Only Death May End Obasanjo-Atiku Feud – Shehu Sani

Former Kaduna Central Senator, Shehu Sani, has described the long running political rivalry between former President Olusegun Obasanjo and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar as a conflict that may persist until one of the two political heavyweights dies.

Sani made the remark in a post on X while reacting to the latest exchange between the former allies, whose relationship has remained strained for more than two decades.

According to him, the feud has endured long enough to span an entire generation, beginning when many of today’s young adults were children and continuing into their adulthood.

“The Obj/Atiku feud began when Gen Zs were in nursery and primary school. It’s continuing even when that generation has graduated from universities, married and had children,” Sani wrote.

He added that the prolonged political hostility was unlikely to end anytime soon.

“It’s likely going to continue until one of them is gone, and the other will pay a glowing tribute. Since Atiku threw a devastating bomb at Obj, he has been receiving Obj’s hypersonic missiles for two decades,” he stated.

Sani’s remarks followed a fresh round of verbal exchanges between Obasanjo and Atiku, reviving one of Nigeria’s longest standing political rivalries.

The latest disagreement was triggered after Obasanjo reportedly described his decision to pick Atiku as his running mate ahead of the 1999 presidential election as the biggest mistake of his presidency.

The renewed exchange between former President Olusegun Obasanjo and his former deputy, Atiku Abubakar, is the latest chapter in one of Nigeria’s longest and most consequential political feuds.

The rivalry has shaped the country’s political landscape for more than two decades.

Their relationship began on a cordial note ahead of the 1999 general election that ushered in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic.

Having emerged as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate while still in prison over an alleged coup plot under the late General Sani Abacha, Obasanjo selected Atiku, then a former Customs officer and former governor elect of Adamawa State, as his running mate after consultations within the party.

Together, they secured victory in the election and took office on May 29, 1999, with Obasanjo as President and Atiku as Vice President.

In the early years of the administration, Atiku was regarded as one of the most influential vice presidents in Nigeria’s history.

He chaired the National Council on Privatisation and played a central role in implementing the administration’s economic reform agenda, including the privatisation of several government owned enterprises, liberalisation of key sectors and efforts to attract private investment.

For much of their first term, the partnership appeared stable, with both leaders presenting a united front despite occasional reports of differences over policy and political appointments.

However, cracks began to emerge after their re-election in 2003.

Political observers traced the deterioration of the relationship to growing disagreements over succession politics, control of the PDP, appointments, policy direction and the expanding political influence of the Vice President.

The conflict reached its peak when allies of Obasanjo began campaigning for a constitutional amendment that would have allowed the President to seek a controversial third term in office beyond the two term limit prescribed by the Constitution.

Atiku openly distanced himself from the proposed amendment, a move widely interpreted as direct opposition to his principal.

The third term bid eventually collapsed in the National Assembly in 2006 following widespread resistance from lawmakers, civil society groups and sections of the political class.

The fallout was immediate and severe. Obasanjo publicly accused Atiku of disloyalty, corruption and undermining his administration, while Atiku alleged that he was being politically persecuted because he refused to support the third term agenda.

The dispute soon spilled into the courts after the Presidency attempted to strip Atiku of many of his official responsibilities and sought to declare his office vacant following his defection from the PDP to the Action Congress ahead of the 2007 presidential election.

In a landmark judgment delivered in March 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that the President lacked constitutional powers to remove an elected Vice President, allowing Atiku to remain in office until the expiration of their tenure on May 29, 2007.

Since leaving office, both men have repeatedly traded accusations over corruption, abuse of power, betrayal and the events that defined their years in government.

Obasanjo has consistently questioned Atiku’s suitability for Nigeria’s highest office, while Atiku has accused his former boss of authoritarian tendencies and attempting to rewrite history.

There were moments when it appeared the long standing hostility had subsided.

In the buildup to the 2019 presidential election, Obasanjo publicly endorsed Atiku’s presidential ambition after falling out with President Muhammadu Buhari.

The endorsement briefly fuelled speculation that the former allies had buried the hatchet after years of political animosity.

That reconciliation, however, proved short lived.

Following the election and subsequent political developments, relations again deteriorated.

Obasanjo resumed his criticism of Atiku’s presidential ambition, while Atiku continued to challenge his former principal’s public comments and account of their years in office.

The latest round of hostilities was triggered after Obasanjo accused Atiku of bribing the late House of Representatives speaker, Hon. Ghali Umar Na’Abba to impeach him.

Atiku had denied the allegation, alleging that Obasanjo was targeting him in the build-up to the election so as to create a soft landing for his kinsman in the election.

Obasanjo fired back saying choosing Atiku as his running mate in 1999 was the greatest mistake of his presidency.

Atiku’s camp swiftly dismissed the remarks, reopening old political wounds that have refused to heal despite the passage of more than two decades. (Daily trust)