Judging Jonathan

Some people thought I had officially lowered myself to sycophancy. But what would be a good way to convey my argument and get the naysayers to grasp my point? I believe, despite the unfortunate manner of his ascendancy to office, including the doctrine of necessity that ensured he took full control of the country, that […]

Some people thought I had officially lowered myself to sycophancy. But what would be a good way to convey my argument and get the naysayers to grasp my point? I believe, despite the unfortunate manner of his ascendancy to office, including the doctrine of necessity that ensured he took full control of the country, that he appears to be more capable than he is being given credit for, or being given a chance to prove. This is most especially in the north where the first two generations of leadership have failed their people woefully. I concluded that to be a sycophant, and be favourably disposed to those who ruined my country, must mean that I am schizophrenic. I do not see things simply in black and white; certainly, not when it comes to politics or our societal mores.
In the case of Goodluck Jonathan, and cognizant of the historically corruptive and oppressive nature of our society, I am more convinced that his accomplishments especially towards improving the lot of his Niger Delta people is better, compared to the mess that northern leaders inflicted on Nigeria and their people in the north. However, I am embarrassed that in spite of his humble beginnings or his perceived intellectual shortcomings, Jonathan has shown himself not to be conversant with the global strategy for poverty alleviation. One would expect that a man of his upbringing wouldn’t waste public funds on private jets or even bother embellish the presidential fleet. But alas!
But he has stepped up to the plate in other departments. In making all these assessments particularly, I am also more inclined toward honesty than subterfuge, and using my fair sense of our political history, having been a political editor some years ago, irresponsible governance and dishonest workmanship did not begin with last night’s news.
There are contexts to our circumstances that must be elevated to the discussion table. In my research for today’s article, for example, I came across the USD 9.3m and I looked at the merits of the threat by elder statesman Edwin Clark to expose all those public officials who have been running with oily hands and shouting wolf where there is none.
The truth that I would want to share is that the nation’s third generation of leaders institutionalized criminality in government. The military on whom the blame continues to rest brought the template of official criminality’ many years ago, and ensured that power is vested in the hands of those who perpetrated the most foul of misdeeds.
I wish that those political leaders and the ones who served with them are the ones to go after. Who dares to do that? Who dares to the then leadership to explain its Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) or the oil windfall totalling USD12.3m?  There are others who need to be interrogated too, including some who sit easily in government and elsewhere in the society whom we seem hell-bent on giving a pass, or whose public relations response to tame questions about their contributions to Nigeria’s dysfunctions and dystrophy we readily accept.
I believe that, as president, Jonathan holds the most powerful office in the land and must be subjected to questions of stewardship, but I still wonder if there is not a hint of bullying and, by extension, cowardice in the way he is being treated by some in the media and others who think they are powerful, given our reluctance to subject others to similar standards.
Ultimately, I am not suggesting that Jonathan is a genius. I am suggesting, however, that though he might be overly dependent on his pastors, special advisers, speech writers and assistants, and may lack some emotional controls, as well as any grand vision and intentionality to move the country at the pace it needs to go, if we revise our neo-colonialist, Social Darwinist view of life, in which power resides in family connections, maleness and wealth, we will recognise that Jonathan is not the worst thing that happened to Nigeria, and that, in spite of his limitations, he is getting some things right.
Those who call Jonathan a child of circumstance should understand that the leadership bar, traditionally, has been set so low it is not hard to scale at all. And that what we have nurtured has not brought us prosperity or taught us collaboration, cohesion, mutual respect, or the core values of honesty, integrity, morality and diligence, that a society needs to thrive. I have since discovered after deep introspection that any real examination of our political leadership to date must also be a profound examination of right and wrong, and of good and evil.
We need to understand how we got to where we are. Our foundations are so fragile that, we cannot clean the trash in Lagos; we cannot trust our legislators who make our laws or the police who enforce them; and we disagree on the basic principles of nation-building. It is absurd that Jonathan’s intellect is often brought into question. While it is essential to successful leadership, there are other factors at play, including the values of society. In our own interest, we must raise the bar and adjust our attitudes:
We must show greater understanding and openness to different perspectives, and make responses that are more rational than blindly emotional and stop bullying our president.