|
Yar’Adua’s Image Problem By
Ordinarily, Nigerians should be much enthused about a Yar’Adua presidency. For one thing, he is a rare breed in the corrupt and cupid milieu of Nigerian politics. He reportedly has an unquestionable record of probity, decency and incorruptibility. In addition, he cuts the image of a humble, patient and disciplined man. He seems like a listener whom is willing to learn.
Corruption is the most daunting problem of the Nigerian society. The rest of our problems hinges directly or indirectly on it. Any meaningful moral and ethical reformation must start from the top and filter down to the bottom. So, until the Nigerian power elite lead lives that exemplify decency and selflessness, corruption will remain as entrenched in the society. Therefore, an uncorrupt president – the Übermensch of the power elite – will be a powerful antidote against this societal plaque.
He is strikingly different from both Olusegun Obasanjo and Obasanjo’s henchman at Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Maurice Iwu. In contrast to Obasanjo’s arrogance and acidic tongue, Yar’Adua has thus far impressed Nigerians as a modest man who can moderate his utterances. To Obasanjo, the rigging of elections is normality, and those who have problems with it are cranks and perverts who should find something better to do with their time. To Maurice Iwu, the elections were fair and free. The issues of fraud and other irregularities reported by the election observers are irrelevant, because the local election observers are lairs and mischief makers, and the foreign observers are ignorant, and need to be schooled on the peculiarities of the Nigerian political environment. On the other hand, Yar’Adua admitted that the elections were flawed, but counseled that no country has a completely flawless electoral process.
Obasanjo wielded presidential powers like a medieval emperor with the “Mandate of Heaven” to lord it over his hapless subjects. In his rare moments of modesty, he behaved as though he personifies the law of the land. In his usual megalomania, he acted as though he was not just above the law, but that the law was an irksome, pesky encumbrance that needed to be trampled. Contrastingly, Yar’Adua believes, as he stated in an interview with the Los Angeles times, that “when people talk about power, I don’t see where the power lies. If you are honest with yourself, the power lies with the law”.
Yar’Adua’s antecedence shows that he is not a pushover. He is independent minded. Secondly, power, especially presidential power, with all the trappings of the office is so emboldening, and even intoxicating. Therefore only a dim-witted man will believe that he can install someone in the office of the president, and then remote control him from behind the scene. Is Nigerian history not littered with the broken dreams of political godfathers who enthroned their protégés with the hope of controlling them? Did not Chimaroke Nnamani, Chris Ngige, Olusegun Obasanjo and so many others frustrate the expectations of their political godfathers? So, based on facts, Nigerians should be excited about a Yar’Adua’s presidency.
However, politics is not always a game of facts and figures. It is sometimes an issue of emotions and sentiments. As a result, in politics, images, aura and style are usually more important than reality, and emotions can hold a more powerful sway than reason. Despite his impressive political credentials, Yar’Adua has image problems that continue to cloud people’s perception of him.
First, he does not in anyway cut the image of a leader. He lacks the color, ebullience and flamboyance of most successful politicians. Dour, reticent and lackluster, he looks like an aggrieved high school teacher. And perching behind him in those Peoples Democratic Party’s (PDP) presidential campaign posters was Goodluck Jonathan, with his look of a marginally successful petty trader attired in his Sunday-best.
Secondly, the circumstances surrounding his emergence as the PDP presidential candidate projected him as an Obasanjo stooge – a man being positioned at Aso Rock to be remote controlled from Ota Farm. The other presidential candidates were intimidating into stepping down for him, a man not initially thrilled by the prospects of being the president. Obasanjo is a consummate baba: autocratic and paternalistic. Nigerians continue to see Yar’Adua as baba’s boy.
Most troubling for Yar’Adua’s image are the electoral frauds that won him the presidency. It is likely that he could have won the election even if it was fair and free. Muhammadu Buhari stood no chance because Nigerians are tired of rewarding those who acquired political relevance because they shot their way into power, and held the country in submission to the gun. Secondly, they realized that those acculturated and socialized in the Nigerian military do not make good democrats. They may shed off their kaki for civilian garbs, but they never completely discard their military habits and mindset.
So, Yar’Adua’s only serious opponent was Atiku Abubakar. Obasanjo’s strident attempt to undo Atiku Abubakar politically made Atiku popular, and won him the people’s sympathy. But other factors like the general belief among Nigerians that he is very corrupt and his protracted conflict with INEC weakened him politically.
However, it is within the realms of lunacy to believe INEC figures, that Yar’Adua won more than 24 million votes. After all, how many Nigerians registered to vote in the first place, and what was the turn out rate? It seems that the figures were penned down even before the elections took place. Maurice Iwu behaved like a man who has been paid to act a script. So, no matter how bizarre the script turned out, he still had no choice, but to stick to his assigned role.
Yar’Adua will remain the president, because it is most improbable that any court will reverse his electoral victory. How then as president does he handle his image problem? You cannot unscramble a scrambled egg. He can neither change the aura about himself, nor reverse the circumstances that brought him to power.
General Douglas Mac Arthur once stated that “the object of war is victory.” What is the object of democratic governance? Political scientists, sociologists, etc will have a field day debating this question. However, democratic governance as a philosophical or intellectual construct is a luxury the Nigerian masses cannot afford. Democracy must be made relevant to our every day lives. It must yield dividend, palpable dividend.
It must: address the needs of the people (food, shelter, water, etc.); offer us protection from criminal predators and the arbitrariness and harassment of the police, soldiers and other government agents; reinforce the rule of law by evincing that no one man is above the law, that the law is not an oppressive mechanism designed to serve the interest of the wealthy at the expense of the poor, that former governors and other public officials who stole public funds and murdered political opponents are thieves and murderers, and should be punished as such; foster a more equitable distribution of resources, by dismantling a vicious and inhumane system that engenders the decadent opulence of a privileged few and traps the generality of Nigerians in desperate, primitive poverty. The list goes on. These will be the crucial indexes – of Yar’Adua’s presidency - that will finally redefine him amongst Nigerians.
|