2027: Why Tinubu must not play God or turn power struggle into a do-or-die affair
MAIN POINTS:
*”You cannot return from Umrah in Makkah and still be involved with manipulative behaviour in electoral process”
*”Nigeria must not become victim of Yoruba political ambition”
By ABANIKANDA OLUMORO (UK)
To suggest that Tinubu must remain President simply because he is Yoruba is to reduce the Nigerian presidency to an ethnic possession. That is not democracy. It is ethnic politics in its most dangerous form. I am particularly concerned about the increasingly boastful declarations attributed to some Yoruba APC supporters who say, with apparent satisfaction, that Tinubu has broken the influence of Northern traditional rulers and political leaders and that the North will no longer determine who governs Nigeria. Some even project a political arrangement in which Tinubu will use his remaining years in office to weaken the Northern region so thoroughly that, when he leaves in 2031, even if a Northerner is to succeed him, such a person must first be selected or approved by Tinubu himself.
There is something dangerously disturbing about the political conversations emerging from certain quarters of the South-West ahead of Nigeria’s 2027 presidential election. It is the growing impression, particularly among some supporters of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu of Yoruba extraction, that his continued occupation of Aso Rock until 2031 is not merely a political ambition but an ethnic entitlement that must be defended at all costs.
This is a dangerous way of thinking, and President Tinubu must caution himself and his supporters against it before their political desperation becomes a threat to Nigeria’s unity.
The President, who just returned from the Holy Pilgrimage of Umrah in Makkah where he claimed he went to pray for peace and prosperity of Nigeria, not only must not play God by thinking that taking power away from him in 2027 must be a do-or-die affair but also must not involve himself with such manipulative behaviour in the election process because, that would run contrary to the Umrah principle and put his Islamic faith in the Holy Pilgrimage to Makkah under question.
Although headline of newspaper report wherein he said: “I do none believe in one Nigeria” continues to circulate as evidence against him to justify the current allegations that his administration is drifting towards either winning re-election in 2027 or breaking Nigeria, Mr. Bola Tinubu must not allow himself to believe that because he is a Yoruba man, Nigeria must remain under his presidency until 2031, regardless of the consequences for the country and its people.
More disturbing are the statements attributed to some of his supporters, particularly those from the Yoruba South-West, who boast that Tinubu must remain in power because he is a Yoruba President. In their calculation, the presidency must not return to another region in 2027 because, supposedly, the Yoruba have only just secured their opportunity to control Nigeria. And, to achieve this, they back the allegedly political plot by Tinubu and his administration to keep the very man that made him President even when his Emi Lokan mantra failed to push his ambition through in 2023 – Mallam Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai – in detention until after the 2027 election.They also back the wreckless political talk of pro-Tinubu All Progressives Congress (APC) members that “We have already concluded the 2027 election and it is Tinubu till 2031.” This is not only undemocratic but, more sadly, treasonable and recklessly anti-people.
But what exactly is the meaning of this ethnic entitlement?
Does being Yoruba make Tinubu’s presidency more Nigerian than that of a Hausa, Fulani, Igbo, Ijaw, Tiv, Kanuri or any other Nigerian? Is the Nigerian presidency now an inheritance of a particular ethnic group? And must the remaining Nigerians endure another four years of hardship, poverty and economic suffering simply because some people believe that their ethnic kinsman must remain in power?
These are questions that responsible Yoruba people must ask themselves.
Ethnic sentiment must never become a justification for national suffering.
Nigeria is presently confronted by enormous economic and security challenges. Millions of citizens are struggling with the cost of living, food inflation, unemployment, declining purchasing power and the consequences of policies whose benefits remain beyond the reach of many households.
Whatever assessment one makes of the Tinubu administration, the fact remains that Nigerians have the democratic right to decide whether they want another four years of his leadership.
If his supporters believe he has performed well, they should take their argument to the electorate. They should explain his achievements, defend his policies and persuade Nigerians to renew his mandate.
But to suggest that Tinubu must remain President simply because he is Yoruba is to reduce the Nigerian presidency to an ethnic possession.
That is not democracy. It is ethnic politics in its most dangerous form.
I am particularly concerned about the increasingly boastful declarations attributed to some Yoruba APC supporters who say, with apparent satisfaction, that Tinubu has broken the influence of Northern traditional rulers and political leaders and that the North will no longer determine who governs Nigeria.
Some even project a political arrangement in which Tinubu will use his remaining years in office to weaken the Northern region so thoroughly that, when he leaves in 2031, even if a Northerner is to succeed him, such a person must first be selected or approved by Tinubu himself.
This is the kind of political conversation reportedly gaining currency in certain Yoruba political circles. It is an unfortunate development that must be challenged before it becomes the defining image of the Yoruba political establishment.
What exactly are we celebrating?
Is the objective of winning the presidency to govern Nigeria for all Nigerians or to weaken another region and establish permanent political domination?
If Northern political influence is to be challenged, must it be through deliberate regional humiliation? If the Yoruba have an opportunity to produce the President, must that opportunity become a platform for making other Nigerians feel politically inferior?
The North is not an enemy territory. Neither is the South-West the exclusive political headquarters of Nigeria.
The Nigerian presidency belongs to Nigerians, not to an ethnic group.
I find it particularly troubling that some Yoruba APC supporters have adopted the loose but highly provocative expression, “Don’t worry, ati dibo” — meaning, “We have already voted and Tinubu has won the 2027 election.”
What kind of confidence is this, when the election has not even been conducted?
Who has counted the votes? Who has announced the results? Who has given any individual or political group the authority to determine the outcome before Nigerians have exercised their constitutional rights?
Such statements are not merely thoughtless. They create the impression that the electoral process is a formality and that the outcome has already been determined by political forces who believe they possess the machinery to impose their preferred result.
Yoruba APC members must understand the damage such declarations can do to the image of their people.
They risk reinforcing an anti-Islam and anti-united-Nigeria perception among Nigerians who may interpret the politics of ethnic entitlement and regional domination as an attempt to exclude other parts of the country from national leadership.
This is particularly sensitive given the persistent accusations and stereotypes that have historically been directed at the Igbo over the Nigerian Civil War and their alleged attitude towards national unity.
It would be most unfortunate if the Yoruba, who have traditionally presented themselves as a politically sophisticated, accommodating and nationally integrated people, were to acquire an even more damaging reputation for ethnic political exclusivity.
I must make my position clear. I am Yoruba, and I will not join those who believe that the Nigerian presidency should be retained by an individual simply because of his ethnic identity. Neither will I join those who have turned political loyalty into a justification for threatening the existence of Nigeria.
I will also distinguish my position from the grievances of deprived Lagos indigenes, whose concerns about political representation and their place in the state deserve separate and honest consideration.
What exactly are we celebrating? Is the objective of winning the presidency to govern Nigeria for all Nigerians or to weaken another region and establish permanent political domination? If Northern political influence is to be challenged, must it be through deliberate regional humiliation? If the Yoruba have an opportunity to produce the President, must that opportunity become a platform for making other Nigerians feel politically inferior? The North is not an enemy territory. Neither is the South-West the exclusive political headquarters of Nigeria.
My concern here is the larger Yoruba political attitude emerging from some quarters across the other five states of the South-West geopolitical zone.
I am increasingly disturbed by the apparent willingness of some people to throw caution to the winds with the mantra: “It is either Tinubu in 2027 or Nigeria breaks up.”
What exactly does this mean?
Is Nigeria now so disposable that its continued existence must depend on whether one Yoruba politician remains President? Are we saying that if Nigerians decide to elect another candidate, the country should be allowed to disintegrate?
That is an extremely irresponsible position.
Nigeria must not become the casualty of Yoruba political ambition.
Interestingly, the Igbo, who have often been subjected to negative historical narratives concerning national unity, are not necessarily the people displaying the greatest desperation to control the Nigerian presidency.
Many Igbo businesspeople and ordinary citizens understand that Nigeria is their country and that its enormous economic opportunities can be enjoyed when there is an enabling environment for legitimate business, security and prosperity.
They have a practical interest in a peaceful, united Nigeria in which they can trade, invest, establish businesses and live without discrimination.
This is not to suggest that all Igbo people think alike or that every Yoruba person subscribes to the troubling statements being criticised here. Far from it.
Indeed, there are many patriotic Yoruba people who reject this dangerous political direction. Some of us have continued to warn that Nigeria’s unity must not be sacrificed on the altar of ethnic ambition.
But why should the Yoruba, of all people, give Nigerians reasons to question their commitment to an inclusive federation?
Why should a people whose political history includes outstanding national figures who stood for democracy, federalism and national integration now be associated with the proposition that their kinsman must remain in power or the country should break up?
The Yoruba must understand that political power comes with responsibility. It does not confer superiority over other ethnic nationalities.
President Tinubu himself must take responsibility for the political atmosphere developing around his ambition. He must discourage supporters who present his re-election as an ethnic obligation. He must make it clear that nobody should threaten Nigeria’s unity or intimidate political opponents in his name.
He must also respect the independence of INEC, the judiciary and security institutions. Opposition parties must be allowed to campaign freely, and Nigerians must be permitted to vote for candidates of their choice without fear.
If Tinubu wins a credible election in 2027, he should continue in office with the mandate freely given by Nigerians. If he loses, he must accept the outcome peacefully and congratulate whoever emerges victorious.
That is the true test of statesmanship.
The Yoruba must equally remember that Nigeria’s future cannot be built on the humiliation of the North, the exclusion of the East or the political subjugation of any other region. The country belongs to all of us.
I therefore appeal to my fellow Yoruba, particularly those in the APC who are making provocative statements about Tinubu’s inevitable victory, to think beyond the immediate excitement of having one of their own in Aso Rock.
What happens to Nigeria after Tinubu? What happens to the Yoruba themselves if their political conduct convinces other Nigerians that giving them power means risking national stability?
These are not questions to be dismissed as opposition propaganda. They are questions of national survival and collective reputation.
Tinubu must not play God, and Yoruba political ambition must not become Nigeria’s undoing.
No Nigerian President has the divine right to remain in office against the wishes of the electorate. No ethnic group has a superior constitutional claim to the presidency. And no political party should mistake its ambition for the destiny of a nation.
The 2027 election must be a democratic contest, not an ethnic war. It must be decided by votes, not threats; by persuasion, not intimidation; and by the Constitution, not declarations of predetermined victory.
President Tinubu has an opportunity to demonstrate that he is a Nigerian leader first and a Yoruba son second. His supporters must equally demonstrate that their loyalty to him does not supersede their loyalty to Nigeria.
Let the Yoruba not become the people who, having been entrusted with national leadership, made the survival of Nigeria appear conditional on their continued control of power.
Let no one make the mistake of thinking that Nigeria can be held hostage to the political ambition of one man or one ethnic group.
Nigeria is not Tinubu’s inheritance. It is not the property of APC, and it is certainly not the exclusive possession of the Yoruba.
It belongs to all Nigerians.
And if the choice of the Nigerian people in 2027 is different from what President Tinubu and his supporters desire, they must respect it.
That is democracy. That is patriotism. That is the Nigeria we must defend.
DISCLAIMER: Note that opinions expressed in this article are entirely those of the author and not of The DEFENDER Newspaper.
