|
Obasanjo/Atiku: It is Enough By Segun Adepipe
Once again, and not surprisingly, the President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, has reminded us that the days of his personal animosity with the Vice President, Atiku Abubakar, are not over. On a recent visit to London the Vice President was quoted by the Financial Times as criticising the United States over its handling of the Niger Delta situation. The Vice President has said he was misquoted on that, and other issues, by the London paper.
Nonetheless, the President has told the world, through a statement issued by Mr. Femi Fani-Kayode, that the Vice President was speaking for himself. They were his personal views, not the views of the Presidency and the Government of Nigeria. In deed, he said the Vice President’s comments were at “cross purpose” with those of government. But of course, he was not speaking for himself, but for Nigeria.
In that interview with the Financial Times the Vice President talked about many other things that were positive and favourable to Nigeria. Why did they not also dissociate themselves from those comments? They extract what they don’t like and use it against him. That is undignifying. If the Vice President of Nigeria could not speak for Nigeria, who could? Mr. Fani-Kayode? It was truly amazing. The President’s reaction to what Vice President Atiku Abubakar might have told the Financial Times was totally at variance with accepted principles and norms of international relations and state craft. One of those principles is that at the highest levels of leadership and administration, you never advertise your differences, or wash your dirty linens in the street.
It sends the wrong message. In this case, the impression has been given to the world that while the Niger Delta situation is deteriorating, with hostage taking and pipelines and flow stations being blown up by militants thereby threatening oil supplies to the world, the President is busy fighting a private war against his Vice President, at a time when concerted effort was needed to resolve the crisis.
The world is increasingly nervous about events in the Niger Delta, but instead of facing the problem squarely, Obasanjo has time to push his personal problems with Vice President. How is the world to look at this?
Coincidentally, the President’s statement, and the Vice President’s denial, were issued from the same Presidency, on the same day, and published in the newspapers on the same day (March 2). That spoke volumes for the serious disconnection between the two leaders of the government and country. How could things be allowed to deteriorate like this?
Indeed this was a matter that could leave been resolved more calmly and the unity and integrity of the Presidency preserved. But the President chose to use the situation to further humiliate the Vice president, in pursuit of a misguided vendetta which has included attacks on Atiku Abubakar’s personal assets.
It is unthinkable for the White House, or 10 Downing Street, to issue public statements that would advertise differences between President Bush and his Vice President, Prime Minister Blair and the Deputy Prime Minister. They do have disagreements among themselves, but no one would ever know. Why cannot African leaders conduct their own affairs in a similar civilized manner which preserves the unity of the leadership? Why is Obasanjo so bent on demonizing the Vice President, even at the expense of Nigeria’s international image?
Mr. Femi Fani-Kayode, whom the President has launched as an unguided missile, at best a wrongly guided missile, to attack and destroy any target, no matter who, as long as they are perceived to be “enemies” of the President, is a low level appointee who should never have been permitted to denigrate the integrity of the Vice President and cast him as an inconsequential person whose views do not represent the views of government. And he uses such impolite language. Does Mr. Fani Kayode not have respect for anyone? Of course, he did not grow up or go to school in Africa, so he did not learn the African culture of respect for elders.
The truth, whether anybody likes it or not, is that the Vice President is a very important and powerful person. He is the Vice President of Nigeria, and there can be no President without the Vice President. The same constitution created the President and the Vice President. Both ran the election on a single ticket. They are inseparable. There is an African saying that, if a finger is sick it is the whole hand that is sick. You can’t cut off the finger without doing harm to the hand.
The Presidency is one, not two. Therefore it is impossible for anyone to “dissociate” the Presidency from the Presidency. In any case, what did the Vice President say that was so unacceptable? Is he not permitted to speak on bilateral issues? Countries criticise one another but still do business together. They even go to war but still keep back channels open for rapprochement. That is how international relations is conducted. That is how civilised politics is conducted. Was the Vice President’s alleged characterization of the relationship between Nigeria and the United States as less than perfect, such a bad thing for Nigeria? Not at all. After all, we do have serious differences with the Americans. Why pretend that it is not so? Mr. Fani-Kayode’s statement paints the picture of a perfect relationship. He says that it could never have been better. He claims that the ties between George Bush and Obasanjo are not only close and “exemplary”, but also “legendary”. But this is all nonsense; a meaningless play on words. There is no such perfect relationship anywhere. In deed we do not enjoy the best of relations with the United States. There is ample evidence to suggest so.
Even as Mr. Fani-Kayode was making those claims, Mr. John Negroponte, the National Security Adviser, was telling the US Senate Committee on Armed Services that the President Obasanjo’s third term project was threatening to plunge Nigeria, indeed Africa, into a new crisis, with serious consequences for US oil supplies.
Department travel advisories warning Americans against traveling to Nigeria. Indeed the members of the National Assembly had also protested against US government reports that Nigeria was on the verge of breaking up. The United States government also has alleged that Nigeria harbours terrorists. Nigerians still cannot freely travel to America.
Recently in the elections for the ADB presidency, it was America and its allies in Europe that voted to defeat the Nigerian candidate, inspite off Nigeria being the largest shareholder in the African bank. And there are strong indications that America will not support Nigeria’s bid for the UN Security Council seat. So much for “excellent” relations. Instead of boldly taking on the Americans on all issues of our vital interests, Obasanjo prefers to pursue a policy of groveling servitude and obedience to every whim of America, the World Bank, and International Monetary Fund, no matter that it has brought untold hardship to the generality of Nigerian people.
The truth of the matter is that, as far as the President was concerned, the Vice President’s comments had come at the wrong time; at the time of his third term campaign, which is seriously opposed by the US administration. He believes that the less Nigeria criticizes America, the better the prospects of George Bush accepting the third term. If that is his worry, he needs not lose any sleep. Bush will not support third term, but he will have no option but to do business with a third term President Obasanjo, because the interests of America in Nigeria are paramount and must be protected. But let us ask: If, as the President says, the views of the Vice President were not those of the government, what were the views of the government at the time? And why had the Vice President not been aware of it, so as not to speak out of line? The truth is that no policy line had been developed; it is doubtful that any exists even now.
It is indeed the third term project that has brought Obasanjo’s anger to the boil. Atiku is an implacable, unrepentant opponent of the third term; therefore he has been branded a disloyal person and an opponent. Obasanjo has declared war on all Nigerians opposed to his ambition. Atiku Abubakar has shown that he is loyal to democracy and to the constitution. Having been a democrat for over 20 years, and had opposed and had problems with successive military dictators, he cannot support anti-democratic agendas. His duties as Vice President do not oblige him to support every private ambition of President Obasanjo, such as the third term, especially when that ambition runs counter to the constitution, which is being forcibly amended for the third term project.
In any case, Obasanjo has to understand that loyalty is mutual; it works both ways. He has not been loyal to Atiku. Besides, Atiku has future political ambitions of his own. Therefore he should not be expected to nail his political future to the declining image of a President who may be thinking of staying on forever. Atiku Abubakar has to pursue his political sun rise, not bury it in Obasanjo’s sun set. No one can stop the sun from rising in its time, or going down also in its time. Times and seasons march on inexorably. For it is so ordained. Obasanjo should call off this senseless war. In any case, why continue to punch a man who is not fighting back, not because he is weak, but because he wants to remain loyal to his boss?
Chief Obasanjo has made important contributions to the history of Nigeria, and had an exemplary career in public service. The nation has more than rewarded him for his efforts. No other Nigerian has been President and Head of State two times, twenty years apart. No one else has come straight from death sentence in prison to the highest office in the land. What more does he want?
Why does he want to ruin all that by an attempt to cling to power indefinitely against the wishes of all Nigerian’s, except the few who are willing to sell their souls for a mess of pottage? Why does he not leave when, as they say, the ovation is loudest? Why does he not see that Nigerians are tired of him?
Why does he blame Atiku for his self inflicted problems? After all, it is he, not Atiku, who thinks that this country could not possibly do without him. SEGUN ADEDIPE,
|