In parts, President Goodluck Jonathan’s speech before the All Nigeria Political Parties Summit held in Abuja last week is the stuff of the rhetoric of statesmanship.
“Our roles should not be limited to the struggle to win elections and acquire political powers but also to handling the demands of patriotism and statesmanship and restoring hope to the Nigerian people,” he said with reference to the political class. “In all this, it is pertinent that the actions, conduct and utterances of all political stakeholders reflect the highest level of commitment to the defence of our social cohesion, our political stability and our sovereignty as a nation.”
This is the stuff of the rhetoric of high patriotism, rendered all the more rousing by its ex-cathedra provenance. The President and Commander-in-Chief is nothing if not patriot-in-chief as well.
And there is more from Dr Jonathan.
“The conduct and utterances of leading politicians at home and abroad,” he said, are rapidly creating and spreading unnecessary tension in the country. Such unguarded utterances on their part fester (sic) the embers of discord, bitterness and rancor. Such unfortunate development plays into the hands of extremist elements waging a vicious campaign of terror against the state.”
High-minded stuff indeed, in a long season of pusillanimity.
“Our political parties,” he went on, “must remain positive and constructive in their engagements as we seek to build a virile and stable nation that can compete with other states in the world.”
Not even the most querulous commentator can find fault with these remarks. They are indeed the stuff of the rhetoric of statesmanship, it is necessary to insist.
When Dr Jonathan went on to warn of “very remorseless and anti-democratic forces operating in the political system, ever ready to exploit lapses in the management of our political and electoral processes,” and that some of these forces may during the forthcoming elections, “through their lifestyle, truncate the nation’s hard-won democratic liberty,”you could properly charge him with hyperbole, some scare-mongering even.
The newspapers, circulating freely again after a four-day blockade imposed by the military officials in the name of “national security,” dutifully captured the President’s rather apocalyptic warning on their front pages or in their headlines.
Samples: “Jonathan alleges plot to scuttle 2015 polls” (The Guardian). “Forces out to truncate democracy – Jonathan (Vanguard). “Jonathan: anti-democratic forces working against 2015 polls” (The NATION, on an inside page).
You could point out that being ever ready to “exploit lapses in the management of business of the politically and electoral processes” is the main business of the political opposition, consecrated in the letter and spirit of the Constitution. Any opposition party that fails to exploit such lapses ought to have its registration withdrawn.
You could also ask how political actors could truncate Nigeria’s democracy “through their lifestyle,” of all things.
But you would still have to situate Dr Jonathan’s warning in the context of the rhetoric of statesmanship that runs through portions of his speech.
Taken as a whole, however, the speech lacks not just plausibility but moral force. Dr Jonathan came across like the direction post that is always pointing somewhere but never going there.
In his actions and utterances, he is first and foremost leader of the PDP, desperate to keep his party in power by all means and at all cost, and to secure another term. That preoccupation often trumps his office as President of Nigeria; rarely does he come across as a statesman.
Take as an example, his declaration that terrorism, Boko Haram style, is convulsing only states governed by the opposition APC, whereas states governed by the PDP are models of good governance and orderly development.
It so happens that the three North-eastern states ravaged by terrorism are indeed governed by the APC. But that is not the whole truth. The larger truth is that, until their governors defected to the APC some six months ago, those states had been under the control of the PDP since the end of military rule in 1999. Plateau State, which has at its helm Jonah Jang, the chair of the PDP Governors Forum, is being daily ravaged by “Fulani herdsman” terrorism, with occasional Boko Haram intervention.
By his unhelpful and utterly partisan declamation, Dr Jonathan effectively politicised what was hitherto an issue on which all Nigerians were united across party affiliation. And yet, in his speech, he could say with a straight face that “We must never politicise the fundamentals and core imperatives of defending the state,” since doing so would only “embolden” the terrorists and their confederates.
Not yet done, Dr Jonathan publicly berated the former PDP governors who migrated to the APC, saying that they could not win elections in their constituencies.
Even if that is true, it smacks of politics in its rawest form. Dr Jonathan should have left that kind of talk to one of the dozens of political flunkeys at his service, or front organisations flush with slush funds from his alternative treasury.
Take again the petulant vindictiveness with which he has pursued Sanusi Lamido Sanusi’s ascendancy as Emir of Kano. Sanusi had served out his controversial suspension from the post of Central Bank Governor and his lawsuit challenging the ouster is before the courts.
We have it from reliable sources that Dr Jonathan tried to block Sanusi’s preferment. His party, the ruling PDP, even tried to pre-empt it by publicly congratulating one of the contestants who, it would turn out, had not been designated emir.
When these shabby tactics failed, the police, acting on Abuja’s orders, blockaded the emir’s palace, claiming rather disingenuously that they were doing so to ensure the safety of its treasure of precious artifacts. It was as if the matter at issue were the throne of Emir of Nigeria rather than that of Emir of Kano. Meanwhile, denied access to the palace, the new emir had to take up temporary residence in Government House, Kano, as the Governor’s guest.
The siege on the Emir’s palace was lifted only after Abuja had extracted an apology of sorts from Sanusi over his disclosure of wide gaps in the Federal Government’s financial reporting, and a promise to do nothing that would embarrass the federal authorities.
There is no statesmanship here, only petulance.
Finally, there is President Jonathan’s open and enthusiastic embrace of Ayo Fayose as his party’s candidate in the Ekiti gubernatorial election scheduled for Saturday. Fayose once occupied that position based on a gravely flawed election and was impeached for gross misconduct and dismissed. He is a suspect in the investigation of the murder of two of his political opponents and the subject of an indictment for serious fraud.
It may well be that Dr Jonathan could not dissuade his party from nominating Fayose. Still, in another country, the President would have kept a very long distance between himself and a candidate so heavily tainted.
Not in Nigeria. For there was Dr Jonathan the other day, enthusiastically presenting Fayose to the Ekiti people in a carnival atmosphere, with PDP chieftains and the mighty apparatus of the Nigerian state in tow. The only thing missing was Dr Jonathan’s trademark azonto dance.
There is no statesmanship here, no thought about the next generation, only raw political calculation to serve the needs of the moment.
