Going by media reports, the relationship between Bola Tinubu and the northern part of Nigeria (“the North”), which gave him the presidency in 2023, is frayed and may snap in 2027. The North, we are told, is regretful that despite pulling all the stops to put Tinubu in power, he is neglectful of, even indifferent to, the core interests of northern Nigeria, ranging from the region’s dehumanising poverty and insecurity to political appointments and policy choices that disadvantage the North.
Of course, considering that the North produced 64 percent of the votes that brought Tinubu to power, the region has every right to feel betrayed if, as president, Tinubu ignores its vital interests. However, as the legal maxim goes, “one who comes into equity must come with clean hands.” And in that regard, it’s worth recognising that, truth be told, there are two betrayals here: one, the betrayal of Nigeria; the other, the betrayal of the North!
Take the first betrayal. Without equivocation, the North betrayed Nigeria in making Tinubu president in 2023. I say that not because the North did not have the right to choose whom it wanted as president, but because it made that choice without putting Nigeria first. Put simply, the North voted for Tinubu in 2023 for two main reasons. First, because he “made” Muhammadu Buhari president in 2015, so, it was “payback time”. Second, because Tinubu played the religious card and fielded a Muslim-Muslim ticket.
Neither of those two reasons served Nigeria’s best interests. Buhari’s presidency was an absolute disaster for Nigeria, politically, economically and socially. Thus, it was an utter betrayal of Nigeria for the North to reward Tinubu for a self-interested political calculation that set this country back several decades. As for the Muslim-Muslim ticket, can the North look itself in the mirror and truly say that it was in Nigeria’s best interests to exploit religious divisions and vote for a same-faith presidential ticket? More on the first betrayal later.
“Thus, it was an utter betrayal of Nigeria for the North to reward Tinubu for a self-interested political calculation that set this country back several decades.”
Now, take the second betrayal. Truth is, Tinubu has betrayed the North, to which he owes his presidency. Consider the facts. In the 2023 presidential election, Tinubu secured a minuscule 127,370 votes (5.72%) from the South-East; a miserly 799, 957 votes (28%) from the South-South; and a modest 2,279,407 (53.59%) from his South-West base. However, North-Central gave Tinubu 1,760,993 (38.58%); North-East gave him 1,185,458 (34.5%), and North-West handed him 2,652,235 (39.6%). Put together, out of Tinubu’s 8,794,726 votes in the election, the North accounted for 5,598,686 or 64 percent; the South gave him only 3,196,040 or 36 percent, with the South-East and the South-South overwhelmingly rejecting him.
Elsewhere, in other political climes, the North’s massive and decisive support will make them a key partner in Tinubu’s government, with their concerns receiving serious considerations. Only a strong mandate with a broad-based national support can ensure that no single group has such a decisive influence. But in Nigeria, someone can become president with a narrow victory by ruthlessly deploying the wedge issues of ethnicity and religion, as Tinubu did in 2023. He became president with the support of a tiny segment of the population, securing only 8.7m out of the 24m votes cast, or 36.6 percent of the popular vote, with predominantly Muslim votes (in the North) and ethnic votes (in the South-West).
However, regardless of what the apologists say, the truth is that, in government, Tinubu is running a Yoruba-centric administration, putting his fellow Yoruba in the South-West and, in some cases, ethnic Yoruba in the North-Central in virtually all key economic, security and justice positions. The North may have made him president, but he behaves as if he holds the office for the Yorubas. People with Yoruba names occupy most of the critical offices of state.
Yet, the rumblings of discontent in the North go beyond Tinubu’s lopsided appointments. At the start of his administration in August 2023, Tinubu imposed economic blockade, and threatened military sanctions, against Niger Republic, following a military coup, ignoring the impacts on the North, which has centuries old historical and cultural ties with Niger. The controversial tax reform proposals were other Tinubu policies that ignored northern sensitivities. Then, there’s the paralysed state of the North itself: poverty, insecurity, name it!
But let’s be clear: Of the two betrayals, the North’s betrayal of Nigeria is far worse than Tinubu’s betrayal of the North. In February 2023, I wrote a piece titled “The North must not foist a Tinubu presidency on Nigeria” (BusinessDay, February 6, 2023). I argued that the North should discharge its critical kingmaker role in the best interests of Nigeria and should not elect Tinubu a) as a payback for making Buhari president and b) because of his Muslim-Muslim ticket. Rather, they should consider whether, given his character, integrity and vision for Nigeria – not his “emi lokan” self-entitlement – he was the president Nigeria needed.
However, the notion that “the North is indebted to Tinubu and it’s payback time” was very strong. It was as if Tinubu helped Buhari to become president in 2015, after three failed attempts, because he cared about what was best for Nigeria and, indeed, the North rather than his own interests. In truth, Tinubu’s relationship with Buhari and the North was not based on deep affections or values. Rather, it was purely transactional and reciprocal: rub-my-back-I-rub-yours! If Buhari had turned out to be even a modestly good president, one could say that Tinubu exercised good judgement, a key leadership criterion, even though his motive was self-serving. But Buhari was an unmitigated disaster as president. So, why reward Tinubu for bad judgement, a selfish one at that? It was a slap in the face of Nigeria!
Yet, the biggest determining factor for the North was the Muslim-Muslim ticket. The Supreme Council of Sharia in Nigeria (SCSN) said it supported “Mallam Ahmed Tinubu” because he chose “Mallam Kashim Shettima” as his running mate. Nasir el-Rufai, Tinubu’s Svengali-turned-critic, said in a viral video that religion gave Tinubu “victory”, asserting that Tinubu “had no option” but to pick a Muslim running mate; otherwise, “he would lose the election”. Recently, el-Rufai said he had never put any individual above Nigeria. He lied. To advance Islamic hegemony, he put Tinubu above Nigeria, despite saying that he knew all the allegations and controversies swirling around Tinubu about his integrity and character.
In his memoir, A Journey in Service, General Ibrahim Babangida remarked: “Abiola, a southern Muslim, defied conventional wisdom by picking another Muslim as his running mate for the June 12 presidential election.” That remark confirmed that there was, indeed, a conventional wisdom that the president and the vice-president should not belong to the same faith. Even Buhari, often accused of religious bigotry, respected the conventional wisdom in 2015 when he refused to make Tinubu, a fellow Muslim, his running mate. Conventional wisdom is underpinned by consensus and can only be broken by consensus. But with just 36.6 percent of the popular vote, Tinubu, helped by the North, shattered a long-cherished conventional wisdom, and rode roughshod over the principle of religious equality!
The North made Tinubu president for two perverse reasons: “payback time”, a sop to his “emi-lokan” claim, and Muslim-Muslim ticket. But seemingly, it’s having buyer’s remorse. Yet, if the North is hurt by Tinubu’s betrayal, its own betrayal of Nigeria is far worse!
•Written By Olu Fasan
