About three weeks ago, a friend and former colleague who relocated to Nigeria long ago asked me how the 2019 electioneering is playing in the US. My response may well be summed up by the movie title “All Quite on the Western Front.”
Every presidential election in Nigeria since 1999 has received heavy coverage here, and usually the thrust is apocalyptic. In contrast, coverage of this election has been low-key and mostly matter-of-factly.
So, when I learned that the Euroasia Group — an international risk assessment company headquartered in New York — included Nigeria’s forthcoming election in its report on the top global risks in 2019, I expected the worst. To some extent, it didn’t disappoint. It contains the usual dose of pessimism and emphasis on the unwholesome.
But relative to previous predictions of apocalypse, the assessment is relatively tame. There’s hardly anything there that an average Nigerian doesn’t intuitively sense.
To begin with, the report titled “Top Risks 2019,” places the Nigerian election last of the 10 global risks. Top on the list is what Euroasia calls “Bad seeds,” a reference to powerful errant leaders such as Donald Trump of the United States, Vladimir Putin of Russia and Xi Jinping of China. Some other notable risks are US-China relations, cyber warfare, “European populism” and the deterioration of American politics.
On Nigeria’s 2019 election, Euroasia says essentially that the choice for president is between an ailing, frail and clueless incumbent and an astute, energetic, but corrupt challenger.
“One candidate is the incumbent, Muhammadu Buhari. He is an elderly, infirm leader who lacks the energy, creativity, or political savvy to move the needle on Nigeria’s most intractable problems,”
Euroasia asserts in the report. “His opponent is Atiku Abubakar, another gerontocrat who would focus on enriching himself and his cronies, avoiding the difficult and politically unpopular tasks necessary for reform.”
Ouch!!! It is an assessment that makes one daydream of a February surprise, doesn’t it? (If the reference doesn’t make sense to you, please see Punchwise of January 13).
In any case, the assertion that Nigerian voters are stuck with a choice between the clueless and the corrupt is not necessarily the most pessimistic aspect of the report. What happens to the respective parties after the election is what portends the greater danger.
“Buhari would be a lame duck from day one, with powerbrokers in his own party quickly shifting their focus to the next electoral cycle in 2023,” the report states.
Moreover, “a Buhari reelection … carries tail risks. A politically weakened president, for health or other reasons, would open the floodgates for political infighting, increasing the chances that his ruling All Progressives Congress implodes. That would turn a policy slow down into paralysis. The risk of attacks on oil infrastructure would also rise, because the absence of strong leadership in Abuja would make it harder to negotiate with the Niger Delta’s various militant groups.”
The prospect is not much better in the event of an Atiku victory. “A win for the challenger, Atiku, would create a brief, superficial boost to the country’s image — largely because of his better health and keener intellect,” the report states.
READ ALSO: Atiku walks out, insists on debate with Buhari
“But it would also pose the risk of a return to an even more rent-seeking governing style…. “Atiku would (also) face significant infighting within his Peoples Democratic Party as well, as leaders try to hold him to his promise to serve only one term (a pledge he’s likely to retract).”
In effect, Euroasia is saying that Nigerians will be damned whether Buhari or Atiku wins. But does the organisation leave any hint at all as to who is the lesser evil. It appears so. To begin with, the attributes they credit to Atiku — “better health and keener intellect” —would seem to be a backhand endorsement of sorts.
In contrast, Buhari’s reputation as an incorrigible leader is only hinted at in Euroasia’s assertion that Atiku’s victory “would also pose the risk of a return to an even more rent-seeking governing style.” The phrase “even more” means, of course, that Buhari never ended the practice; it’s just that Atiku would worsen it.
“Rent-seeking” is, of course, a euphemism for corruption. The phrase must have been borrowed from Professor Richard Joseph’s book on the Second Republic, “Democracy and Prebendal Politics in Nigeria.”In it, Joseph likens the practice of pilfering public funds to a medieval governance system in which monarchs assigned territories (prebends) to associates who then enriched themselves by collecting rent and taxes.
Back to Euroasia and 2019, the organisation’s report on Nigeria includes a flow chart titled “Whom should I vote for?” The chart suggests the abilities to combat corruption and stimulate the economy, respectively, as the primary considerations for choosing a candidate. The left part of the flow chart, which is on combating corruption, ends with a familiar computer message: “Sorry. Try Again In The Next Election. A line next to it that points to Buhari is broken by a leaky faucet.
The line on the right represents stimulation of the economy and it points toward Atiku. On the line is the question, “Does This Require A More Energetic Leader?” This is followed with the answer “Yes” and a solid arrow that points down to Atiku.
So, though the report is harsh on both candidates, Atiku comes off getting a begrudging nod. Apparently the Euroasia Group is too steeped in realism to explore a February surprise.
Fake news, Nigeria and World War III
While reading Euroasia Group’s report on global risks, I couldn’t help thinking of a remark credited to Professor Wole Soyinka regarding what would cause World War III. “I’ve said this before that fake news may cause World War III and the fake news will be started by a Nigerian,” the Punch of January 9 quotes Soyinka as saying.
Having myself written that fake news will turn humanity into mental zombies, I am not at all surprised that the sage professor takes such a grave view of the practice. What surprised me is that he believes that Nigerians will be the triggers. Nigeria is very much in the periphery in the world of fake news. If any country would start World War III with fake news it would probably be Russia, China and other countries that champion it from the centre.
Ironically, Soyinka complained in the same story of false claims being attributed to him. I don’t suppose the story I have cited is one of them. Perhaps, the famed playwright was engaging in tongue-in-cheek hyperbole.
END
Be the first to comment