This is an academic question, you may say. After all, what’s the point in bringing back memories of last year’s presidential contest? Yet, reflections are good when they contain seeds for learning. And there are few more important areas where lessons should be learned than in matters of democratic choices: they can affect the destiny of nations! So, here is my question: If you knew then what you know now about Muhammadu Buhari and Goodluck Jonathan, would you still have voted the way you did?
I ask this question because President Buhari marked his first year in power at the weekend. And the commentariat’s verdict has been damning! Words of regret, such as “this is not the change we voted for” and “shattered dreams” have been used to describe his administration’s one year in office. In a front-page report on 22 May, BusinessDay Sunday put it devastatingly: “Bitterness, complaints, unending sighing and gnashing of teeth have been the lot of Nigerians since the inauguration of the Muhammadu Buhari administration a year ago.” Other reports suggest that this gory account reflects the general mood in Nigeria.
Recently, some people started the ridiculous and perverse #BringBackCorruptionslogan. The strong undertone was that life was better for Nigerians under Jonathan, with much corruption, than under Buhari, with less corruption! Nigeria’s democracy must certainly be flawed if some Nigerians are feeling nostalgic about the appalling Jonathan government after just 12 months of Buhari’s government. What then is the purpose of a democratic change? But, in truth, the seeds of any disappointment were sown during the 2015 presidential election.
Now, I wasn’t in Nigeria to vote in the election. But even if I could vote, I would have struggled about doing so. Neither main candidate struck me as a credible choice. Indeed, in my column, titled “Buhari or Jonathan: Whoever wins this week, don’t clink glasses” (BusinessDay 23 March 2015), I posited that had there been a “None of these candidates” option on the ballot paper, as in some US states, most Nigerians would probably have voted “None”! So, why did I take a “neither/nor” view about the two candidates? Well, let’s start with Jonathan.
For me, Goodluck Jonathan was fantastically inept! His cavalier attitude to corruption was beyond the pale, even criminally negligent. His handling of national security was also reckless to the point of criminality. Boko Haram killed over 13,000 Nigerians and abducted 219 girls under his watch while he twiddled his thumbs! On matters of governance, he was the equivalent of the medieval French rai fainéant, the “do-nothing king”; he completely abandoned responsibility for leadership! Four more years of a Jonathan government would have cost this country dearly, and, so, for me, his re-election wasn’t an option. But then, what was the alternative? Buhari – with his own flaws! In my 23 March 2015 column, I wrote: “If Buhari wins, it would mainly be because Nigerians can’t stomach four more years of Jonathan, not because he is the ‘solution’”, and I cautioned against believing “all the hype” about him being Nigeria’s Mandela or General Eisenhower or General De Gaulle!
Two weeks ago, a reader, Ike Muo, from Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ogun State, emailed me and said: “During the last Presidential campaigns, you wrote an incisive article wondering if and how PMB/APC could fulfil their promises, given the financial implications”. He asked if I could send him a copy of the article. I sent Ike the piece, titled, “The Price of APC’s statist agenda” (Businessday, 2 February 2015). The article reminded me why I couldn’t warm to Buhari and his party during the election. I didn’t like their manifesto and economic policy.
Truth be told, the APC manifesto was full of half-baked ideas that shouldn’t be part of a credible programme for government. For instance, the manifesto was laced with anti-business rhetoric, such as the promise to “eradicate predatory capitalism”, as well as protectionistideas, such as the commitment to “ban superfluous imports”. But, above all, the manifesto was fiscally irresponsible. The party promised “heaven on earth”, from free health and free education to an infrastructure renewal and a “massive social security scheme”. Yet APC said nothing about the cost of the promises and how they would be funded, apart from the woolly statements about savings from blocking leakages and “proceeds recovered from corruption”. As I wrote in the 2 February 2015 piece, “APC has over promised and is likely to under deliver in office”. I added that “Given the perilous state of Nigeria’s public finances, an APC government would either break its promises or run excessive budget deficits to fulfil them.”How prescient! Buhari’s first budget is a whopping N6.08 trillion, with a deficit of N2.2 trillion!
The APC promised to make Nigeria’s economy “one of the fastest-growing emerging economies in the world”, but, for the first time in 15 years, Nigeria has just dropped out of the league of fastest-growing economies in Africa, according to the IMF. The party also promised an economy that grows at the rate of “10 percent annually”, yet, according to the National Bureau of Statistics, Nigeria has just recorded a negative real GDP growth rate of – 0. 36 percent in the first-quarter of 2016, the first time since 2004! Unemployment and inflation are also rising. APC’s manifesto certainly lacked economic credibility, and, thus, the party came to power unprepared, without a viable economic plan!
So, I struggled with Candidates Jonathan and Buhari. Their worst attributes and those of their parties scared me. Yet, Buhari was the better of the two. Think of it this way. You need values and character to fight corruption; strength and experience to handle national security; and ideas and expertise to run a successful economy. However, you can’t buy values, character and strength. They are innate qualities; you either possess them or you don’t! But you can “buy” ideas and expertise. Now, Jonathan lacked values and strength to tackle corruption and insecurity. But he “bought” ideas and expertise by assembling a good economic team. Unfortunately, he failed to provide leadership, and, so, some of his technocrats ran amok!
By contrast, Buhari has leveraged his moral compass, character and strength in his war against corruption and Boko Haram. During the recent Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, President Obama was overheard telling the new Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau, that President Buhari “is doing a good job”, to which Trudeau replied: “Yes, indeed!” The Archbishop of Canterbury also recently said Buhari “is trying very hard”. These world leaders were rightly commending President Buhari’s dogged efforts on corruption and insecurity. Surely, Buhari is playing to his strengths in these two areas, but the economy is his Achilles heel. As former President Obasanjo said recently, Buhari “is not a hot person when it comes to the economy”. But that’s not fatal, provided he can “buy” ideas and expertise on how to run the economy. Sadly, Buhari is noted for his rigidity on economic and political reforms. Yet, he can only be a great leader if he succeeds in these areas; history will be unkind to him if he fails. I wish him well.
Olu Fasan
