PMB’s Four Years of ”Change” and Two Years of ”Next Level”: The Foreign Policy Dilemma

By Bola A. Akinterinwa

The main foci of President Muhammadu Buhari (PMB)’s administration have been articulated within the context of his campaign slogans: ‘change’ in the mania of governance of Nigeria and ‘next level’ in the context of a conjectural methodology for the operationalisation of the change. His first tenure, 2015-2019, was driven by the need for a ‘change’ in many ramifications: objectives of government, style of administration, change of priorities, etc. Emphasis was then placed on three main pursuits: anti-corruption drive, economic vibrancy, and national security. In 2019, PMB adopted a new slogan, ‘next level,’ implying the continued pursuit of a change-agenda and articulating what is next to pursue.

In light of the first four years of change, 2015-2019, and the first two years of ‘the next level, 2019-2021, how do we evaluate the administration of PMB, in terms of achievement of his own set objectives? How do we explain his attitudinal disposition in political governance? More interestingly, how best can the goodness of an individual be assessed? These questions are prompted by some considerations: PMB is believed and seen to have a lackadaisical attitude towards political governance. He virtually keeps quiet on pressing national questions. He has been variously accused of de facto nepotism, manifest Fulanisation and Islamisation agenda of Nigeria. In fact, he is believed, rightly or wrongly, not only to be incompetent but also not good a president.

When compared with three presidents of some great countries, can PMB be rightly likened to them on the basis of his past six years? In one posted video, three people with different characters were presented and viewers are to choose the best among the three. The first person, Mr. A, has friendship with bad politicians, consults astrologers, has two wives, is a chain smoker, and takes alcohol eight to ten times a day. The second individual, Mr. B, has been kicked out of office twice, sleeps from morning till noon, has used opium in college and drank whiskey every evening. The third person, Mr. C, has been a decorated war hero, a vegetarian, has never smoked, never took alcohol, never cheated on his wife, and was a painter. The question here is who is the best among the three?
Interestingly, Mr. A happens to be Franklin Roosevelt of the United States. Mr. B was Winston Churchill, former Prime Minister of Britain, and Mr. C was Adolf Hitler, the agent provocateur of World War II. The video message is that character is complex, that we should not judge and that we should simply accept everyone as important, which is arguable. Without doubt, PMB of Nigeria is quiet in outlook and easygoing in life like Adolf Hitler, but does it mean he can still have evil intentions like Adolf Hitler? The statement of Shakespeare in Macbeth, according to which there is no art of finding the human construction from the face, but which physiognomy has now also disproved, remains very thought provoking.

Manifestations of ‘Change’ and ‘Next Level’
Change, in the eyes of PMB, is the first needed strategic foundation of his administration, which is meant to introduce a controversial Buharimania approach to the political governance of Nigeria. The adoption of a policy change necessarily implies that PMB sees the situational status quo in Nigeria as not good enough and therefore intends to give a better approach. This was the declared agenda in his first four years as President.

As he put it himself during his re-election campaign in 2018, ‘we have worked hard to fulfil our promises – and while the road may have been difficult, over the last three and a half years, we have laid the foundations for a strong, stable and prosperous country for the majority of our people.’ Thus, ‘next level’ simply means the pursuit of a stronger Nigeria. As PMB further explains it, ‘foundational work is not often visible, neither is it glamorous, but it is vital to achieving the kind of country we desire. Judging by the prior depth of decay, deterioration and disrepair that Nigeria had sunken into, we are certain that these past few years have put us in good stead to trudge on the Next Level of building an even stronger nation for our people.’ Next level therefore, not only means continuation of change but also change as a pursuit of a greater or stronger Nigeria.

However, the physiognomy and manifestations of PMB’s ‘change’ in political governance and the definition of ‘next level’ in the first four years and the past two years put together, clearly point to the fact that the PMB administration has truly made some ‘changes,’ apparently not for the better, but for the worse. The ‘next level’ strategy that operationally began on May 29, 2019 has been that of policy ambiguities, deepening economic retrogression, governmental remissness and public disorderliness, recidivist national insecurity, manifestations of flagrant presidential nepotism, shameful conflicting policy pronouncements and unfulfilled electoral promises, etc.

Consequently, the environment has become very inclement, thus prompting increasing clamour for self-determination and separation from Nigeria, sustained struggle for fairness and justice in political governance, and perhaps, most disturbingly, deepening public grievance, which, generally, have been manifested in the destruction of public institutions, especially police stations, prison yards, offices of the 1999 constitutionally-created Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), as well as increasing natural disasters. This is why the situational reality of bad political governance under PMB’s in the past six years has raised disturbing concerns about poor governance and possible disintegration of the country. The manifestations are undoubtedly not far-fetched: public complaints, public protests, use of statistical data, not only to ask for fairness, but also to undermine national unity and progress.

For instance, Adetutu Balogun @Tutsy22 compared the healthcare budget of N46billion for 200 million Nigerians and education budget of N48 billion for 200 million people with the legislators’ budget of N125 billion for only 465 people. @Tutsy22 believes the problem of Nigeria is that of politicians versus the people and not simply about the macroeconomic questions that are being advanced as causal factors. Interrogatively put, how do we explain the fact that 465 people would have N125 billion and 200 million other people would have N46 billion for the same common purpose of public administration and national development and survival?

Another instance is the perceived unfairness in the allocation of resources from internally-generated revenues. As revealed by the National Bureau of Statistics and quoted in @statisense.org, in 2020, Northern Nigeria generated only N385.18 billion (North Central, N181.61 billion; North West, N146.73 billion; and North East, N56.84 billion) compared with N920.89 billion from Southern Nigeria (South West, N561.01 billion; South South, N263.17 billion; and South East, N96.71 billion). In the thinking of many people, southerners are simply labouring unjustifiably for Northerners to eat, hence the southern struggle for a situational change.

And Perhaps more challengingly, the structure of political and regional representation in the National Assembly (NASS) is such that the wanted situational change can never be possible if voting is stricto sensu based on north-versus-south voting, simply because Northern legislators outnumber southern legislators. Consequently, no matter the importance or nature of any given bill, either for restructuring or for self-determination, it can never sail through in the NASS. This is one of the pillars of the foreign policy dilemma

The Foreign Policy Dilemma
One constituent of the New Level of PMB’s Change and therefore of Nigeria’s foreign policy dilemma, is the potential use of the National Identification Number (NIN), not in the sense of its declared use against crime-fighting, but possibly for the undeclared altering of Nigeria’s demography. It is observed by some stakeholders (vide www.oak.tv) that the mania of registration for the acquisition of a NIN is already compromised, not driven by any security consciousness, and necessarily enables the acquisition of Nigeria’s citizenship through the back door, contrarily to the provisions of Sections 25, 26 and 27 of the 1999 Constitution on acquisition of Nigeria’s citizenship. It is posited that, with the ease with which the NIN is being obtained and the unrestricted scope of its use, especially for opening of bank accounts, for voting, etc, and that, from all indications, it is also going to be required for the digital voting being planned for 2023,Nigeria cannot but become another Turkey.

And perhaps most apprehensively, it is suggested that the new immigration policy of visa on arrival, easing of inflow of foreigners into Nigeria is consciously being further facilitated with the NIN agenda. In this regard, how to shape the perceptions of the international community on this matter, how to prevent terrorists from having a NIN and how the NIN should be made acceptable and not compromised cannot but be a major challenge for foreign policy makers, as the politics of the NIN is currently tainting Nigeria’s international image.

Second, there is conflict of interest in the call by PMB on the international community for help in the war against boko haramic insurgency in Nigeria, on the one hand, and the public beliefs, at the domestic level, that PMB not only has a Fulanisation and Islamic agenda. but also that the Nigerian military are actually aiding and abetting the insurgency, on the other hand. Even under the administration of Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, it was submitted that there were many sponsors of boko haramism in Government.

It is useful to also note the testimony of one of the bandits, who swore to God in a video that has gone viral. In his words, ‘if it is not government that encourages us to commit crimes, let God end my life now’ (vide Dajin Kidandan, Tik Tok videos). He said that it was actually Government that was giving them AK-47. This is unbelievable but reportedly true.

In fact, General Theophilus Danjuma has also publicly accused the military of actively aiding and abetting Boko Haram, but Government is not on record to have responded to this serious allegation coming from a great patriot. Additionally, Dr. Obadiah Mailafia, another patriotic nationalist of the first order and a former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank and former presidential aspirant, has not only informed that the main funder of boko haramic insurgency in Nigeria is one of the incumbent governors in the North , but also that there are pointers to a civil war come 2022 in Nigeria. Again, this is another dilemma for Nigeria’s foreign policy. The way Nigerians have heard this narrative cannot be different from the way the international community do also see it. The only difference can only be in its evaluation and interpretation. In this regard, how do Nigeria’s Foreign Service Officers begin to read the lips and eyes of their international counterparts?

Third, PMB has also been accused of presidential and professional incompetence because of the deepening situation of insecurity in the country. About 100 pupils, out of the 276 Chibok girls kidnapped in 2014, are yet to return home. The PMB administration has no clue to it, probably not necessarily because of alleged professional incompetence of PMB, but more probably because he is a Fulani man who believes strongly in the making of the remaking of the 1804 jihad in a new form.

Explained differently, the Governor of Benue State, Samuel Ortom, has drawn public attention to the communiqué issued by the Fulani Nationality Movement (FUNAM) at its press conference of 13-14 January, 2018 in Kano, Kano State, in which it is clearly stated that the main objective of the Fulani is to take the whole of Nigeria as their dominion; to declare an unprecedented obnoxious war against whoever will not allow the Fulani to settle in any place of his or her choice in Nigeria. The FUNAM Communiqué also had it that all Fulani in West Africa and elsewhere have not only been asked to prepare fully and be armed for this new jihad but to also come to Nigeria and settle down as Nigeria is the only country given by God to the Fulani as their legitimate and ordained homeland; and perhaps most noteworthy is the concluding cautionary note of the FUNAM in the communiqué: ‘we are ready for the worse. We are prepared for war. There is hope for peace, if and only if attacks on Fulani herdsmen stop and the Fulani is allowed to settle anywhere that the Fulani choose to settle in Nigeria. We are Nigerians and are free to settle anywhere we desire with our culture, our families, our commerce and values, to the glory of Almighty Allah. Any attempt or to reverse this demand will be met with holy uprising never before seen in the history of Nigeria and can only be compared with the 1804 jihad. a word is enough for the wise. The Fulani is capable of defending itself.’

Put differently, Nigeria’s political dilemma is the imminent war, not necessarily between geo-political North and geo-political South, but disturbingly most likely to be between the Fulani ethnic stock, on the one hand, and all other ethnic groups in the country, on the other. Thus, the FUNAM communiqué expectedly generates animosity vis-à-vis the Fulani people. This is, indeed, most unfortunate

Fourth is PMB’s non-fulfilment of his main electoral campaign promises which he made during the 2019 general elections. For instance, PMB promised to include persons of integrity in the Cabinet, a promise that is consistent with his anti-corruption drive. Most unfortunately, however, corruption under the PMB administration is galloping and more institutional. PMB is cannot be on record to have succeeded, especially in light of public officials who were sacked from public office by the Presidency but were still given letters of commendation by the same Presidency for serving the country well. This is a good contradiction in official attitudinal disposition. In other words, how do we explain commendation on the basis of allegations of public embezzlement or missing or misuse of public funds? Is this not Buhariplomacy?

The International Press Centre (IPC) in Lagos, Nigeria, launched a list of all PMB’s campaign promises, published on 20 June, 2019 on ipcng.org. At the level of education, PMB promised to expand the school feeding programme from 9.3 million to 15 million children, as well as create more than 300,000 jobs for food vendors and farmers. He also promised a re-interpretation of the educational curriculum through coding, robotics, animations and design thinking, as well as retrain all teachers in public primary and secondary schools to deliver digital literacy. Without doubt, the socio-educational agenda has become controversial. The delivery of digital literacy is far from being a priority. It has only been helped by COVID-19 protocols which have compelled everyone to adopt virtual teaching and learning, and hence, introduction of digital literacy, not by programming, but by doctrine of necessity.

Economic revamping promises are also noteworthy. There is the introduction of the Need-Power (N-Power) programme with the ultimate objective of taking 100 million Nigerians out of poverty in ten years. The plan is to begin with an engagement of one million N-power graduates in a partnership with the private sector.

There is also the promise of establishment of a People’s Moni Bank; increasing the beneficiaries of Trader Moni, Market Moni and Farmer Moni from 2.3 million to ten million. It was planned that the giving of loans would be institutionalised, and that up to one million naira would be given to small traders, artisans and commercial drivers Again, without any jot of doubt, trader, Market and Farmer Moni programmes have been created, but their positive impacts are yet to be seen. In the eyes of the general public, there is nothing to suggest that the programme has not been more of drain than gain. The programmes are unnecessarily over-politicised to no avail.

In also seeking to revamp the economy, PMB promised to establish 109 Special Production and Processing Centres (SPPCs), one in every Senatorial district of the country, develop social investment program so as to eradicate poverty; develop the Special Economic Zone to concretize the Made-in-Nigeria for Export (MINE). The economy is far from being revamped. And true enough,how many of the SPPCs have been put in place?

From the perspective of infrastructure, PMB promised to complete the Ibadan-Kano phase of the Lagos-Kano rail link, as well as the completion of the Itakpa-Warri link to Abuja through Lokoja and the Port Harcourt-Maiduguri line. He also promised to complete the Second Niger Bridge and the East-West Road that connects Warri in Delta State and to Oron in Akwa Ibom State, through Kaiama and Port Harcourt in Bayelsa. And perhaps more important, PMB promised the remodelling and equipping of 10,000 schools every year, as well as completing the Mambilla Dam and Bridge, ensuring the construction of the Makurdi-Taraba-Borno rail project and the completion of 365 road projects under construction in all parts of the country. Many of these electoral promises are being gradually implemented but are perceptibly shrouded in controversies and allegations of corruption and nepotism in their management.

Most unfortunately, for continuous six years of the APC government, it has been economic growth without development, blame game in which the predecessor PDP government is always held responsible, even for current problems in the country. In fact, and perhaps most disturbingly, the PMB administration is much characterised by conflicting official pronouncements. The most recent case is that of Ibori Cash or Ibori Loot. The first report is that the British government had returned the ill-gotten money by Ibori and kept in British financial institutions, but reportedly returned to the Federal Government of Nigeria. The Accountant General of the Federation claimed in one report that the returned money had been credited into the account of the Delta State Government. When the Governor of the State denied publicly such claim, the Accountant General of the Federation re-explained that the money was still in intact and yet to be transferred to the Government of Delta State. It is even argued that the money had not been received from the British government. This is the international image of the PMB administration for which the country’s diplomacy has responsibility.

Indeed, Nigeria, as of May 29, 2021 has become a terra cognita of insecurity, of non-development and retrogression. The insecurity is now to the extent that PMB himself has to raise an alarm that insecurity is rocking Nigeria’s foundation. He could not have been more correct. If insecurity is now rocking Nigeria’s foundation, how do we change the narrative and move to the next level? What is the next level in this case, especially in light of strong threats of secession of some ethnic groups from Nigeria? More importantly, what should be the foreign policy of a Nigeria on the dangerous path of disintegration? This is really a major foreign policy dilemma.

May 29, 2021 marked the second year of PMB’s Next Level agenda. The day ought to be an opportunity to address the allegations of Fulanisation and Islamisation against PMB and opposition to them. And true, the war predicted for 2022, may, after all, be declared before then and the military, which, under normal circumstances, should owe its allegiance to the Nigeria nation and not to the Government, may behave differently. Consequently, PMB must begin to see more clearly: Muammar Gaddafi’s approach of a Muslim North and a Christian South; re-writing a new Constitution to reflect the wishes of all ethnic groups; return to the 1963 constitutional model that allows for true federalism; re-commitment to the principles of justice, fairness, and equity in political governance, acceptance to restructure, without which dismantlement of Nigeria will remain a desideratum, especially that her legal foundation was removed on January 1, 2014, and therefore, newly requiring re-negotiation for continued existence.

PMB should not be carried away by the arguments of indivisibility or indissolubility of Nigeria, which is self-deceit. Unity is voluntary and not by coercion. International diplomatic practice clearly lends credence to this point. PMB should therefore thread cautiously with Von Clausewitz’s theory of whoever wants peace must first prepare for war.