|
When bad men combine, the good must associate; or else they will fall one by one, au unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle. Edmund Burke The entry of Pat Utomi into the presidential race and the recently reported calls by reformist elements of the current administration for a “paradigm shift” in the political succession process have underscored the issue of a possible triumph of alternative politics in 2007. The reformists reportedly want a departure from the assembly line of the usual suspects such as former heads of State, retired Generals Buhari and Babangida. The question is whether the reformist trend represented by Professor Utomi, the Restoration Group and others of their kind within and outside government can become a viable political movement that can effectively contest for power in 2007. Clearly there is widespread disenchantment with politics as usual. Whether Nigeria’s reformists can convert that disenchantment into political capital and real momentum is a different matter. Three factors have converged to make a political revolution of sorts possible, if not imminent. Firstly, Nigerians don’t want their democracy turned into a game of elite musical chairs and personages such as Babangida, Buhari and Atiku represent a throwback to an expired political creed. They don’t want the electoral process to become a recycling of irredeemable human capital at the highest levels. The second factor is the emergence of different movements as evangelists of national redemption. The entrance of activists such as Julius Ihonvbere and Adams Oshiomhole into what used to be seen as the traditional preserve of career politicians bespeaks a newfound willingness to engage the forces of social retrogression and stake something in our political enterprise rather than simply snipe from the sidelines. To mount an effective challenge in 2007, the reformists must avoid the errors, foibles and the strategic ineptitude that derailed the previous generation of reformist politicians known as the progressives. In their various incarnations as NADECO, AD and more recently PRONACO, the progressives have failed to broaden their horizons beyond the coasts of the Lagos-Ibadan axis of civil society and forge alliances with like minds across the polity. This strategic failure is one of the main reasons why the June 12 agitation was never translated into the national movement that it should have been and why the AD was unable to become a broad-based ideologically centered opposition party. A good way of gauging the health of the progressives is to establish the whereabouts of the AD today. The answer is simple. The AD is dead, as much a victim of its own suicide as of the political ruthlessness of its rivals. The progressives have become extinct because of their “holier than thou” puritan complex and their inability to adapt to the requirements of post-military era politics. The reformers must cast themselves as practitioners of alternative politics. There are reform minded politicians both within and outside the government. The starting point would be for both groups to recognize that they have the same objective, namely, the transformation of Nigeria, something that has already been initiated by the Obasanjo administration’s reforms. If both groups want the same thing, then it stands to reason that some kind of synergy of resources is imperative. Movements such as the Restoration Group and their leaders have the moral and intellectual credentials to bid for power. But they also need to crucify the ego by recognizing that many others in other groups and in government possess such qualities. Strategic networking across all artificial divides to create a strong reformist front would bring about the access to the political and financial resources needed to mount an effective campaign. The reformists must also realize that the levers of social change are not only in the presidency but also in the National Assembly, State Government Houses and Assemblies and Local Government Councils. If reforms are to permeate every level of the society, then the reformists must discard the trickle-down politics that is the consequence of everyone aiming for Aso Rock. This however is a challenge because I sense a latent hubris in reform movements that is wholly unhelpful to attaining political power. It is the prideful belief, dare I say, delusion, that they alone have the answers which in turn, breeds an unnecessary antipathy towards potential allies in other groups and in government circles. The same hubristic attitude has been the Achilles heel of the progressives. Surmounting this self-destructive conceit is central to forging a strong reformist alliance in 2007. Overcoming this hubris entails the ‘humbling’ recognition of what is probably the most understated fact in Nigerian politics today which is that there already is a reformer in Aso Rock. Whatever his critics may say, rightly or wrongly, (and they are legion), the fact remains that President Obasanjo has set this nation on the path to recovery. And while we are crawling rather than sprinting towards the first world, Obasanjo deserves credit for defining the agenda for this republic (fighting corruption and economic recovery) and now at the end of his regime setting the agenda for the next republic which is the continuance of those reforms. We may quarrel with the methodology or implementation or even with the president’s personal style, but there is a basic consonance with the direction of the government across civil society. Let there be no mistake, it has taken Obasanjo’s personality, warts and all, to drive the reform program so competently administered by a dynamic group of technocrats. History will be far kinder to him than the contemporary press as is often the case with great but flawed leaders who lead in difficult times. Few people want to go back to the era of inept national monopolies, bloated public bureaucracies and state dominance of the economy. The vast majority of Nigerians want a free enterprise economy, something for which the Nigerian temperament seems perfectly suited. Indeed, if anything, Nigerians want to see an extension of those reforms into the social and political spheres. The challenge of the next republic is to translate the macroeconomic gains of the reforms into the currency of social intervention and sustainable development. As such, the call for a paradigm shift is nothing other than a call for another generation of politicians to rise up as heirs of Obasanjo’s legacy. The third of the three convergent factors of change is the expiration of the leadership capacity of the present political generation. As Reverend Chris Okotie puts it, the old brigade elite politicians have to “retire and become living ancestors of our political genealogy.” In other words, we must phase out the personalities who embody the brand of politics that has failed Nigeria for so long. By “leadership capacity” I am referring to the vision, wisdom, skills and values which drive the performance of leadership in any setting. I am convinced that the current generation of politicians has reached the zenith of their capacity and to task them further is to condemn Nigeria to strain hopelessly at the limits of their receding abilities. Obasanjo personifies the best attributes of this retiring class in terms of courage, will and acclaim and must now bring all of that to bear in superintending the withdrawal of his generation. The 2007 contest is not between the various assortments of parties dotting the political scene or between geopolitical zones. To see it as such is a superficial reading of Nigerian politics. It is not simply even about the PDP’s bid to sustain its eight year old grip on power despite threats from other parties. This is because Nigerian political parties are less vehicles of fixed ideological values than of highly mutable ambitions and interests. Party names, as such, are no more than rearranged alphabets and anagrams. The 2007 contest may be properly interpreted as a clash of generational values; a confrontation between exponents of old-school politics as usual and the new breed apostles of alternative politics. The use of the adjective “generational” has to be qualified considering some of the characters in our political space. Orji Uzor Kalu and Ahmed Sani Yerima, for instance, are both below 55 years and may thus claim to be members or leading lights of the next generation. In truth, these men and many others of their ilk have absolutely nothing to recommend them for higher office except perhaps the very low standards that we demand of our office-holders. The generational shift that we need is not one of age but one of ideas. It is a shift away from the deployment of cash and thugs to a deployment of skill and intelligence in winning over the trust of the people. It is a shift from the typical cerebrally minimal tenor of our politics to something more intellectually intense befitting the pursuit of leadership over millions of Nigerians. The 2007 polls thus becomes a vote for the future or for a return to the past.
|
Authors 
Posted by Robot| 27.07.2006 18:28