Saturday, February 28, 2015

"DEMOCRATS WORKING BOTH SIDES OF NIGERIA'S PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION" - POLITICO

 


LAGOS, Nigeria — Africa’s most populous country is headed toward its first close presidential election in decades, pitting a struggling incumbent president against an ex-military strongman, both of them using U.S. Democratic political strategists to help their campaigns.
In on-again off-again roles, two firms that are political allies in America have found themselves working on opposite sides in Nigeria’s presidential election.
One is the strategy group founded by former Obama campaign manager David Axelrod, AKPD Message and Media. The other is former Howard Dean campaign manager Joseph Trippi of The Potomac Square Group.
U.S. consulting firms routinely parachute into foreign countries to advise campaigns, work that can win influence for their other clients. But it can also backfire on the campaigns when politicians attack their opponents’ American consultants to score points.
That has happened in Nigeria ahead of an election originally scheduled for Saturday that is now too close to call and which was postponed last week following violence by the extremist insurgent group known as Boko Haram.


“The consultants have already become an issue,” said J. Peter Pham, director of the Africa program at the Atlantic Council, a Washington-based think tank. “This issue won’t by itself sway the minds of many voters so much as perhaps reinforce their inclinations.”
President Goodluck Jonathan, 57, a Christian from Nigeria’s south, has been criticized at home and abroad as an ineffective leader who has allowed corruption to deteriorate the county’s infrastructure and national pride. His political party has been in power since Nigeria resumed free elections in 1999 after decades of military rule.
Jonathan’s opponent, Muhammadu Buhari, 72, a Muslim from the north, took control of Nigeria for about 20 months after a military coup in 1983. He has argued he will fight corruption and terrorists better than Jonathan.
As the race heated up in December – and ahead of a deadly offensive by Boko Haram last month – Jonathan wound down his U.S. consultant’s work, while Buhari’s party ramped theirs back up: Jonathan’s campaign stopped working with Trippi’s firm. That same month, the opposition party temporarily rehired AKPD.
AKPD’s Nigerian work has already drawn media attention in the U.S. and Nigeria, including reports of leaked emails that discussed the firm’s recent work for Buhari’s party.
Jonathan, too, faced backlash over a third U.S. public relations firm, Levick Strategic Communications, which was hired in June 2014 to help him respond to the kidnapping of more than 200 schoolgirls by Boko Haram.
All of this occurred before Nigeria’s independent election commission last week postponed the election from Feb. 14 to March 28, a decision decried by Buhari’s supporters. It was also criticized by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who visited Lagos last month.
“It is critical that the government not use security concerns as a pretext for impeding the democratic process,” Kerry said in a Feb. 7 statement. On Friday, a State Department official added: “We stand ready to work with Nigeria and its people no matter which candidate is elected.”
“There is a great deal of anger about the postponement of the election and suspicion among opposition supporters that the delay is a deliberate ploy to subvert the democratic process,” said Jennifer Cooke, director of the Africa program at the Center for Strategic & International Studies, a Washington think tank.
It’s unclear if the either Potomac or AKPD will be recalled to action as a result of the extended campaign. Neither Trippi nor AKPD would elaborate about their consulting work. In a statement, Trippi said only that he has worked in Nigeria for 12 years and considers Jonathan a friend.
From September through November, Trippi said he collaborated on “Forward Nigeria” ads for Jonathan’s campaign, but that work stopped in early December.
Jonathan’s ads changed noticeably after Trippi’s work ended. Four months ago, the ads featured students, new building projects, and generally a lot of Nigerians smiling and working. By contrast, an ad from January focused almost entirely on Jonathan himself, working out on an elliptical trainer and playing squash before meeting with advisers.
AKPD said it was rehired for a three-week project in December to help organize announcement events. Buhari’s party initially hired AKPD from December 2013 to March 2014, and its work for the campaign has stopped, said AKPD’s Isaac Baker in a statement.
A Buhari campaign spokesman declined to comment about AKPD’s work. Attempts to reach Jonathan’s campaign were unsuccessful.
Looming large over both candidates is international pressure to beat back the Islamic extremist group Boko Haram, which has killed more than 5,500 in attacks in 2014 and hundreds more already this year, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service. In April 2014, Boko Haram kidnapped about 270 schoolgirls, sparking a Twitter campaign using the #BringBackOurGirls hashtag that drew support from celebrities and politicians including First Lady Michelle Obama.
In addition to terrorist attacks, the threat of partisan violence is high, too. Both Jonathan and Buhari faced off against each other in 2011, when Jonathan beat Buhari with 59 percent of the vote. About 800 people died in unrest following that election.
This time, Buhari’s party has mounted a better campaign in part thanks to an aggressive social media strategy. Cooke of CSIS says social media could be deciding factor: “How effectively the two parties shape and convey [their] two competing narratives in the next six weeks will have a major impact on how people vote in March. And social media will very likely have a big role to play in that.”
In Lagos, Nigeria’s commercial capital, even Jonathan’s supporters have said the president’s campaign messaging pales in comparison to Buhari’s.
“He does not have a good media team. They cannot sell,” said Kunle Jinadu who runs a small business that delivers boxes of fresh produce to offices including U.S. firms McKinsey & Co. and Google.
Jinadu applauded Jonathan for making improvements to Nigeria’s technology infrastructure. But he criticized Jonathan’s public relations team allowing the Boko Haram insurgency to overwhelm the campaign.
“I don’t know where they come from,” he said, “but they cannot sell to the public.”
Nahal Toosi contributed to this report.

Thursday, February 26, 2015

"THE VIDEO RECORDING OF GENERAL BUHARI'S SPEECH AT CHATHAM HOUSE IN LONDON"

I am very impressed by the excellent speech and the outstanding performance of General Muhammadu Buhari of Nigeria at the prestigious Chatham House of London this morning before the whole world. This is very presidential. I am proud to be a Nigerian ‪#‎CHAfrica‬
I want the leadership of the opposition political party of Nigeria, the APC to officially arrange another international speaking engagement event for General Muhammadu Buhari in Washington, DC with one of the three leading America's political think-tank bodies, such as, The Brookings Institution, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and Center for Foreign Relations before General Buhari returns to Nigeria to continue his presidential campaign for the election that is now slated for March 28, 2015"‪#‎PoliticalAttackDogForBuhari‬

"GENERAL MUHAMMADU BUHARI'S SPEECH AT CHATHAM HOUSE IN LONDON"

Title:Prospects for Democratic Consolidation in Africa: Nigeria’s Transition
Venue: Chatham House, London, 
Date:26 February 2015




Permit me to start by thanking Chatham House for the invitation to talk about this important topic at this crucial time. The 2015 general election in Nigeria is generating a lot of interests within and outside the country. This is understandable. Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country and largest economy, is at a defining moment, a moment that has great implications beyond the democratic project and beyond the borders of my dear country. So let me say upfront that the global interest in Nigeria’s landmark election is not misplaced at all and indeed should be commended, for this is an election that has serious import for the world. I urge the international community to continue to focus on Nigeria at this very critical moment. Given increasing global linkages, it is in our collective interests that the postponed elections should hold on the rescheduled dates, that they should be free and fair, that their outcomes should be respected by all parties, and that any form of extension, under whichever guise, is unconstitutional and would not be tolerated.
With the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, the collapse of communism and the end of the Cold War, democracy became the dominant and most preferred system of government across the globe. That global transition has been aptly captured as the triumph of democracy and the ‘most pre-eminent political idea of our time.’ On a personal note, the phased end of the USSR was a turning point for me. If you will, that was my own road to Damascus experience. It convinced me that change can be brought about without firing a single shot. As you all know, I had been a military head of state in Nigeria for twenty months. We intervened because we were unhappy with the state of affairs in our country. We wanted to arrest the drift. Driven by patriotism, influenced by the prevalence and popularity of such drastic measures all over Africa and elsewhere, we fought our way to power. But the global triumph of democracy has shown that another, and a preferable, path to change is possible. It is an important lesson I have carried with me since, and a lesson that is not lost on the African continent.
In the last two decades, democracy has grown strong roots in Africa. Elections, once so rare, are now so commonplace. As at the time I was a military head of state between 1983 and 1985, only four African countries held regular multi-party elections. But the number of electoral democracies in Africa, according to Freedom House, jumped to 10 in 1992/1993 then to 18 in 1994/1995 and to 24 in 2005/2006. According to the New York Times, 42 of the 48 countries in Sub-Sahara Africa conducted multi-party elections between 1990 and 2002. The newspaper also reported that between 2000 and 2002, ruling parties in four African countries (Senegal, Mauritius, Ghana and Mali) peacefully handed over power to victorious opposition parties. In addition, the proportion of African countries categorized as not free by Freedom House declined from 59% in 1983 to 35% in 2003. Without doubt, Africa has been part of the current global wave of democratisation.
But the growth of democracy on the continent has been uneven. According to Freedom House, the number of electoral democracies in Africa slipped from 24 in 2007/2008 to 19 in 2011/2012; while the percentage of countries categorised as ‘not free’ increased from 35% in 2003 to 41% in 2013. Also, there have been some reversals at different times in Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Cote D’Ivoire, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Lesotho, Mali, Madagascar, Mauritania and Togo. While we can choose to look at the glass of democracy in Africa as either half full or half empty. While you can’t have representative democracy without elections, it is equally important to look at the quality of the elections and to remember that mere elections do not democracy make. It is globally agreed that democracy is not an event, but a journey. And that the destination of that journey is democratic consolidation—that state where democracy has become so rooted and so routine and widely accepted by all actors.
With this important destination in mind, it is clear that though many African countries now hold regular elections, very few of them have consolidated the practice of democracy. It is important to also state at this point that just as with elections, a consolidated democracy cannot be an end by itself. I will argue that it is not enough to hold series of elections or even to peacefully alternate power among parties. It is much more important that the promise of democracy goes beyond just allowing people to freely choose their leaders. It is much more important that democracy should deliver on the promise of choice, of freedoms, of security of lives and property, of transparency and accountability, of rule of law, of good governance and of shared prosperity. It is very important that the promise embedded in the concept of democracy, the promise of a better life for the generality of the people, is not delivered in the breach.
Now, let me quickly turn to Nigeria. As you all know, Nigeria’s fourth republic is in its 16th year and this general election will be the fifth in a row. This is a major sign of progress for us, given that our first republic lasted five years and three months, the second republic ended after four years and two months and the third republic was a still-birth. However, longevity is not the only reason why everyone is so interested in this election. The major difference this time around is that for the very first time since transition to civil rule in 1999, the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is facing its stiffest opposition so far from our party the All Progressives Congress (APC). We once had about 50 political parties, but with no real competition. Now Nigeria is transiting from a dominant party system to a competitive electoral polity, which is a major marker on the road to democratic consolidation. As you know, peaceful alternation of power through competitive elections have happened in Ghana, Senegal, Malawi and Mauritius in recent times. The prospects of democratic consolidation in Africa will be further brightened when that eventually happens in Nigeria.
But there are other reasons why Nigerians and the whole world are intensely focussed on this year’s elections, chief of which is that the elections are holding in the shadow of huge security, economic and social uncertainties in Africa’s most populous country and largest economy. On insecurity, there is a genuine cause for worry, both within and outside Nigeria. Apart from the civil war era, at no other time in our history has Nigeria been this insecure. Boko Haram has sadly put Nigeria on the terrorism map, killing more than 13,000 of our nationals, displacing millions internally and externally, and at a time holding on to portions of our territory the size of Belgium. What has been consistently lacking is the required leadership in our battle against insurgency. I, as a retired general and a former head of state, have always known about our soldiers: they are capable, well trained, patriotic, brave and always ready to do their duty in the service of our country. You all can bear witness to the gallant role of our military in Burma, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Darfur and in many other peacekeeping operations in several parts of the world. But in the matter of this insurgency, our soldiers have neither received the necessary support nor the required incentives to tackle this problem. The government has also failed in any effort towards a multi-dimensional response to this problem leading to a situation in which we have now become dependent on our neighbours coming to our rescue. Let me assure you that if I am elected president, the world will have no cause to worry about Nigeria as it has had to recently, that Nigeria will return to its stabilising role in West Africa, and that no inch of Nigerian territory will ever be lost to the enemy because we will pay special attention to the welfare of our soldiers in and out of service, we will give them adequate and modern arms and ammunitions to work with, we will improve intelligence gathering to choke Boko Haram's financial and equipment channels, we will be tough on terrorism and tough on its root causes by initiating a comprehensive economic development plan promoting infrastructural development, job creation, agriculture and industry in the affected areas. We will always act on time and not allow problems to irresponsibly fester, and I, General Muhammadu Buhari, will always lead from the front and return Nigeria to its leadership role in regional and international efforts to combat terrorism.
On the economy, the fall in prices of oil has brought our economic and social stress into full relief. After the rebasing exercise in April 2014, Nigeria overtook South Africa as Africa’s largest economy. Our GDP is now valued at $510 billion and our economy rated 26th in the world. Also on the bright side, inflation has been kept at single digit for a while and our economy has grown at an average of 7% for about a decade. But it is more of paper growth, a growth that, on account of mismanagement, profligacy and corruption, has not translated to human development or shared prosperity. A development economist once said three questions should be asked about a country’s development: one, what is happening to poverty? Two, what is happening to unemployment? And three, what is happening to inequality?
The answers to these questions in Nigeria show that the current administration has created two economies in one country, a sorry tale of two nations: one economy for a few who have so much in their tiny island of prosperity; and the other economy for the many who have so little in their vast ocean of misery. Even by official figures, 33.1% of Nigerians live in extreme poverty. That’s at almost 60 million, almost the population of the United Kingdom. There is also the unemployment crisis simmering beneath the surface, ready to explode at the slightest stress, with officially 23.9% of our adult population and almost 60% of our youth unemployed. We also have one of the highest rates of inequalities in the world. With all these, it is not surprising that our performance on most governance and development indicators (like Mo Ibrahim Index on African Governance and UNDP’s Human Development Index.) are unflattering. With fall in the prices of oil, which accounts for more than 70% of government revenues, and lack of savings from more than a decade of oil boom, the poor will be disproportionately impacted.
In the face of dwindling revenues, a good place to start the repositioning of Nigeria's economy is to swiftly tackle two ills that have ballooned under the present administration: waste and corruption. And in doing this, I will, if elected, lead the way, with the force of personal example.
On corruption, there will be no confusion as to where I stand. Corruption will have no place and the corrupt will not be appointed into my administration. First and foremost, we will plug the holes in the budgetary process. Revenue producing entities such as NNPC and Customs and Excise will have one set of books only. Their revenues will be publicly disclosed and regularly audited. The institutions of state dedicated to fighting corruption will be given independence and prosecutorial authority without political interference. But I must emphasise that any war waged on corruption should not be misconstrued as settling old scores or a witch-hunt. I'm running for President to lead Nigeria to prosperity and not adversity.
In reforming the economy, we will use savings that arise from blocking these leakages and the proceeds recovered from corruption to fund our party’s social investments programmes in education, health, and safety nets such as free school meals for children, emergency public works for unemployed youth and pensions for the elderly. As a progressive party, we must reform our political economy to unleash the pent-up ingenuity and productivity of the Nigerian people thus freeing them from the indignities of poverty. We will run a private sector-led economy but maintain an active role for government through strong regulatory oversight and deliberate interventions and incentives to diversify the base of our economy, strengthen productive sectors, improve the productive capacities of our people and create jobs for our teeming youths. In short, we will run a functional economy driven by a worldview that sees growth not as an end by itself, but as a tool to create a society that works for all, rich and poor alike. On March 28, Nigeria has a decision to make. To vote for the continuity of failure or to elect progressive change. I believe the people will choose wisely.
In sum, I think that given its strategic importance, Nigeria can trigger a wave of democratic consolidation in Africa. But as a starting point we need to get this critical election right by ensuring that they go ahead and depriving those who want to scuttle it the benefit of derailing our fledgling democracy. That way, we will all see democracy and democratic consolidation as tools for solving pressing problems in a sustainable way, not as ends in themselves.
Permit me to close this discussion on a personal note. I have heard and read references to me as a former dictator in many respected British newspapers including the well regarded Economist. Let me say without sounding defensive that dictatorship goes with military rule, though some might be less dictatorial than others.
I take responsibility for whatever happened under my watch. I cannot change the past. But I can change the present and the future. So before you is a former military ruler and a converted democrat who is ready to operate under democratic norms and is subjecting himself to the rigours of democratic elections for the fourth time.
You may ask: why is he doing this? This is a question I ask myself all the time too. And here is my humble answer: because the work of making Nigeria great is not yet done, because I still believe that change is possible, this time through the ballot, and most importantly, because I still have the capacity and the passion to dream and work for a Nigeria that will be respected again in the comity of nations and that all Nigerians will be proud of.
I thank you for listening.

Monday, February 23, 2015

"GENERAL MUHAMMADU BUHARI WILL SPEAK AT THE CHATHAM HOUSE OF LONDON THIS WEEK"

Prospects for Democratic Consolidation in Africa: Nigeria's Transition

26 Feb 2015 - 10:00 to 11:00

Chatham House, London
Africa Programme, Nigeria Project

Participants

GENERAL MUHAMMADU BUHARI, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS, NIGERIA
CHAIR: SIR RICHARD GOZNEY KCMG CVO KSTJ, BRITISH HIGH COMMISSIONER TO NIGERIA (2004-07)



REGISTER INTEREST
Overview

The postponement of Nigeria’s fifth election since its return to civilian rule in 1999, together with fierce political competition, a security crisis and severe economic challenges linked to the drop in oil price, have thrown into sharp relief the challenges of conducting this essential process in such a complex environment. While there is widespread speculation as to the reasons for the delay, there is also widespread acknowledgment of the necessity that national elections do now take place as scheduled on 28 March.

General Muhammadu Buhari, former military ruler (1983-85) and now opposition presidential candidate, will discuss the importance of democracy for Africa’s future, and in particular why delivering dividends of elected government matter both to Nigeria and internationally.

LIVE STREAM: This event will be live streamed. The live stream will be made available at 10:00 GMT on Thursday 26 February.

ASK A QUESTION: Send questions for the speaker by using #CHAfrica on Twitter. A selection will be put to him during the event.

Please apply to attend by midnight on Tuesday 24 February. Applications received after this time will not be considered.

Entry to this meeting is restricted to e-ticket holders only.

EVENT CONTACT

Chris Vandome

+44 (0)20 7314 3669

Saturday, February 21, 2015

"ALL OFFICIAL EVENTS ARE ANNOUNCED BY CHATHAM HOUSE ON ITS WEBSITE"


"GARBA SHEHU CREATED THE POLITICAL CONTROVERSY ON GENERAL BUHARI'S VISIT TO LONDON"

Shehu Garba, the official spokeperson for the presidential campaign of General Muhammadu Buhari, the opposition presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) of Nigeria should be very careful, sensitive and meticulous when issuing any future public statement to the press about his boss, General Buhari henceforth. Any political event or engagement that General Buhari is working on that is still in the planning stage and without any official confirmation should never be made public to the media. Mallam Shehu Garba committed a huge political blunder when he released a press statement in Nigeria this week that General Buhari will hopefully speak at the prestigious Chatham House in London, United Kingdom during his ongoing visit to Britain. The Newsweek magazine and "THE REVEALER" contacted the public affairs department of the Chatham House separately for the official confirmation of this proposed event. The Catham House responded by email to "THE REVEALER" that there is no event that is officially planned for General Buhari at the moment by this organization.


Friday, February 20, 2015

"CHATHAM HOUSE DID NOT SCHEDULE GENERAL BUHARI FOR A TALK IN LONDON"

"THE REVEALER" has authoritatively confirmed from the public affairs department of the powerful political think-tank group in London, The Chatham House that General Muhammadu Buhari, the opposition presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) of Nigeria has no official engagement or event currently with this organization. General Buhari arrived into London, United Kingdom yesterday for a short visit. General Buhari's campaign organization reported yesterday that General Buhari was scheduled for an event with the Chatham House during his ongoing visit to Britain. The Newsweek Magazine also reported earlier today on the same subject matter that :"according to his campaign, after flying in from the Nigerian capital, Abuja, Buhari is set to speak at the foreign policy NGO the Royal Institute of International Affairs at Chatham House as well as holding talks with “key members of the British political establishment”. However, Chatham House could not confirm that he would be speaking, only saying it was “likely” and Newsweek could not determine who Buhari would be meeting"

Monday, February 16, 2015

"Nigeria’s Miserable Choices" - New York Times Editorial Opinion


The Nigerian government was supposed to hold presidential elections this past weekend, which presented voters with the dispiriting choice of keeping a lousy incumbent or returning to power a former autocratic leader. Now they will have to wait at least six weeks to cast votes.
The Nigerian election commission said earlier this month that it had pushed back the vote until at least March 28, after the country’s security chiefs warned that they could not guarantee the safety of voters in northeastern areas of the country where Boko Haram, the extremist militant group, captured international attention last spring when it abducted hundreds of schoolgirls. On Friday, Boko Haram fighters attacked a village in neighboring Chad for the first time, an alarming sign of the group’s expanding strength in a region that also includes areas of Cameroon and Niger.
Any argument to delay the vote might be more credible if President Goodluck Jonathan’s government had not spent much of the past year playing down the threat posed by the militants and if there were a reasonable expectation that the country’s weak military has the ability to improve security in a matter of weeks.
It appears more likely Mr. Jonathan grew alarmed by the surging appeal of Muhammadu Buhari, a former military ruler who has vowed to crack down on Boko Haram. By dragging out the race, Mr. Jonathan stands to deplete his rival’s campaign coffers, while he continues to use state funds and institutions to bankroll his own.
That Mr. Buhari, who helped launch a coup against a democratically elected government in 1983 and ruled until late 1985, has emerged as potential winner is more of an indictment of Mr. Jonathan’s dismal rule than a recognition of the former military chief’s appeal.

Nigerian voters have grown increasingly worried about the stunning rise of Boko Haram, which has committed terrorist atrocities including bombings.
The abductions and attacks by the group have exposed the weaknesses of Nigeria’s armed forces and the dysfunction of the government. Although Mr. Jonathan’s government has in the past been less than enthusiastic, and at times obstructive, in response to offers of American and European aid, he appears to be growing increasingly worried. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal last week, he said he would welcome American troops to fight the insurgency.
Beyond security matters, entrenched corruption and the government’s inability to diversify its economy as the price of oil, the country’s financial bedrock, has fallen have also caused Nigerians to look for new leadership. Nigeria, the most populous nation in Africa, and a relatively young democracy, cannot afford an electoral crisis. That would only set back the faltering effort to reassert government control in districts where Boko Haram is sowing terror. The security forces may not be able to safeguard many districts on Election Day. But postponement is very likely to make the security threat worse.

Nigeria’s Miserable Choices" - New York Times Editorial Opinion


The Nigerian government was supposed to hold presidential elections this past weekend, which presented voters with the dispiriting choice of keeping a lousy incumbent or returning to power a former autocratic leader. Now they will have to wait at least six weeks to cast votes.
The Nigerian election commission said earlier this month that it had pushed back the vote until at least March 28, after the country’s security chiefs warned that they could not guarantee the safety of voters in northeastern areas of the country where Boko Haram, the extremist militant group, captured international attention last spring when it abducted hundreds of schoolgirls. On Friday, Boko Haram fighters attacked a village in neighboring Chad for the first time, an alarming sign of the group’s expanding strength in a region that also includes areas of Cameroon and Niger.

Any argument to delay the vote might be more credible if President Goodluck Jonathan’s government had not spent much of the past year playing down the threat posed by the militants and if there were a reasonable expectation that the country’s weak military has the ability to improve security in a matter of weeks.
It appears more likely Mr. Jonathan grew alarmed by the surging appeal of Muhammadu Buhari, a former military ruler who has vowed to crack down on Boko Haram. By dragging out the race, Mr. Jonathan stands to deplete his rival’s campaign coffers, while he continues to use state funds and institutions to bankroll his own.
That Mr. Buhari, who helped launch a coup against a democratically elected government in 1983 and ruled until late 1985, has emerged as potential winner is more of an indictment of Mr. Jonathan’s dismal rule than a recognition of the former military chief’s appeal.
Nigerian voters have grown increasingly worried about the stunning rise of Boko Haram, which has committed terrorist atrocities including bombings.
The abductions and attacks by the group have exposed the weaknesses of Nigeria’s armed forces and the dysfunction of the government. Although Mr. Jonathan’s government has in the past been less than enthusiastic, and at times obstructive, in response to offers of American and European aid, he appears to be growing increasingly worried. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal last week, he said he would welcome American troops to fight the insurgency.
Beyond security matters, entrenched corruption and the government’s inability to diversify its economy as the price of oil, the country’s financial bedrock, has fallen have also caused Nigerians to look for new leadership. Nigeria, the most populous nation in Africa, and a relatively young democracy, cannot afford an electoral crisis. That would only set back the faltering effort to reassert government control in districts where Boko Haram is sowing terror. The security forces may not be able to safeguard many districts on Election Day. But postponement is very likely to make the security threat worse.

"Nigeria’s 2015 Presidential Election" - John Campbell, former US Ambassador to Nigeria

The success or failure of democracy, rule of law, and ethnic and religious reconciliation in Nigeria is a bellwether for the entire continent. With a population of more than 177 million evenly divided between Muslims and Christians, Nigeria is Africa’s largest economy and most populous country. A 2010 Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Contingency Planning Memorandum, “Electoral Violence in Nigeria,” considered the potential for widespread violence associated with Nigeria’s 2011 elections and the limited policy options available to the United States to forestall it. This assessment remains relevant today. The 2015 elections again may precipitate violence that could destabilize Nigeria, and Washington has even less leverage in Abuja than it did in 2011.

The upcoming elections are a rematch of the 2011 elections between the incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan (a southern Christian) and Muhammadu Buhari (a northern Muslim and a former military chief). Tension between Washington and Abuja is higher than in 2011, largely over how to respond to the radical Islamist insurgent group, Boko Haram, which is steadily gaining strength in northeast Nigeria. According to CFR’s Nigeria Security Tracker, Boko Haram has been responsible for nearly eleven thousand deaths since May 2011. Nigerian domestic instability has also increased as a result of the recent global collapse of oil prices, which are hitting the government and political classes hard.

Oil constitutes more than 70 percent of Nigeria’s revenue and provides more than 90 percent of its foreign exchange. Since October 2014, the national currency, the naira, has depreciated from 155 to the U.S. dollar to 191. NEW CONCE RNS Since Nigeria’s independence in 1960, political power has alternated between the predominantly Muslim north and predominantly Christian south, an informal strategy to forestall the country’s polarization. Jonathan assumed the presidency when President Umaru Yar’Adua, a northern Muslim, died in 2010. Jonathan gave private assurances that he would finish Yar’Adua’s term and wait until 2015 to run for president because it was still “the north’s turn.” But Jonathan ran for reelection in 2011, thereby violating the system of power alternation. Following the announcement of Jonathan’s victory, the north made accusations of election rigging. Rioting broke out across the north, resulting in the greatest bloodshed since the 1967–70 civil war.

The 2015 elections are likely to be more violent. A new opposition party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), has nominated Buhari as its presidential candidate. The APC is stronger than its predecessors and reflects a splintering of the political classes. The government’s inability to defeat Boko Haram, the economic hardships brought on by falling oil prices, and a growing public perception that the Jonathan administration is weak have fueled support for the APC. Though the APC’s voter base is in the north, it enjoys support all over the country, unlike the opposition in 2011.

However, any incumbent Nigerian president has significant advantages: he is at the center of extensive patronage networks; he has access to the government’s oil revenue; The 2015 elections are likely to be more violent.and he and his party largely control the election machinery and ballot-counting infrastructure. It is uncertain whether any provisions will be made for voters in the three northern states placed under a state of emergency because of Boko Haram, as well as the estimated one million people displaced by the insurgency. These displaced voters would likely support Buhari and the APC; their exclusion would benefit Jonathan and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). Thus despite the strength of the opposition, Jonathan remains the likely—but not certain—winner. POLICY IMPLICATIONS An unstable Nigeria with internally displaced and refugee populations and a government unable to quell Boko Haram could potentially destabilize neighboring states and compromise U.S. interests in Africa.

Yet, the United States has little leverage over Nigerian politics, which is driven by domestic factors, and even less leverage over the Nigerian security services. Nigeria will be disappointed that the United States has not offered greater assistance to counter Boko Haram, and Washington will be frustrated by Abuja’s failure to address human rights abuses by the security service.RECOMMENDATIONS A November 2014 Council Special Report “U.S. Policy to Counter Nigeria’s Boko Haram” recommends longterm steps the United States should take to encourage a Nigerian response to terrorism that advances democracy, rule of law, and respect for human rights. In the short term, vocal U.S. support for democracy and human rights both during and after the elections could help discourage violence at the polls and after the results are announced. Secretary of State John Kerry, in a preelection visit to Nigeria, has already underscored the importance of free, fair, and credible elections to the bilateral relationship.

 In the aftermath, Washington should avoid commenting prematurely on the quality of the elections. Observers from the National Democratic Institute and the International Republic Institute are likely to issue preliminary assessments immediately after the polls close. So, too, will observers from the European Union, the Commonwealth, and the African Union. There will be media pressure for early, official comment. But, following a close election and the violence likely to follow, the timing and content of official U.S. statements should take into account the views of the vibrant Nigerian human rights community, which will likely be the most accurate.  Washington should forcefully and immediately denounce episodes of violence, including those committed by the security services. But official statements should avoid assessing blame without evidence, and they should take into account the weak ability of party leaders to control crowd behavior.  Washington should facilitate and support humanitarian assistance.

The north is already in desperate need of humanitarian assistance, with the prospect of famine looming. If the postelection period is violent, there may be need for international humanitarian assistance in many other parts of the country. The Obama administration should plan for a leadership role in coordinating an international humanitarian relief effort, including a close study of lessons learned from the Africa Military Command’s successful intervention in Liberia’s Ebola crisis -  John Campbell is the Ralph Bunche senior fellow for Africa policy studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Saturday, February 7, 2015

"BOKO HARAM IS THE WINNER OF THE FEBRUARY 14, 2015 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN NIGERIA"

Nigeria made the global history yesterday when its electoral body, the INEC decided not to join the league of the nations of the world in this 21st century, such as, Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq that had conducted their own national elections in the midst of those ongoing wars in their countries. The INEC decided to push forward the scheduled dates of the Nigerian elections and claimed that the Nigerian military and security forces refused to provide the needed security for those scheduled elections. Prof. Attahiru Jega, the head of INEC also said that the military will start fighting the Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East of Nigeria  beginning from February 14, 2015, the same day that the rescheduled Nigeria's presidential election was to take place initially. The Boko Haram insurgency is now over 6 years old in Nigeria and It has so far claimed over 18,000 Nigerian life and displaced another 1.5 million as internal refugees. The Boko Haram insurgency is happening in the 3 states of Borno, Adamawa and Yobe out of the 36 states in Nigeria. The Boko Haram insurgency is active in 10 local government areas of Borno State, 2 local government areas of Yobe State and 2 local government areas of Adamawa State out of the entire 774 local government areas of Nigeria. The territory that is presently under the control of Boko Haram in Nigeria is about the same size as the European nation of Belgium.





Nigeria is a typical banana republic in all ramifications. Where in the democratic nations of the world today is their military ever used to conduct their elections except in Nigeria? Is the conduction of an election for a country now the same thing as the theater of war that requires the military to supervise it and be in control of it? What are the constitutional responsibilities of the Nigerian Police Force? This is "Babanla Nonsense" which means a very stupid decision according to the late Fela Kuti of Nigeria. This can only happen in a lawlessness nation where the constitution and the rule of law are never respected by the leaders of such a country like Nigeria

Nigeria in my own judgement is a lawless country. Election in Nigeria is a constitutional issue in which every eligible Nigerian enjoys under the supreme law of the land. One of the constitutional responsibilities of the Nigerian military and the security agencies is to provide national security for the elections in Nigeria. The military and the security agencies of Nigeria have no constitutional power and rights to turn down this constitutional responsibility. The military and the security agencies of Nigeria are directly under the command of President Jonathan Goodluck, who is the commander-in-chief of the Nigerian armed forces and her security agencies. This is President Jonathan Goodluck at work in all reality. Will the Nigerian INEC under the supervision of this President  conduct a free, fair, transparent, credible and all-inclusive elections in Nigeria on the new dates of March 28, 2015 and April 11, 2014 respectively? Only time and events in Nigeria in the next 6 weeks can surely tell.  . 

Thursday, February 5, 2015

"NIGERIA 2015:A FORMER DICTATOR IS A BETTER CHOICE THAN A FAILED PRESIDENT" - THE ECONOMIST.


SOMETIMES there are no good options. Nigeria goes to the polls on February 14th to elect the next president, who will face problems so large—from rampant corruption to a jihadist insurgency—that they could break the country apart, with dire consequences for Nigerians and the world.
And yet, as Africa’s biggest economy stages its most important election since the restoration of civilian rule in 1999, and perhaps since the civil war four decades ago, Nigerians must pick between the incumbent, Goodluck Jonathan, who has proved an utter failure, and the opposition leader, Muhammadu Buhari, a former military dictator with blood on his hands (see article). The candidates stand as symbols of a broken political system that makes all Nigeria’s problems even more intractable.
Start with Mr Jonathan, whose People’s Democratic Party (PDP) has run the country since 1999 and who stumbled into the presidency on the death of his predecessor in 2010. The PDP’s reign has been a sorry one. Mr Jonathan has shown little willingness to tackle endemic corruption. When the governor of the central bank reported that $20 billion had been stolen, his reward was to be sacked.
Worse, on Mr Jonathan’s watch much of the north of the country has been in flames. About 18,000 people have died in political violence in recent years, thousands of them in January in several brutal attacks by Boko Haram, a jihadist group that claims to have established its “caliphate” in territory as large as Belgium. Another 1.5m people have fled their homes. The insurgency is far from Mr Jonathan’s southern political heartland and afflicts people more likely to vote for the opposition. He has shown little enthusiasm for tackling it, and even less competence. Quick to offer condolences to France after the attack on Charlie Hedbo, Mr Jonathan waited almost two weeks before speaking up about a Boko Haram attack that killed hundreds, perhaps thousands, of his compatriots.
The single bright spot of his rule has been Nigeria’s economy, one of the world’s fastest-growing. Yet that is largely despite the government rather than because of it, and falling oil prices will temper the boom. The prosperity has not been broadly shared: under Mr Jonathan poverty has increased. Nigerians typically die eight years younger than their poorer neighbours in nearby Ghana.
Goodbye Jonathan
Voters have ample cause to send Mr Jonathan packing. In a country where power has often changed through the barrel of a gun, the opposition All Progressives Congress has a real chance of winning through the ballot box. Yet its candidate, Mr Buhari, is an ex-general who, three decades ago, came to power in a coup. His rule was nasty, brutish and mercifully short. Declaring a “war against indiscipline”, he ordered whip-wielding soldiers to ensure that Nigerians formed orderly queues. His economics, known as Buharism, was destructive. Instead of letting the currency depreciate in the face of a trade deficit, he tried to fix prices and ban “unnecessary” imports. He expelled 700,000 migrants in the delusion that this would create jobs for Nigerians. He banned political meetings and free speech. He detained thousands, used secret tribunals and executed people for crimes that were not capital offences.
Should a former dictator with such a record be offered another chance? Surprisingly, many Nigerians think he should. One reason is that, in a country where ministers routinely wear wristwatches worth many times their annual salary, Mr Buhari is a sandal-wearing ascetic with a record of fighting corruption. Few nowadays question his commitment to democracy or expect him to turn autocratic: he has repeatedly stood for election and accepted the outcome when he lost. He would probably do a better job of running the country, and in particular of tackling Boko Haram. As a northerner and Muslim, he will have greater legitimacy among villagers whose help he will need to isolate the insurgents. As a military man, he is more likely to win the respect of a demoralised army.
We are relieved not to have a vote in this election. But were we offered one we would—with a heavy heart—choose Mr Buhari. Mr Jonathan risks presiding over Nigeria’s bloody fragmentation. If Mr Buhari can save Nigeria, history might even be kind to him.

Tuesday, February 3, 2015

"THE POLITICAL ODDS AGAINST THE REELECTION OF GOODLUCK JONATHAN IN 2015"

The easy reelection of President Jonathan Goodluck of Nigeria back to the Aso Rock villa on March 28, 2015 in a free, fair, transparent, credible and all-inclusive election is a typical daunting task. The year 2011 that this President was new on the national political stage of Nigeria is very different from the year 2015 when most Nigerians now know the real Jonathan Goodluck in his true nature. This President promised Nigerians heaven on earth if he was elected into power in 2011. But four years later in 2015, these electioneering promises remained unfulfilled by this President who is now seeking a second term in office this month. Time and events of the last five years and nine months in the governance of Nigeria and under the watch of this President have both changed, shaped and defined his presidency clearly to the Nigerian voters who will determine his fate in the next two weeks. The electorates that will be voting in 2015 are now in a better position in the year 2015 than in the year 2011 to make a well informed political decision with their votes this month.
.

President Jonathan Goodluck of Nigeria

This President is running for his reelection with a political party, the PDP that is no longer politcally intact today like the same PDP that he won his presidency with in 2011. The PDP has lost the speaker of the House of Representatives, five state governors, several members of the national and state assemblies and party leaders at the national, state and local levels to the main opposition party, the APC. The political landscape in 2011 is now totally different from that of 2015, In 2011, this President ran against many smaller and very weak political parties that their support bases did not cut across the entire Nigerian federation. Today in 2015, this President will be running against the united opposition parties, the APC that now has national spread and massive support base across Nigeria. The failure of this President in his war against the Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East region of Nigeria despite the yearly billions of dollar that were allocated for the defense of Nigeria is a political determinant of the fate of this President this month. The international scandal that surrounded the kidnapping of the over 200 school girls at Chibok by Boko Haram and the daily bombings of innocent Nigerians that have now claimed about 15,000 souls and internally displaced over 2 million Nigerians are the huge political baggages in the 2015 election that this President can never sweep under the carpet. He will pay dearly for it at the polls in the Northern Nigeria on March 28, 2015.

The recent global drop in the price of oil that has resulted in the quick declining of the Nigeria's economy and the rapid collapse of the Naira are part of the legacies of this President for his reelection in 2015. This President has also failed to address the double-digit youth unemployment rate and the provision of electricity for Nigerians as he promised in 2011. His government has failed woefully to address the issue of official corruption in Nigeria. The government of this President has been clouded with many financial scandals, such as, the missing $20 billion oil money, the billion of dollar in the Malibu oil deal, oil subsidy scandal, allegations of corruption against the members of this President's executive council as well as the top public officials in his government. 


The most important political development against the reelection of this President is the fact that General Muhammadu Buhari of the main opposition party, the APC has made deep political inroad ito the traditionally PDP strongholds in the North-Central, South-East, South-South and South-West regions of Nigeria in 2015. General Buhari has also succeeded in penetrating deeply into the Christian South and also expanded his political base deeper into the Muslim North. The truth is that Nigeria today is now worse off in every area of human developmental indice than the Nigeria that was handed over in 2011 to this President to govern. Finally, the most important question that every Nigerian voter must answer before they cast their votes in 2015 is this:Are Nigerians truly better off today than in 2011? Nigerian voters may answer this question on March 28, 2015.

Monday, February 2, 2015

"MANY OF THE NIGERIA'S POPULAR PASTORS ARE THE REAL ENEMIES OF THE ORDINARY NIGERIANS"

Why are so many Nigerian Church folks so surprised today to learn that Pastor Adeboye, Bishop Oyedepo, Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor and the leadership of CAN and PFN all unanimously endorsed the reelection of the corrupt, inept, mediocre and lawless President Jonathan Goodluck of Nigeria? These pastors are never the true friends of the poor or the ordinary Nigerians in the first instance and in all reality. These pastors have never spoken at anytime and in their life against the corrupt leadership in the governance of Nigeria. These pastors are the secret lovers of the corrupt Nigerian public officials as well as the key beneficiaries from the corrupt governance of Nigeria. These pastors have exploited their poor, ignorant, gullible, vulnerable and desperate Church members of their hard earned money in the name of God, the Bible, the religion of Christianity and the gospel of prosperity or greed gospel that they preach all over Nigeria. 



These pastors are now worried about their own fate and future in the event that General Buhari, the anti-corruption politician of Nigeria becomes the next President of Nigeria this month. Pastor Adeboye may have to explain to his fellow Nigerians how he personally cheated the government of Nigeria of about $120 million through the illegal import duty waiver he was given under the Obasanjo's government. Pastor Oyedepo may have to explain how he cheated Ogun State government of their tax revenue and the physical assault on the Ogun State tax collectors that he ordered. Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor may have to explain the roles that he played in the use of his private jet to launder about $9.5 million into South Africa for the illegal arm purchase in the black market in the name of the federal government of Nigeria. The fear of Buhari is the beginning of a better government in Nigeria.. 

"I BELIEVE THE N30 TRILLION ($140 BILLION) THAT CHARLES SOLUDO SAID WAS STOLEN IN NIGERIA"

The figure of N30 trillion or $140 billion that Charles Soludo, the former Nigerian central bank governor claimed to have been stolen under the economic supervision of Ngozi Iweala and the presidency of Jonathan Goodluck can be trusted and believed for a number of reasons. Firstly, the government of Jonathan Goodluck made almost $0.5 trillion from the Nigeria's oil revenue since its inception to date. Secondly, the oil reached its highest price of over $100 a barrel  at 2.2 million barrels a day from 2009 to June of 2014 under Jonathan Goodluck. The foreign reserves stood at about $67 billion when the government of Nigeria was handed over to Jonathan Goodluck. This foreign reserves did not increased by $1 under the government of Jonathan Goodluck in 5 years and 7 months and in the midst of the biggest global oil boom in history of the whole world. Nigeria's foreign reserves are now less than $40 billion.
Charles Soludo versus Ngozi Iweala.

Thirdly, Ngozi Iweala has refused to date to release the audit report that probed the $20 billion that Lamido Sanusi, the former central bank governor accused this government of stolen from the Nigeria's treasury. Fourthly, the excess crude oil account that was close to $30 billion under Jonathan Goodluck at the onset of his government is almost empty today. Fifthly, Nigeria has borrowed more money in the midst of her oil boom than anytime in her hitory as a nation. Our foreign debt that stood at over $3.5 billion under Jonathan Goodluck at the beginning of his administration is now close to $16 billion. Sixthly, between 100,000 to 400,000 barrels of oil are stolen daily by oil bunkers under the government of Jonathan Goodluck since its inception to date unabated. The Al-Jazeera cable network reported last year that about $8 billion is lost yearly by the Nigerian government to the oil theft.  Lastly this amount of N30 trillion was stolen over almost 6 years at an average of N5 trillion a year and never at once.

Sunday, February 1, 2015

"THE 3 REASONS WHY I DO NOT SUPPORT THE REELECTION OF PRESIDENT JONATHAN GOODLUCK OF NIGERIA"

President Jonathan Goodluck of Nigeria


I am one of the Nigerians that is not surprised or disappointed for one second of my life by the bad, ineffective, visionless and corrupt leadership of President Jonathan Goodluck in the governance of Nigeria for the last five years as the Nigeria's acting president, substative president and elected president. The truth is that I have never supported his ascendancy to the presidency of Nigeria since the day that he was nominated by the PDP in January of 2011 as their party's candidate to run in the presidential election of that year.
I have three reasons why I have never supported this President from 2011 to date. Firstly, he was never prepared and ready for the huge challenges and the responsibilities of the office of the President of Nigeria. He needs more than GOODLUCK to govern Nigeria with positive results. Secondly, his rise in politics from his first nomination as a deputy governorship candidate in 1999 in Bayelsa State to his nomination as the vice-presidential candidate in 2007 were all based on the politics of godfatherism, zoning, ethnicity and religious affiliation and never on merit, his track record of past achievements and exemplary leadership quality and style that he processes.
Lastly, President Jonathan Goodluck has no single public record of ever actively fighting the menace of official corruption and resource mismanagement in his entire public life and service either as a deputy state governor, a state governor, a vice president of Nigeria, an acting president of Nigeria and the president of Nigeria. I personally consider both the official corruption and resource wastage as the number one enemy of Nigeria and Jonathan Goodluck is not that messiah that will take Nigeria to her great future. A vote for Jonathan Goodluck in 2015 is a vote for the further setback and the destruction of Nigeria. Nigerians, please vote this President out of office in 2015. ‪#‎PoliticalAttackDogForBuhari‬ 

"THE REASONS WHY PRESIDENT GOODLUCK JONATHAN OF NIGERIA WILL LOSE HIS REELECTION IN THE NORTH"


wrote it on my Facebook page about a week ago that the presidential campaign for the reelection of President Jonathan Goodluck of Nigeria in the Northern Nigeria is about to collapse like a pack of playing cards. This political prediction is now happening live in the Northern Nigeria today. This President has witnessed the lowest turnouts of his own PDP party supporters so far in all his political rallies that he had held in the Northern Nigeria. Credible news reports also said that President Jonathan Goodluck was stoned in some Northern states which I condemned and will not support. The shout of Sai Buhari in Hausa, which means only Buhari dominated his campaign rally in the strategic Northern Nigerian city of Kaduna yesterday.

This President has forgotten that he was elected to be an equal President to all Nigerians. This President has quickly forgotten that 8 million out of his 22 million votes or 37% of his total votes that elected him to office in 2011 came from the 19 Northern states of Nigeria. This President decided to listen to Asari Dokubo, Edwin Clarke and Tompolo on how to govern Nigeria and the North. This President has lost his political support in the North because he decided to play politics with the Boko Haram by paying lip service and nonchalant attitude to the war on this insurgency in the North-East of Nigeria that has now destabilized many parts of the North with millions displaced and thousands killed. He refused to protect the ordinary Northerners from the daily terror of Boko Haram. He will pay a heavy political price for this in the North on March 28, 2015. I know my onions in the Nigerian politics.