritten rule of regional power rotation. There exists a widespread consensus, particularly in the South and Middle Belt, that the presidency should remain in the South until 2031. This is not just a political argument but one rooted in the country’s fragile sense of fairness, equity, and national cohesion. Any effort by the opposition coalition to reverse this sentiment by fielding a northern candidate could provoke backlash and drive moderate southern voters back into Tinubu’s camp, even if reluctantly.

While the adoption of the ADC as a coalition platform may give the opposition a semblance of structure, it does little to address the fundamental strategic and electoral challenges that lie ahead. Without a clear ideological foundation, credible nationwide structures, and a candidate capable of uniting both the North and South, the coalition’s mission remains aspirational at best.

President Tinubu, for all the criticisms his administration may face, retains a firm grip on power, a strategic understanding of Nigeria’s political terrain, and the advantage of incumbency. For now, the path to Aso Rock in 2027 is still his to lose.

• Egajivwie Frank Odiri is a Public Affairs Analyst. He writes from Agbor, Delta State. Contact: lymonfranky80@gmail.com

• By Aliyu Gaya

One exceptionally commendable fact about the Bola Tinubu presidency is that it is not lacking in ambition and audacity. Courage defines the leader and Tinubu has it in good measure. Think about this: Tinubu wants to grow Nigeria net-worth to a $1 trillion economy by 2030. While this shows ambition, it is much more a demonstration of audacity in leadership.

To achieve this, Tinubu says Nigeria must lean on and encourage local production. He believes that achieving food security is the sine qua non for advancing the nation’s economy through heavy investments in the agriculture value chain. He is pushing a Nigeria First, Buy-Nigeria policy. Some of his ministers and appointees are also singing the same local production hymn.

A quick fact-check shows that this is not new, especially since the commencement of the 4th Republic. President Olusegun Obasanjo, it has to be emphasised, laid a solid foundation to promote indigenous production of goods and services. He did not chime Buy Nigeria, he lived it, implemented it and the results were profound. The results of Obasanjo’s Buy Nigeria policy manifested in diverse ways. Local patronage of indigenous fruit drinks and ban on imported ones; local production of air time cards for GSM service providers; local patronage of locally assembled computers that gave a huge boost to local production of same such that some ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) standardised their IT operations on indigenous computer hardware and software.

Sadly, despite the traction gained by indigenous products, the succeeding governments did not as much as sustain the Buy-Nigeria momentum. Tinubu seems determined to do so. But to achieve the noble ambition of $1 trillion economy, President Tinubu must listen to key Nigerians who are not only employers of labour, but are deeply committed to indigenous production as the key to unlocking the huge potential of the nation’s economy.

One of such Nigerians Tinubu must take heed to his advice is Aliko Dangote whose refinery is the biggest single infrastructure project in Africa. Dangote, a major indigenous manufacturer, is not happy with the manner local companies are treated in Nigeria.

Dangote recently advocated for policies that protect indigenous industries and nurture them into mega corporations capable of generating jobs and fostering prosperity. Addressing a gathering of manufacturers and investors in Abuja recently while delivering a keynote on ‘Rethinking Manufacturing in Nigeria’ at the Nigeria Manufacturers’ Summit, Dangote advocated a reversal of government policies that expose local players to vulnerabilities including continued importation of goods and services that are also produced in Nigeria. Such lack of protection of indigenous players usually in the form of lack of patronage from the government and Nigerians stunts the growth of these local players.

He cited instances of countries where governments had to take drastic measures to protect their respective local markets. These include the blocked sale of US steel to Nippon Steel of Japan; the blocked sale of six US port management companies to Dubai Ports World; restrictions on Chinese cranes at US ports; and the US imposition of tariffs such as 100% on Chinese EVs (electric vehicles), 50% on semiconductors, medical products, and solar panels.

There are other instances, including the restriction of Russia gas supply to Europe, which led European countries to increase coal usage despite opposition to fossil fuels; and the US government’s distribution of $39 billion in subsidies to incentivise local microchip production. The above cases clearly show how respective governments deliberately protect their local players, not only to give them a head-start over competition but also to help them scale up on the path of profitability. Nigerian governments have been short on this.

Read Also: Sanwo-Olu’s wife launches N60m Tinubu’s RHI Agric support

Leo Stan Ekeh, of Zinox Group is yet another voice Tinubu should give ears to. Ekeh much like Dangote and others, has been a victim of serial blackmail and corporate bullying despite his undeniable sacrifice to create a digital culture in the Nigerian marketplace including education, media, banking, oil and gas, agriculture and other aspects of the economy. His Computerise Nigeria project became the cornerstone for the establishment of digital hubs in the nation’s tertiary institutions.

Ekeh believes that achieving a $1 trillion economy is possible but stressed that the current state of power delivery nationwide (an average of four hours per day according to latest NBS data) cannot support the type of bullish industrialisation and local production that will bolster the nation’s economic trajectory to the trillion-dollar mark. He warned that a situation where genuine players in local production and service delivery are bullied and blackmailed by unscrupulous private sector fringe players and public sector operators does not bode well for economic growth. He urges more protection from government for the progressive and proven indigenous companies. He says the concept of Buy-Nigeria should be enforced especially among MDAs.

He also suggested that Tinubu aggressively pursue a policy that promotes patronage of indigenous manufacturers and service providers as a way of reflating the economy.

He said: “It is evident that the core of the myriad challenges afflicting the nation today is our failure to develop local capacities. We must embrace self-sufficiency by consuming what we produce and supporting indigenous players across various sectors.”

He regretted that in spite of several local content policies established by the federal government, such policies are consistently disregarded by government employees and appointees, wondering why “we send our children to the world’s best institutions, where they excel, yet we overlook the products they create.”

He gave the example of the government of India which effective November 1, 2023 placed restrictions on the importation of laptops, tablets, all-in-one personal computers and ultra-small computers and servers with immediate effect. This, according to him, was to boost local productivity both by multinationals operating in India and indigenous Indian companies to create more jobs, encourage proficiency, and discourage capital flight.

“Mr. President, I humbly appeal to you to be deliberate and decisive in encouraging indigenous producers and service providers across all sectors. This way, we create a market for indigenous products, build confidence in our economy and easily attract international investors. The way we treat our local investors will determine how many foreign investors we can attract,” he stated in an open letter to the president earlier this year. The voices of Dangote and Ekeh echo the voices of other indigenous players who have continued to deliver value amid vicious headwinds.

Speaking at the inaugural Domestic Investors Summit in Abuja recently, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Investment, Jumoke Oduwole, reaffirmed Tinubu’s steely determination to achieve the trillion-dollar economy. She outlined targets for 2025, including $6 billion in foreign direct and portfolio investment, $6.5 billion in non-oil exports, a 20 per cent increase in trade value, and the creation of 200,000 export-led jobs. This is grand. But the major pulley that will drive this growth is the recommendation of leading indigenous players that the government, as a priority, protect local investors and entrepreneurs through patronage, policy shift that encourages growth and categorising such investors’ assets as national assets deserving of preservation.

•Gaya, a public policy analyst, writes from Kano