Correcting misconceptions about Buhari in 2015 elections

This has become necessary because of the increase and intensity of negative campaign attack adverts in the media, meant to capture the imagination of uninformed citizens and to influence them to vote against the targeted candidates. Attack adverts do not only confuse and misinform citizens,  they are also injurious to sustained democratic political development. It […]

This has become necessary because of the increase and intensity of negative campaign attack adverts in the media, meant to capture the imagination of uninformed citizens and to influence them to vote against the targeted candidates. Attack adverts do not only confuse and misinform citizens,  they are also injurious to sustained democratic political development. It is therefore important that those who are trained in the art and science of politics contribute their knowledge through systematic analysis of issues so as to enhance voter political education and citizen civic responsibilities that are required in a democratic political system.
Most of the negative adverts are targeted at General Muhammadu Buhari (GMB), the presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), concerning his age at 72, and his military service. This brief analysis of the issues in the campaign attacks is meant to correct the misconceptions created by the charges and, in doing so, contribute to citizen education that will enable voters make rational decisions in choosing between candidates during the elections.
One issue in the sustained attacks on the candidacy of GMB has been that he is too old at 72 to contest the elections and to be president if and when elected. Yet, none of the advertorials provided any explanations or justification for the opinion. Indeed, there no logical explanations to correlate age (the 70s) to performance as the President of a country. In fact, to the contrary, there are numerous examples from international and comparative experiences in contemporary times, to prove the opposite. Below is a sketch of matured individuals (70 and above) from around the world with outstanding performances as national leaders.
Starting from Asia, in 1978, China required a leader to move the country from the socialist to a market economy. Deng Xiaoping at 74 was called upon for the task. The reforms he helped initiate during his tenure were responsible for China’s status today as one of the leading economies in the world. Not only that, China went through the process with a stable political system. By the time he retired from active politics in 1989 at the age of 85, China has gained a firm footing in global politics and economy. Today, any analysis of the Chinese emergence as a global economic and political power will be incomplete without reference to Deng Xiaoping. His age did not deter him from performing the feat and the wisdom and experience that came with age might have helped him.
Moving on to the Americas, voters in the United States of America (USA), which can claim to be a leading modern democracy, elected President Ronald Reagan at the age of 68 in 1980. He contested for re-election in 1984 at the age of 72 and won in a landslide. He finished his second term at the age of 76. It is therefore a lie for an advertorial in a national daily (February 6th, 2015, p. 50) to claim that “no progressive countries in the world . . . like the US and UK, etc. have ever elected anybody above 70 years of age since the inception of democracy in their countries.” Political observers noted that President Reagan became “a conservative icon, who ranked highly in public opinion polls of US Presidents and is credited for generating an ideological renaissance on the American political right.”  Reagan’s advanced age did not undermine his ability to govern and to lead his country during hard economic times.  
In the Middle East, we had the most endearing case of the Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran who in 1979, at the age of 77, led a social revolution to liberate his country from the grip of imperialism. Today, the Republic stands tall in the global political arena as a regional leader. The Ayatollah was successful because of the overwhelming support he had from the youth and professional groups and the anti-imperialists.  Of those examined in this piece he was the oldest, but after the successful revolution he was left as the leader for another 10 years before his death.  No one can tell if the revolution could have succeeded if the Iranians said the Ayatollah was too old to lead a revolution. His vision, wisdom and ideas transformed Iran in spite of his advanced age.
Back to our own continent, Africa, and still very fresh in our collective memory is the real life story of Nelson Mandela who was elected President of South Africa at the age of 74 to lead his country through a difficult time transitioning from apartheid to a democratic political system. The country was divided not only along African ethnic lines, but also along bitter black/colored/white /Asian racial categories. The economy was threatened with white business flight at the end of minority rule. Yet in four years, Mandela, (two years older than GMB) was able to pull the country together politically and salvaged the economy. The same advertorial quoted above attacking GMB’s candidacy also attempted to deceive its readers by quoting Mandela as having said that “he would like to hand over to a younger man,” but cleverly left out the fact that Mandela was 74 when he accepted his party’s nomination in 1994 to contest the election which he won. Who knows what would have happened if South Africans claimed that Mandela was too old at 74 to lead his country during difficult times? Mandela’s leadership contributed to make South Africa the envy of Africa today. He succeeded because of the love for his country, Africa and humanity. His ripe age was a political asset and not an obstacle. In hindsight, it would seem that Africa is lucky that Mandela came to the world via South Africa. Had Mandela come through Nigeria he would probably not have had the chance to make history the way he did.  It is hoped that Nigerians can learn from others’ experiences and not allow themselves to be deceived and denied the chance to make their own history.
The fallacy (defined as a “logically unsound argument” or “a statement based on false logic or reasoning”) of the sustained campaign attacks on GMB is that the attacks give the wrong impression that individuals in their 70s cannot rule effectively. The records of outstanding performances of national leaders of that age group show that the claim of the advertorials is false.  And, it is not true either, that younger individuals have always ruled better as evident in our own contemporary Nigeria.  We can only conclude then that age has no correlation to effective political leadership, but that there is, in fact evidence as shown, that the matured age of 70s and above may be a political asset in a country beset with formidable problems like Nigeria.
As for relating old age to poor health and even death, the claim is not only empirically incorrect, but also morally wrong. There is no statistical evidence, at least in the case of Nigeria, that older people are less healthy and are dying faster than younger people. Going by the obituary announcements in the mass media and from other evidence, there is no proof to claim that people in their 70s are more likely to die of ill-health than those in their 50s or 60s. If health of candidates is an issue then all candidates must be asked to produce a clean bill of health. If done properly (non-Nigerian style) we may be surprised by the findings. But in the absence of that we should hope that all candidates are healthy and we should not wish any of them dead. It is morally wrong in our cultures and religions to wish other people dead or attempt to play God in the name of politics.
The other major issue in the attacks targeted at GMB is his military service and brief tenure as the leader of a military regime in the early 1980s. First the attacks imply that his years of military service did not equate to the academic qualifications for a president and second, that his actions as the leader of a military regime, he cannot transform himself into a democratically elected leader. Both charges are false and do not consider political processes elsewhere in the modern world. Although there are numerous examples from around the world of democratic political leadership with military backgrounds, this enquiry will be limited to the experience in the USA where unexpectedly, individuals with military service are referred as democratic leaders, and yet the country remains a strong leading democratic nation. The first US President, George Washington, reached the rank of General before becoming President. Only two of the first ten presidents did not serve in the Military in one form or the other. And of the total forty four presidents of the US, only eleven did not serve in the military or related services prior to seeking office through the ballot box.

In reference to GMB, the US produced two presidents – Ulysses Grant and Dwight Eisenhower – who were graduates of the US Army War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, the same Military academy attended by GMB. The two US presidents are listed along with GMB as notable alumni of the College. President Jimmy Carter was a graduate of the US Naval Academy. It is no wonder that till today, military service comes up in US presidential campaigns as a political resource to the extent that some candidates attempt to exaggerate their record of military service to boost their electoral chances.
So the question arises, why does the US electorate value military service? The answers are not far-fetched. First, military service is considered as one of the highest personal sacrifices one can make for his or her country. It means one is able to fight in a war aware of the possibility that one may have to give up his or her life for the sake of the county. Second, by its nature, military service emphasizes discipline, perseverance, and commitment to values among others – all of which are important for leadership role by officers. Because of these values candidates with proven service records are hardly put to prove other academic credentials. George Washington’s academic credentials would probably have been valued more than his service and leadership qualities when his peers persuaded him to contest for the presidency. It is only in Nigeria that those who served in the army and have not enriched themselves, are considered abnormal to the extent that candidates such as GMB can be ridiculed rather than respected for their service in the military. General Muhammad Buhari (GMB) is an intelligent man as many of the instructors in the military academies affirmed. There are no reasons to doubt that those leadership qualities, discipline and intelligence cannot be employed to salvage Nigeria.
Related issues to military service being used to distract citizens from voting for MGB include his Ordinary Level certificate before joining the military. Many Nigerians are now discarding issue as mere desperate moves by his opponents to distract attention leading to the elections. Many are asking, why are these issues now important when they were not in the last three cases when GMB contested for the Presidency? And how can the minimum requirement be more significant than the diplomas and certificates GMB received in those prestigious Military Academies? This related charge against GMB does not require any analysis as potential voters are seeing the big picture and questioning the logic of the issues of Secondary School Certificate.
Another related issue concerns GMB’s brief stint as the leader of the military regime from 1983-1985. As a corrective regime (as they regarded it then) and as was the practice in many developing countries at the time, ad hoc laws (decrees) were promulgated to enable the regimes to govern. The laws were not meant to follow the normal pattern just as the regime was out of the normal. Campaign attacks in television and news media commercials and advertorials continue to insist that GMB if elected will duplicate patterns of his military rule. But any intelligent person knows this is impossible. The country will have an independent judiciary, an elected National Assembly that will contain members of the opposition parties, an independent media, and above there is now a changed global community that is increasingly pro-democratic than was the case in the early 1980s. How can GMB overcome all these factors and undermine the democratic dispensation? Only uneducated citizens can be deceived to believe the political process of the military era in the early 1980s can be duplicated in contemporary Nigeria. There is no reason to doubt that just as the Generals in the USA were able to rule as elected democratic leaders, that GMB can also rule as a democratically elected civilian president.
 There is a ready example in the nearby Republic of Ghana, where Flight Lieutenant J.J. Rawlings cleaned up the house as a military ruler and turned around in civilian clothes to transform politics and society in Ghana. Nigerians visiting Ghana today can tell the difference. It is commendable that GMB has been consistent in his campaign focus to fight corruption when elected. It is the practice all over the civilized world to try those accused of corruption in a court of law and sent to prisons if found guilty. This is a practice in Europe and the USA, Asia, Latin America, and in the Middle East. There is no single developed country in the world where corruption and indiscipline go unpunished is the case in contemporary Nigeria.
It is hoped that this brief analysis of the issues in the campaign attacks against General Muhammadu Buhari will help to correct the misconceptions that might have been created in the minds of citizens of the country. Political campaigns should serve as agents of political education and socialization only when correct interpretations of issues are provided to the citizens. It is to be expected that some potential voters have already made up their minds whom to vote for. But it is also true that a large number of potential voters also wait till the last minute to do so. Analysis of issues like this may help many voters to understand the issues better and change the way they vote. If the analysis provided helps some citizens to understand the issues better, then this piece would have succeeded in its purpose.

Concluded

Sakah Saidu Mahmud, Ph.D., is a professor of Political Science and Provost, College of Humanities, Management and Social Sciences, Kwara State University (KWASU), Malete.