No one can honestly talk of journalism in Nigeria without mentioning the name of Ethelbert Okere. So, when I saw his piece of the above title in Daily Sun on April 23, 2015, I gave it undivided attention.
Although I was enthralled by the brilliance of his prose and eloquence of his argument, I totally disagree with most of the premises and all of the conclusions.
Okere would have us believe that the secondary school certificate ‘fiasco’ caused Ndigbo, particularly the youths, to be disenchanted with Buhari, as they “kept expressing the view that a fellow who has no secondary school education cannot be allowed to rule Nigeria in the 21st century.”
Buhari had long sworn to an affidavit that the original of his secondary school certificate was destroyed. No eyebrows were raised when the same affidavit was deemed sufficient by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in three past presidential elections.
But in 2015, seeing how the wind was blowing, they wanted him to “personally and physically present the original document” and do so within 24 hours. How do you expect a man to present a non-existent item?
The release of the official result by his secondary school stirred up more protests, and the testimonies of his former school mates were like water off a duck’s back. Even his appeal to the army to release the copy in his personal file procured a melodramatic spectacle.
Okere surmised that those who packaged Buhari didn’t do enough to change his image among Ndigbo. It isn’t as if Buhari didn’t campaign vigorously in the South East; he campaigned there more times than President Goodluck Jonathan did in the core North.
The truth is that Ndigbo were (quoting Okere) “already quite at home with the Jonathan administration, regardless [of the fact] that it might not have met all their expectations.”
He posited that “Jonathan, though not an Igbo, was an approximation of the desire of the Igbo to be allowed access to presidential power.”
In other words, Ndigbo had already locked up their minds on who to vote for and thrown the key into the deepest part of the River Niger – and nothing ‘poor’ Buhari would have done would have made them change their minds.
What kind of patience and respect would you have for someone who insists on irritatingly disturbing you for a favour when you’ve clearly shown him by your countenance and tone of voice the answer is an ‘immutable No’?
I also disagree with him when he claims that “many Nigerians, especially the youth, did not take (Buhari’s decision to boycott the presidential debate) lightly … (as) a lot of young men and women who are highly educated felt that a fellow who cannot submit himself to the rigour of an open debate should have no business seeking to preside over the affairs of their country.” Igbo youths, yes; but definitely not that many Nigerians as the result of the election has clearly shown.
Where were the same “many Nigerians, particularly Igbo youths” when Jonathan refused to participate in the 2011 presidential election debate with Buhari and still won by a landslide?
Candidates perform a level-headed cost/benefit analysis when deciding whether or not to participate in a political debate.
The candidate that is ahead hardly ever wants to do so as a slip up could be very costly while those lagging behind in opinion polls, and those without name recognition seeking to have their day in the sun want debates to hold at all costs.
How come Jonathan’s refusal to participate in the 2011 debate didn’t cost him votes and we now want the world to believe that Buhari’s decision to do the same was one of the reasons we didn’t vote for him? Hmmm!
An overwhelming majority of Ndigbo, chose to support Jonathan and no one begrudges them the right to vote according to their personal consciences. Hence I fail to comprehend why Okere and others like him describe those of us who chose to conscientiously buck the trend as “sycophants and political jobbers.”
It hardly makes any sense to deny us the same right they are so eager to claim, unless it is borne out of the grotesque hypothesis that arguments are best won by demonising those who disagree with your point of view.
Okere ended his treatise by saying that Ndigbo should not be told that they made a mistake in the 2015 presidential election as “only history can give that verdict in the fullness of time.” This is simply seeking a soft landing!
“The only way to predict the future,” said American philosopher Eric Hoffer, “is to have power to shape the future.” In other words, history can only bear us out if we take proactive steps now to write that history ourselves.
It is only a tree in the forest that heard people were planning to cut it down and still remained rooted in the same spot.
During the election, some Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) heavyweights in Edo State made a very reasoned appeal to Bini traditional rulers to urge their subjects to vote for Jonathan and PDP lawmakers so that the state won’t be in opposition to the current central government.
Finally convinced that there was more profit to be made by aligning with the party at the centre, the traditional rulers acceded to the request. The PDP outscored the All Progressives Congress (APC) in a state with a very popular incumbent government and produced two of the three senators.
But the presidential election didn’t pan out as was predicted. Realising that their gamble could cost the state very dearly in the future, the same traditional rulers met again and urged their subjects to vote for APC candidates in the House of Assembly election.
The result? APC won 21 of the 24 seats contested! That’s simply called pragmatic political diversification.
While he was the British Chancellor of the Exchequer (Minister of Finance), Winston Churchill was accused by his Labour Party predecessor of being unprincipled and switching positions on his budget. He happily retorted: “To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often!”
People speak of principle as if it is a fossilised terminology. One can be very sincere and yet be most sincerely wrong. Dinosaurs chose to remain dignified and ‘principled’ even as their environment was undergoing rapid changes. The giant beasts have become extinct while the tiny ant still thrives.
I rest my case.
