Nigeria’s potential
The word “potential” ranks highly in the list of adjectives that have been used to describe Nigeria since the country’s independence some 58 years ago. Yet it would not be an overstatement to say Nigeria has failed to meet its potentials in its almost six decades of independence — from the failure of its first generation politicians to develop a solid foundation for the country, to the abject catastrophe of successive military coup plotters from 1966 to 1999 (including that of the intervening civilian regime from 1979 to 1983), to the utter disappointment of the civilian administrations since the transition to civil rule in 1999.
Nigeria, with its massive human capital potential (population of over 180 million, by far the most populous in Africa) and its enormous economic potential (GPD of over $400 billion, by far the highest in the continent), has nonetheless failed to seize those human capital and economic potentials and to translate them into development for the benefit of its people.
The transition to civil rule
Following the transition to civil rule in 1999 after decades of stunted development under military rule, Nigerians held out hope that finally, here was an opportunity for the country’s potential to be realized. It is now abundantly clear, almost 20 years following the transition to civil rule, that what Nigeria has succeeded in doing has been to replace the outgoing military regime with civilian clones of the outgoing military rulers. Though the Obasanjo administration initially appeared to be setting the country on the right trajectory toward realizing its potential, by the end of his second term, Obasanjo subjected the country to a personal vendetta because Nigerians pushed back against his attempt to amend the constitution to enable him run for a third term. In an act that can only be described as vindictive, Obasanjo gave us Umaru Yar’Adua, a president who spent the majority of his tenure in a sick bed in Saudi Arabia.
Ever since the ill-fated 1993 elections that returned Moshood Abiola as winner, it has been clear that given a shot at free and fair elections, Nigerians are able to sustain the democratic process and return the best candidate. The problem we have faced is that the political processes and institutions have tended to be commandeered by the worst of us and the control of these processes and institutions have then been used to propagate the interests of this cabal-of-the-worst and to maintain their hold on power.
As such, when President Yar’Adua, incapacitated by terminal illness, should have written to the legislature informing of his inability to discharge the functions of his office and thereby transmitting presidential powers to the VP as provided by Section 145 of the Constitution, the cabal of self-interested political acolytes put forward various arguments as to why such a transfer of powers would not be forthcoming — the most ludicrous of which was that President Yar’Adua could very well run the country from his Saudi hospital bed.
For over two months, Nigeria had neither a sitting president nor an acting president. It took the persistent effort of the Nigerian people, and, notably, the vociferous and unrelenting coverage of online news platform Sahara Reporters, to push back against the cabal that was advancing the tenuous argument of a Saudi hospital-based presidency to eventually see to the transition of presidential powers to Goodluck Jonathan. Jonathan was to serve the rest of Yar’Adua’s term on account of the latter’s passing in May 2010.
When Jonathan bid for the presidency in 2011, Nigerians once again saw an opportunity to realize the country’s potential. Here was a man unsullied by the political baggage of the vast majority of the political class. True to his name, he had come up the political ranks through a succession of sheer luck: he became Governor of Bayelsa upon the impeachment of his boss, Diepreye Alamieyeseigha; he was hand-picked by Obasanjo to serve as VP to Yar’Adua for reasons best known to Obasanjo; he became Acting President upon Yar’Adua’s incapacity. He was from the South-South, a region that had never held the presidency. He was a PhD and was sure to have the requisite administrative capacity, we thought. Here was our opportunity to break the old mold and bring in a new breed of president of the federal republic.
If the expectations of the Jonathan presidency were high, the disappointment over his unsatisfactory performance was even higher. While many Nigerians held the view that Jonathan was well-intentioned, it was clear that he was, as they say, in over his head and had no control over the spectacular theft of public funds pervading his administration. By the time he was up for re-election in 2015, many of the progressives who pushed for his presidential bid in 2011 now actively supported his main opponent, Muhammadu Buhari.
Buhari had run in every presidential contest since the transition to civil rule and, truth be told, was not going to win any of them. He carried the baggage of his overthrow of an elected civilian government in 1983 and his heavy-handed administration of the country until he was, in turn, overthrown in another coup in 1985. Buhari also bore charges of sectionalism (in favor of the North), ethnocentrism (in favor of the Hausa/Fulani), and religious fanaticism (in favor of Islam and of sympathizing with those who would have Sharia law apply across the country).
Notwithstanding these charges, Buhari’s campaign positioned on the man’s purported integrity and incorruptibility, a positioning that was and continues to be contested by his detractors. Whether Buhari is truly incorruptible or not, it is inarguable that few figures who have been involved in Nigerian politics for any period of time can make a claim to integrity and incorruptibility with any level of seriousness.
2015 was going to be different presidential election bid for Buhari, however. Jonathan had lost his allure on account of his underwhelming performance and the level of corruption within his administration. And, given the configuration of electoral politics in Nigeria as in many other democratic republics, there appeared only one serious alternative: Buhari.
This time around, the progressives, and again notably Sahara Reporters, who had fought the Yar’Adua cabal in 2010 and strongly supported Jonathan’s ascension to the presidency in 2011, decided they would discount the charges of sectionalism, ethnocentrism and religious fanaticism against Buhari, and place a premium on his perceived integrity and incorruptibility. His administration’s heavy-handed approach to disciplining Nigerians between 1983 and 1985 was seen as perhaps now needed to curtail the corruption prevailing under the Jonathan administration.
Buhari’s administration and Nigeria’s yet unrealized potential
Despite the massive sums of money deployed by the PDP to ensure a presidential win and the continuation of the Jonathan administration, the force of the people’s desire for change, and the use of social media to monitor and report on the elections on online platforms such as Sahara Reporters, brought about Buhari’s win, the first time in the history of the country that a candidate of an opposition political party would win a presidential election. The dual-mandates to Buhari were clear: excise the disease of corruption from the Nigeria public sector once and for all and invest public funds into national economic development — the latter of which required a resolution of the various national security issues, including the Boko Haram crises in the northeast.
In the three years since his election as president, Buhari has failed to fulfill either of these mandates. Like Yar’Adua, he has spent a significant portion of his presidency in foreign hospitals; and like Jonathan, he has failed to fight corruption in any meaningful way nor to take perceptible steps toward tackling national economic development and security.
2019 — an opportunity to take Nigeria back
It is now abundantly clear that the generation of leaders currently running Nigeria have nothing to offer in terms of moving Nigeria forward and helping the country realize its potentials. They have had ample opportunity and each time they have failed us. In particular, the chance taken by Nigerian progressives in supporting Buhari’s presidential bid in 2015 have turned out to be an unprofitable bet. Yet, the beauty of democracy is that the ballot offers the opportunity to correct a previous error, and 2019 offers such an opportunity.
In the upcoming presidential elections we must ask ourselves whether we are better-off now than we were three years ago when Buhari took over the presidency. We might even ask a more lenient question: whether we appear to be on a generally positive trajectory. The answer to either question is an indubitable no — and we must take that answer as a referendum on the Buhari administration. An administration that fails to meet its mandate cannot ask for the renewal of such a mandate. If it had any self-respect, it would step aside for a more vigorous administration, but we can expect no such luck in Nigeria.
As such, Nigeria progressives must identify a viable presidential candidate as an alternative to the incumbent, and do all we can to see to the victory at the polls of such a candidate come 2019.
Omoyele Sowore: the progressive presidential candidate of the moment
A bit of prognostication: Omoyele Sowore will win the Nigerian presidential elections in 2019.
The 2019 elections are not going to be about North vs. South, nor will they be a Christian-Muslim or Yoruba-Hausa-Ibo squabble. The elections will be a referendum on the performance of President Buhari and the failed leadership of his generation, and, equally importantly, a contest for the future of Nigeria between that gerontocracy and the Nigerian youth.
A solid 75 percent of the Nigerian electorate is aged 49 and below. If this 75 percent, the Nigerian youth, rallied around its common interest, namely that of taking back Nigeria from the clutches of the political cabal that has for decades run it aground; if we voted as one solid bloc for a progressive candidate committed to a brighter future for Nigeria, there is absolutely no doubt that such a candidate will win the presidency.
Nothing in the preceding is intended to imply that we should not seek to garner the support of progressive members of the older generation. Indeed, it will be critical to form a broad-based coalition of progressives across all segments of Nigerian society, including the demographic group that we seek to retire and replace.
In the rest of this essay, I will address some questions that have arisen among skeptics and detractors, alike.
Question: Is Sowore the best candidate? What is his experience?
In a country of 180 million, it is difficult to call anyone “the best” candidate for the presidency. The better question to ask is whether Sowore is a qualified candidate, and, subsequently, whether he is a viable candidate. A dispassionate assessment of Sowore’s aspiration to the presidency can only lead to a resounding yes, in response to both questions.
Sowore studied Geography at the University of Lagos in the early 1990s. During that period, he was the president of the university’s student union and stood at the forefront of student activism against the Babangida regime’s particularly in regard the annulment of the 1993 presidential elections won by Abiola. Sowore subsequently studied public administration at Columbia University, New York. In 2006, Sowore launched the online newspaper, Sahara Reporters, which has grown to become a platform for citizen journalism, an authoritative source of news coverage of Nigeria and exposés of public sector corruption. Sahara Reporters has received numerous accolades over the years. Sowore is an adjunct lecturer of post-colonial history at the School of Visual Arts, New York and runs a foundation catering to the education of students in his home state of Ondo.
If his accomplishments as well as his broad-based platform don’t convince you that Sowore is a qualified and viable candidate to be president of the federal republic of Nigeria, it is unclear that any argument will.
Question: Wouldn’t Sowore be better-off starting as local government councilor?
A progressive-minded political candidate is best-advised to vie for the highest position for which he is qualified and in which he believes he can bring about the most progressive change. Vying for a local government councillorship or a state legislative slot will amount to an underutilization of Sowore’s experience and administrative capacity. Vying for a seat in the national legislature will amount to getting sucked into the bowels of that so-called hallowed (one might argue hollowed) chambers and to being rendered impotent to enact any sort of change. This would run counter to the objective of a progressive change agenda.
Question: Will the north support Sowore?
There are many who will bring up the discredited argument that “the north” will not support Sowore. We must vigorously push back against these detractors, for when they bring up “the north” in political discourse, the coded implications are as follow: (1) “the north” is one homogeneous, monolithic unit that behaves as one bloc all the time; (2) the people of “the north” have one common, indistinguishable identity and interests; (4) there is a perpetual northern cabal whose blessings one needs to be president; (5) this northern cabal along with the monolithic, single-minded “north” will never vote for a southerner.
These premises are, of course, balderdash. The north is not a monolithic whole; there are literally hundreds of ethnic groups in the geopolitical zone we call the north, and these ethnic groups have their identities and aspirations independent of the majority Hausa/Fulani ethnic group. While there may have been a cadre of northern military generals that almost exclusively ran the country in the 80s and 90s, the make-up of the retrogressive cabal in today’s Nigeria is decidedly a selection of characters from across the country.
Without a doubt, Sowore will need a coalition of supporters from across the country in order to be successful in his presidential bid. The Nigerian constitution requires a presidential aspirant to win the plurality of the states, so it is both statistically and constitutionally impossible to win the Nigerian presidency without winning across regions. Sowore will need the votes of the north just as he will need the votes of the south to win the presidency.
Though the political reactionaries will attempt to frame the discourse in sectional, ethnic and religious terms, the Nigerian youth who will sway the 2019 elections will be unaffected that that outmoded cast of mind. The fact of the matter is that the political leadership of the country has made no distinction in its plunder of the country’s resources and its failure to develop the country affects the Nigerian youth, regardless of creed or religion, in equal measure. Come 2019, the Nigerian youth from across the country will stand side-by-side, motivated by the singular goal of sweeping the failed gerontocracy into retirement.
Question: Shouldn’t we instead support [insert name of another youthful presidential aspirant]
Fine. Support the youthful presidential candidate of your choice — after you have conducted your own diligence as to his or her background, experience and abilities. We need a robust pool of candidates to thoroughly debate the issues and impel articulation of the contenders’ political ideologies and policy positions. We should however try to avoid drawing daggers on each other on account of our support of different candidates of our generation. Let us support our respective candidates, lay out their respective programs of development, run a free-and-fair contest, and may the best man or woman win.
And it does not suffice to simply say one does not support Sowore because he is not the best candidate of our generation. It is incumbent on those rendering this argument to either put forward a better candidate or to themselves stand for election. Failing either of these, these individuals must realize that simply being a Sowore detractor without offering an alternative is tantamount to supporting the incumbent. Such people should take a leaf from the errors of the supporters of US presidential aspirant Bernie Sanders who, by refusing to back Hillary Clinton once she won the Democratic Party nomination, implicitly lent their support to the reactionary Republican candidate Donald Trump.
Question: How will Sowore fund an election against the highly monetized Nigerian presidential elections?
There are three broad approaches through which Nigerian political candidates have sought to win elections in recent political history:
The default approach has been to rely on the backing of the incumbent political class and political godfathers, who in turn see their sponsorship as an investment on which they expect returns once the candidate enters office. This approach often relies on the commandeering of the public treasury and instruments of state such as the police, the electoral commission, and the electoral tribunal. Further, the approach may employ unsavory machinations such as violence, bribery, propaganda, and so on.
A less frequently taken approach is one through which the candidate seeks to garner the support of the electorate by canvassing at the grassroots level. Usually the candidate is not relying on political godfathers, incumbents or access to public funds or instruments of state — indeed, this approach is more likely to be employed by a progressive-minded political outsider wishing to take the moral highroad to a clean victory. Historically, unless this approach is combined with substantial private sources of funds or an effective campaign fund-raising machinery, the approach has not been typically successful. A ready example of a political candidate that pursued this approach to victory was Moshood Abiola. A candidate who pursued this approach for the presidential run without success was Pat Utomi.
A third approach that has not been taken in Nigerian presidential politics is one that builds upon the grassroots approach described above, but rather than rely on sheer private wealth or even necessarily a campaign fund-raising machinery, relies on financial and in-kind contributions as well as the goodwill of a vast pool of supporters. Such supporters will take on the task of organizing campaign rallies and town hall meetings, printing fliers, and mobilizing and galvanizing support for the candidate. Such a campaign will highly leverage the Internet and social media platforms to extend the reach of the campaign, to continuously engage supporters, and to convey key messages to cynics, doubters and those sitting on fence. The sheer energy and capacity of this highly distributed model for mobilizing and campaigning on behalf of the candidate will far outweigh the ability to finance such an effort monetarily. The added benefit of the self-mobilizing grassroots is that the grassroots and electorate will have a much stronger stake in the campaign, the campaign message and the mandate, and they will turn out the vote and produce a landslide victory. This is a campaign that will be successful in 2019. This is a campaign that, by definition, the incumbent will be unable to run. And, this is the campaign I believe Omoyele Sowore will run and the reason I am convinced that he will win the Nigerian presidential elections in 2019.
Afterword
Sowore must know that the end of his first term will be met with a referendum on his performance, and if he fails to live up to the expectations of the Nigerian progressives that voted him into office, to fulfill the mandate of the Nigerian people, and to set the country on the course of human capital, infrastructural and economic development — in other words toward realizing the country’s potential — we will see to it that he is held to account at the 2023 polls.
