WEEKS after a faction of the pan-Yoruba socio-political and cultural group, Afenifere, endorsed the presidential ambition of ex-vice president Atiku Abubakar, the pan-Igbo socio-cultural organisation, the Ohanaeze Ndigbo, has followed suit with its own elaborate endorsement. The beneficiary of the latest Southeast endorsement is of course Alhaji Atiku. If endorsements were a significant factor in winning the presidency, the former vice president should be coasting to victory in the February 16 election. The South-South, North central, Northeast and Northwest do not have similar ethnic or regional organisations, otherwise the country would also be expecting their endorsements. But in fact they do endorse in nuanced and covert ways, which are often obvious only after the ballots are cast.
The South-South seems in some ways marching to the beat of Alhaji Atiku. If that march should be equal to an endorsement, then, going by the publicised political positions and preferences of the Southwest and Southeast, the entire southern states, bar perhaps one or two, would appear to have made up their minds to follow the former vice president all the way to the promised land. But in reality, endorsements are complex and sometimes uncertain, and are often dependent on many factors, most of them emotional and financial. The Southwest endorsement is even more complicated. Riven by three Afenifere factions, with one of the factions claiming superior mandate to endorse, the zone is unlikely to head in one direction in February, or whenever the elections hold. But the Afenifere faction that endorses Alhaji Atiku derides the other factions, describing them as either paid stooges or non-existent groups.
The Ohanaeze endorsement in the Southeast is less complicated but significantly tenuous. Though the group is not factionalised, and has for many years spoken with one voice principally on account of their shared feeling of alienation, its endorsements and resolutions are often vitiated by the many activist or militant groups balkanising the Southeast population. Among those vociferous groups are the charismatic but badly led Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), the rather perplexed Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), and other minor splinters of the two groups. They all have huge followings and are as assertive as the Ohanaeze; but they are evidently less cerebral, less restrained and hardly diplomatic. Both MASSOB and IPOB have been less forthcoming in giving endorsements. Their indifference alert both the Igbo and the rest of the county to other priorities of the activists that war against the goals and principles of the Fourth Republic.
After declaring itself as the apex socio-cultural organisation working for the interests of the Igbo inside and outside Nigeria, Ohanaeze went ahead to premise its endorsement for Alhaji Atiku on the following:
- Ohaneze notes particularly that a major political party (PDP) by the nomination of our son, Peter Obi, as the vice presidential candidate has given Ndigbo an opportunity for inclusivity. Ndigbo must seize the moment;
- That the presidential candidate of PDP Alhaji Atiku Abubakar has made an avowed commitment to restructuring of the federation and reconfirmed same during his recent visit to the United States in his meetings with high-level US officials;
- In consideration of the above and other relevant existential factors pertaining to the treatment of the Igbo in our polity, the Ime Obi Ohaneze, therefore, hereby ratify the decision reached at the Ohaneze National Executive Committee (NEC)meeting held in Enugu on Tuesday, 22 January, 2019, to adopt the Atiku Abubakar/ Peter Obi ticket in the 2019 presidential election. Ime Obi there all their years of activism and politicking is why they presumptuously claim to represent their peoples, and by inference, their zones. It is true that they sometimes cleverly aggregate the feelings of their zones, and even emblematise them, but they have neither at any time subjected themselves to elections as a group nor called for a referendum both on their identity and claims as a group and their objectives, regardless of how those objectives change from time to time. Both Ohanaeze and Afenifere were formed by a group of individuals, administered according to the rules and regulations of the organisations, and always elected their leaders as organisations do, not as geopolitical zones. Their claims to representation is, therefore, suspect. While the Ohanaeze has modestly describe itself as a socio-cultural organisation, the more voluble faction of Afenifere has described itself as a socio-political organisation, sometimes completely omitting the cultural aspect of their founding. This column has graciously but gratuitously re-inserted the cultural aspect of the Afenifere founding. Why both Afenifere and Ohanaeze could not resist the temptation to significantly whittle down their interference in the politics of their two regions is hard to say. Their peoples are too sophisticated, too politically conscious, and too ideologically diverse to be herded into one association or one direction. The Igbo are too republican and too resistant to regimentation to be herded into one column; and the Yoruba are too liberal and even regicidal to be dictated to by one group or one man. Restricting themselves to their socio-cultural agenda would have been highly recommended and less controversial.
But by coming out with its endorsement last Thursday, the Ohanaeze obviously failed to learn anything from the controversy generated by the Afenifere when they endorsed Alhaji Atiku on the grounds of his promise to champion restructuring. More, even if the Afenifere pigheadedly failed to learn any lesson from the fiasco that accompanied their endorsement of Goodluck Jonathan’s re-election bid during the 2014/2015 election cycle, Ohanaeze had enough example from the Southwest to make it more circumspect in dishing out endorsement to a party or politician when they have not so far been able to answer the question of who gave them the mandate to speak for their people.
It is true that on the whole, and especially given the activism of both MASSOB and IPOB, the Southeast faces terrifying existential questions aggravated by the insensitivity of the Buhari presidency . It is also fairly accurate that Ohanaeze, IPOB and MASSOB have tended to address the same issues and campaigned for inclusive politics. Even much more, all three groups, each claiming to represent the Igbo stoutly and unequivocally, also direct their attention to the issue of restructuring. But despite the coterminousness of their goals, not to say the vigour of their campaigns, none of them has proved conclusively that they represent the Igbo. Or that the Igbo accept their representation.
In the 2015 elections, the Igbo voted in one general direction, with only minor deviations. It is not clear how they will vote in 2019. But if the marginalisation to which they have been sentenced by the Buhari presidency should prove significant to skew their votes in favour of Alhaji Atiku, it will unlikely be due to the fact that Ohanaeze told them to vote for the former vice president. It is all but clear that the Southwest is facing its own decision crisis, wondering whether to endure for another four years in a classic display of enlightened self-interest, or to jump ship and embrace Alhaji Aiku in a spectacular embrace of unstated principles. Whichever way they vote, they won’t find making up their minds easy at all.
Unlike the factionalised Afenifere, the Ohanaeze was long expected to endorse Alhaji Atiku. This is why so many people have remarked the courage of the Southeast elders to, as it were, put their money where their mouths are. It remains to be seen, however, just what value the endorsement will add to the Atiku campaign. If they are able to deliver the region almost wholesale to the former vice president, and more, inflict a crushing on President Buhari next month, the stock of Ohanaeze might rise astronomically. They had better hope the complete reverse is not the case. For a crushing defeat for their candidate, not to talk of a total defeat in the general election, would forebode not only a dismemberment of the socio-cultural organisation, but by the most optimistic consideration a complete denudation of their influence and identity.