|
2007: Atiku Abubakar’s Faulty Start By Terkura Aku
If Nigeria’s presidency requires only a politician, then Alh Atiku Abubakar, Turakin Adamawa and Nigeria’s Vice President, has no equal contender. But Nigeria’s presidency requires more than a politician; and Atiku Abubakar is nothing more than a politician. This is why his ambition to be president, made public by his declaration last Saturday, started on a faulty note.
The crowd at the Old Parade Ground was huge as anticipated. His listeners were spellbound by his suave words and charisma. He spoke to them like a politician out to redeem. And with tact and guile, he spoke to the peoples’ ego, massaged their bruised expectations and exploited their short sightedness.
In his speech, Atiku promised to improve the living conditions of Nigerians-good roads, infrastructure, electricity, anti-corruption, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla! These are not different from the promises every politician makes to win votes, year in year out, all through our history of democratic experiences. In fact even coup speeches came with the same promises. These men use the same problems as the fuel for their empty promises simply because they know Nigerians are looking for a leadership that would provide these necessities.
That’s not where Atiku got it wrong. The Vice President catalogued how the current reform is not meeting the peoples’ expectation. He painted the picture of a failed policy by a government he is a part of. That made me curious.
Is Alhaji Atiku Abubakar telling us that he attended 364 weekly meetings of the Federal Executive Council for seven years watching, discussing and approving programmes that are not working? Or is he telling Nigerians that his opinions and views were never sought or even when sought were not respected?
Assuming his views were not respected or even implemented, would his honour and integrity not demand that he did something rather than allow his name to be associated with failure? But he did nothing; instead, he tagged along for seven years, only to tell Nigerians today that the reforms are not working. Or is he just realizing that?
But some of us remember vividly that between 1999 and 2003, Atiku Abubakar was virtually running the country while his boss shuttled from continent to continent using public funds. When we complained about the President never having time to run the country, we were told he was seeking for debt relief and wooing foreign investors. Well that paid off much later, but what was the state of the country at the time?
At the risk of offending some people’s sensibilities, we all know it was business as usual in government. Also, the privatization programme was at its peak and most of the government businesses were privatized during the period; Atiku was supervising the privatization crew. He was also the chairman of the National Economic Council. How much of that did he translate into better living conditions for Nigerians? Or did it not occur to him that he was their implementing reform programme?
Or was he not aware of the programmes of the PDP when he joined the party. If his personal vision for Nigeria conflicted with that of the party, then he had no business running on her (party’s) ticket until this last minute to cry foul. That is an unpatriotic act.
Obviously Atiku must have noticed long before now that the reforms were not working. Perhaps he even tried to do something but was not listened to. As an Honourable statesman, he should have resigned or demanded for accountability. He had that much right as a Nigerian.
This brings to question the credibility of Atiku’s intention. I read Kolawole’s analysis of the men contesting the presidency on his back page column of ThisDay Newspaper edition of 27th November 2006. I totally agree with him; Atiku has nothing to offer this country. As a politician, he is superb but that does not translate to a super president. He lacks the other qualities the job requires. Right now, at Nigeria’s stage of development, she needs a president who is more than a politician.
The country’s president must be able to see his responsibilities beyond providing basic infrastructure, paying salaries and reforming reforms. These are natural givens for such office. The president we need must be willing to restore the sanctity of the judiciary, ensure the independence of the legislature and strategically position the country in world affairs.
That cannot happen unless the President understands that Nigeria has strong cards that could be played in international politics to further the country’s interests. An example is our successes in conflict resolution in Africa. Another one is sports, where we are an indisputable force in Africa. The new President must be able to turn these into diplomatic negotiation tools for use in international politics.
Another point where the vice president missed it is his lack of courage to admit that some programmes of the government he is still a part of are working. For instance, the anti corruption has led to the removal of a Senate President, a Minister and the conviction of an Inspector General of Police. This has never happened before in this country.
Instead of acknowledging that these efforts, though questionable in some instances, have helped to improving governance and the nation’s international rating on corruption, Abubakar preferred to tow the line of average people by whipping up popular sentiments to win support. I can’t fault him; he was just being the politician he is, but the job of governing this country requires skillful statesmanship, not popular politicking.
The sentiment Vice-President whipped was the popular notion that EFCC’s effort is selective. A statesman would have first of all considered whether or not corruption is an issue and whether the people EFCC goes after are corrupt or not. If they are, then I believe EFCC is doing a good job and needs the support of all Nigerians; but if the people are not truly corrupt, then we need to look at the works of EFCC again. But we must start from somewhere!
When the EFCC was pursuing 419 kingpins and the yahoo boys or even cyber crime experts, no one squealed that the anti graft agency was selective. This is curious. They were not accused of being selective when they went after MD’s of failed banks either; it was only when they came after the political class that we started hearing of this new terminology and like the suave politician, Atiku Abubakar has joined the crowd in crying “selective.”
For a President, I think that’s a faulty note to start from. This is because it prejudices his mind to be objective. In his quest to ‘balance things’, he would likely go after today’s ‘sacred cows’ to wipe away the tears of ‘today’s oppressed.’ When that happens, somebody would still cry ‘selective.’ He would then be guilty of the same ‘crime’ he is accusing the current government of and so the vicious circle would continue.
What the Vice-President must do right now is to show us how he intends to address these inconsistencies by not towing that line. Until then, it would be catastrophic to commit the future of this country to him.
In his declaration speech, the Vice-President made no reference to the party programme or the party ticket he intends to run on. That’s the politician in him and we can relate with that. Instead, he presented his vision for the country; as though the party manifesto was inconsequential. That is fine too, but what I don’t understand is what he would do if eventually his personal vision clashes with that of the party on whose ticket he would run. Obviously, it cannot be the PDP’s. He has faulted all her programmes already and infact hinted he was bringing change-reforming the reforms.
That is the other problem I have with Mr. Vice President - his plan to reform the Reforms. If my understanding of English is average, then reforming the reforms would literally mean reversing everything. This is acutely dangerous. For a man with no well laid out plans, who sees everything happening as a set back, he would be throwing us back into the era of business as usual. That would be like taking us back to the pre-1999s. That is something we don’t want to happen. It is good that Atiku made his intentions known well before we entrusted him with our collective future.
Another crucial point the Vice-President did not address was how he intends to carry out his programmes. When Atiku Abubakar catalogued all the problems he intends to fix, he did not explain how. Everyone in Nigeria knows these are the problems plaguing the nation.
Every past leader had the same problems in focus, but what each of them failed to do was to explain how he would fix the problem. Most of them assumed office unprepared, without plans, made the same empty promises and left us worst off. Atiku is towing the same line, so what assurances do we have that would be different? Terkura Aku, Esq 32 Busa Buji Street, Jos
|