Odd messenger, troubling message

Obasanjo has been fantasizing about the spontaneous outpouring of international praise that followed Madiba’s death. But having been unable to win the Mo Ibrahim Prize, not to mention the Nobel Prize, such ambitions of grandeur are at best a pipe dream. Anyway, since the letter was written three days before Madiba died, I believe the […]

Obasanjo has been fantasizing about the spontaneous outpouring of international praise that followed Madiba’s death. But having been unable to win the Mo Ibrahim Prize, not to mention the Nobel Prize, such ambitions of grandeur are at best a pipe dream. Anyway, since the letter was written three days before Madiba died, I believe the pretension to moral and patriotic grandeur was entirely Obasanjo’s home-grown own.
I am choosing my words carefully here because Obasanjo pre-emptively said in his now famous letter that it “will provoke a cacophony from hired and unhired attackers.” I hope he will generously list me among the unhired attackers, not the hired ones. Obasanjo wrote in another part of his long letter that “a good friend will tell you the truth no matter how bitter.” I consider myself to be his good [well, not friend but] son, so I want to tell him a few reasons why some of the evidently truthful things he said in his letter nevertheless elicited disbelief from many Nigerians.
Two years ago, faced with a similar situation, I asked my reference point on First Republic affairs Alhaji Shehu Kaikai if it is everyone who is qualified to tell the truth. He said, “No; there is a person who can tell the truth; there is a time for telling the truth and there is a way to tell the truth.” All three conditions look problematic with respect to Obasanjo’s letter, but let us for now mostly dwell on the messenger who told these evident truths.
Obasanjo said in his letter’s first paragraph that “I could sense a semblance between the situation that we are gradually getting into and the situation we fell into as a nation during the Abacha era.” Towards the Obasanjo era is more like it; the precedent for many of the awful things that Jonathan is doing in recent times was earlier set during his accuser’s regime.
Obasanjo told Jonathan, “I am concerned about your legacy and your climb down which you alone can best be the manager of.” I am concerned for Jonathan too, but if you are talking about a legacy climb down in Nigerian history it is difficult to match Obasanjo’s. He went within 8 short years from a Commonwealth Eminent Person, African candidate for UN Secretary General, prisoner of conscience and De Gaulle-style national saviour called out of retirement to a normal self-serving, corrupt, manipulative and sit-tight African ruler.
Obasanjo told Jonathan, “You put me third after God and your parents among those that have impacted most on your life.” Could this be his main grouse, that God came before him in the Jonathian order of life impact? It reminds me of the Shah Mohamed Reza Pahlevi who made all soldiers to swear oaths of allegiance to “Xoda, Shah and Mihan”, that is God, King and country in that order. He probably aimed to do a reshuffle later on.
Obasanjo said he told Jonathan that “God has graciously been kind, generous, merciful and compassionate to me and He has done more than I could have ever hoped for.” He is revising history. In April 2007, he said at a seminar in Abuja that “If I wanted a third term, I would have prayed to God and He would have given it to me.” He is the first man I ever know who claimed to have a blank cheque from the Almighty God.
Obasanjo accused Jonathan of manipulating PDP chairmen including the current one, Bamanga Tukur. I think Jonathan has merely equated but has not surpassed Obasanjo’s record of revolving-door party chairmen. There were four PDP chairmen in Obasanjo’s time and there have been five so far under Jonathan, making it a manipulative dead heat between the two men. Obasanjo’s charge that Jonathan “told me that you have not told anybody that you would contest in 2015…only a fool would believe that statement you made to me judging by what is going on.” Where did Jonathan learn this? From Obasanjo, who said in 2005-07 that he never told anybody that he wanted a third term in office despite all the things that were going on.
Equally strange was Obasanjo’s charge that “many party members feel disappointed in the double game you were alleged to play in support of party gubernatorial candidates in some states where you surreptitiously supported non-PDP candidates against PDP candidates” in exchange for support in presidential elections. Who invented that method? Obasanjo did. In 2003 he cut a deal with Alliance for Democracy [AD] not to field a presidential candidate against him. He then turned round after winning the presidential election to stab the AD governors in the back and displaced all of them except Bola Tinubu. Between his method and that of Jonathan who at least kept his own side of the dubious bargain, which is less dishonourable?
Obasanjo also referred to what he called the election “fiasco” in Anambra State which he attributed to “undue interference” by Jonathan. Now, let’s remember that the 2003 election in the same Anambra State was probably the sorriest in Nigeria’s history. Obasanjo later testified that Governor Chris Ngige and his estranged godfather Chris Ubah argued in his presence right there in the Presidential Villa. Ubah told Ngige to his face and in Obasanjo’s presence how he rigged the election in his behalf. Obasanjo said Ngige nodded in agreement, so “I drove them away from my house”! Which fiasco are you talking about again?
Chief Obasanjo gave Jonathan the very good advice that “Those who advise you to go hard on those who oppose you are your worst enemies.” Since when did he know this? At the time he was serially dealing with Atiku Abubakar, Rashid Ladoja, DSP Alamieyeseigha, Bola Tinubu, Joshua Dariye and Ayo Fayose didn’t he know that the men who urged him on that path were his worst enemies? He gave Jonathan another very good advice from strange quarters, “Don’t always consider critics on national issues as enemies. Some of them may be as patriotic and nationalistic as you.” That is strange coming from the man who told Dr Yusuf Bala Usman to shut up or he will walk out of the room and who told a state CAN secretary that he was a fool.
Equally valuable, if Jonathan will heed it, is Obasanjo’s advise, “Mr President, be very wary of assistants, aides and collaborators who look for enemies for you.” One of the most indecorous such cases I remember was when Obasanjo’s Senior Special Assistant for Public Affairs Femi Fani-Kayode attacked General Yakubu Gowon for criticizing Third Term. When an interviewer later asked Fani-Kayode why he went to that extent, he said, “My appointment letter from the Chief of Staff said whoever joins issues with the President, I should join issues with him.”
Still, despite the very odd record of Obasanjo as a statesmanly adviser, there are many very useful things stated in his letter that Dr Goodluck Jonathan will ignore at his own peril. He said for example that “I will want to see anyone in the Office of the Presidency of Nigeria as a man or woman who can be trusted, a person of honour in his words and character.” It is a very good advice from an unlikely source.
Obasanjo said that several African rulers told him Jonathan wanted his help to preserve PDP but that Jonathan denied it. Oga Jonathan, how can several African rulers contact him on this issue if you were not the one who sent them? Anyway, the most troubling charge I find in Obasanjo’s letter was the allegation that Jonathan’s regime is training snipers and has got 1,000 opponents in AK-47’s cross hairs. Oga Jonathan, is it true you are doing that?