OBASANJO AGAIN:The President Explains

PROFESSOR Akin L Mabogunje is no mean figure. An erudite scholar, he is regarded as one of the most outstanding geographers and social scientists in the world.

Going by what the Octogenarian wrote in the foreword of a book, The President Explains, many are bound to believe he offered a good dissection of the true personality make-up of former President Olusegun Obasanjo. Professor Mabogunje stated that,” his singular position as a two-time head of the Nigerian state had certainly equipped him to uniquely understand the intricacies and complexity of governing a multi-ethnic nation and put him in a strong position to deal with its multifarious problems.”

The 390-page publication encapsulates the eight-year administration of the two-time Nigerian leader, which is meant for public presentation on Tuesday January 22, in Abeokuta, Ogun State, his home state, is a compilation of his comments on the actions and achievements of his administration on the live national television interview programme initiated and produced by another great scholar and veteran journalist, Dr. Eddie Iroh.

Ironically, the present Special Adviser to President Goodluck Jonathan on Public Affairs, Dr. Doyin Okupe was part of the Obasanjo team in the capacity of a special assistant, media and publicity. The team also comprised the master political strategist, Chief Tony Anenih; eloquent Professor Jerry Gana; Chief Dapo Sarumi, all who took time and turn to be grilled on air by members of the public concerning their portfolios. It was through the programme that the substantial personality make-up of Obasanjo came across to the governed.

For a while, the former leader has become the issue in the polity for different reasons. His actions and utterances, especially on official policies have triggered a chain of reactions, even from very close quarters. His comments on security matters have elicited angry reactions from the presidency and his party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

When the insurgency in some parts of the North became more pronounced and frightening, the Ota farmer quietly launched a solo effort aimed at convincing the leader of Boko Haram in Maiduguri, the Borno State capital and hot bed of the activities of the Islamic sect, for its members to sheathe their dagger and give peace a chance.

While the opposition politicians described his action as opportunistic and characteristic of the army general, most of his admirers saluted his courage, at a time they felt the authorities were not doing enough to tame the lionised sect. The killing of his host, Baba kura Alhaji Fugu, after that troubleshooting mission to Maiduguri, however, caused panic in the land as people felt it meant the crisis at hand was more than many could contemplate and imagine.

But that horrendous incident, according to commentators, has not deterred Obasanjo from causing a ‘stir’ over the Boko Haram saga. He has either carpeted the federal authorities on its approach to tackling the insurgency or offered what he considers as practical solution. His proposition of the adoption of the kind of military force applied by his regime on Odi in Bayelsa State, following the gruesome murder of police officers by militants drew subtle flaks from the government, a former military leader and condemnation from opposition politicians and groups. Just like some senior citizens from the North, Obasanjo has also sought dialogue by government with the Boko Haram members, with the former apparently ambivalent on the option.

When he appeared on US-based Cable Network News [CNN} interview programme, he was unrepentant on his position that more could still be done by the government in its quest to arrest the insurgency. He opined that the war on the terrorism was still being prosecuted halfheartedly. Going by his antecedents as civilian president, what is the evidence that the former leader would have done some of the things differently if he was president today? Are the situations and circumstances not remarkably different such that those tactics that he adopted and believed worked then, could fail him given the some peculiar circumstances today? What is unique about his style that makes him to believe that most of his propositions on the possible way forward today remain veritable solutions?
Obasanjo’s two terms of four years each were characterized by challenges, including insecurity, which then provoked angry public reactions. There was the killings of soldiers in Zaki-Biam, where his administration ordered reprisal attacks on hapless citizens.

Quoting from the book, The President Explains, Obasanjo gave a clue into what looked like part of his cardinal principles. He stated, “I have to try and be a politician who looks at today and a statesman who looks at tomorrow and it’s not easy to balance.” With that summary coming from the man himself, the 15-chapter publication provides a clear insight into how the Obasanjo government tackled such critical issues like the economy, new partnership for African development [NEPAD], health, poverty alleviation and reduction, work ethics, corruption, reforms, promotion of non-oil export, agriculture and food security, as well as peace and security.

On poverty, the former leader said having been a victim, he knew what it meant to lack the dignity of being employed, adding that unemployment constituted a menace, thus the decision f his administration to introduce the poverty alleviation and reduction programme.He stressed, The litmus of whatever programme this administration has of whatever policy it adopts is how much it helps to alleviate poverty.”

Though critics say his administration cannot absolve itself from the worsening corruption in the land, Obasanjo often claims credit for raising the bar on the war against corruption through appropriate legislation. He said this became necessary because, “corruption is injustice, corruption is anti-development, corruption is a killer, inequality and drives investment and investors away,” recalling that he was once the chairman of Transparency International, apart from being its co-founder.
On peace and security, he said, “You cannot have development in a situation of conflict, of violence, of insecurity; whether it’s political economic or social,” adding, “We have had a civil war in this country, when everything had to grind to a standstill, when the longest bridge we had was broken, when the only refinery we had was burnt down, when all our attention was how to win the war, when the international community was even divided on which position to take about Nigeria.” According to him, “If we cannot have peace and security, the people don’t have confidence in themselves and they don’t have hope.”

Going by his comments, reactions to issues raised by callers, as well as what he lists as some major strides of his government as contained in The President Explains, Nigerians able to have the full grip of Obasanjo as an individual, president, leadership style, mannerism and juxtapose with what he professes in his current status. These could also assist them in arriving at a sound judgment on the leadership style of his predecessor and the incumbent president on some of those aforementioned attributes. It will also assist them to ascertain if Nigerian leaders , including Obasanjo appreciate the message in one of his quotes in the book that, “Government should not say something and do something else; for as long as you do that, government will become a laughing stock.