Tinubu, Trump tango: The guilty are afraid

Apparently, the most-talked-about issue in Nigeria today is the bombshell of an intervention by President Donald Trump of the US in Nigeria’s internal affairs. This was Trump’s reclassification of Nigeria as a ‘Country of Particular Concern’ (CPC), a designation by the US government of any country responsible for severe violations of religious freedom under the […]

Apparently, the most-talked-about issue in Nigeria today is the bombshell of an intervention by President Donald Trump of the US in Nigeria’s internal affairs. This was Trump’s reclassification of Nigeria as a ‘Country of Particular Concern’ (CPC), a designation by the US government of any country responsible for severe violations of religious freedom under the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA) of 1998. Of even more concern in Trump’s proclivity was the issuance of a threat of possible deployment of military force to fight reported mass killing of Christians and burning of churches in Nigeria.

Incidentally, the entire drama constitutes the culmination of back stage processes featuring reports of cases of mass killings of Nigerians, which are before the entire world, including the US administration.

Although the spate of mass killings of human beings for whatever reason in Nigeria had become a daily routine, with the body counts spreading across various backgrounds of the victims, the angle of concern now is the threat by Trump, which even if it had come from a tendentious angle, did not do so in a vacuum. It has antecedents, which from the wide stream of reactions from Nigeria and abroad, may be beyond the knowledge of much of the public. 

Not surprisingly, the pronouncement of the US president has stirred significant concern in both the Nigerian government circles and the citizenry, as well as a wide range of foreign interests. For Nigeria’s Bola Tinubu administration, it served as an unexpected intervention for which the establishment was apparently not prepared for; hence its initial response featured more of the fear of the guilty than that of resolute disposition of an administration that is sure of its onions. 

A valid consideration of the government’s response is accentuated by the coincidence of the Trump threat with the lingering, bitter after-taste of the recent coup scare, which rattled both the government and a wide cross-section of the citizenry.

Both the coup scare and Trump’s threat offered themselves as two ‘tsunami class’, political upper-cut blows and provided more than enough hiccups for the Bola Tinubu administration as they exposed some of its less known vulnerabilities.

This is even as beyond the pronouncement by Trump, the sordid tales of Nigeria serving as a killing field for terrorists and insurgents had engaged the world, especially as the syndrome had not abated but intensified over the years.

The gory tales of scenes of massacre of Nigerians by the killers even feature instances of cannibalism, and open display and sale of human parts. In that context, the recent avowal by Trump only signaled just a highpoint in the macabre situation.

Meanwhile, the responses among the citizenry were of different shades and slants. And such matter a lot in the present circumstances.  The citizens’ responses featured a mixed grill of endorsement of Trump’s threat and condemnation of same. 

Condemnation for Trump’s threat derived from a spontaneous, patriotic inclination of aligning with the mantra of ‘Nigeria First’ – whereby in whatever condition Nigeria is seen being put in a wrong light, the immediate response would be the defence of the country, even if such may be without a second thought.

In the other vein, an endorsement of Trump’s threat is driven not necessarily by an anti-Nigerian disposition or lower level of patriotism by such advocates; rather, it is from a sense of relief that eventually a potent intervention is available that would attract attention of the obdurate powers that be in the country to do the needful and allow rectitude prevail.

However, while the various narratives swirl around with many featuring an ever-growing deviation from the facts of the matter, the main issue now remains where the debacle is taking Nigeria to, especially with respect to the frenzy it has generated within and outside the country.

Put succinctly, the challenge now is which way forward for Nigeria, with respect to coming to terms with the spinoffs so generated by the matter. A topical question is whether Nigerians are allowing the deluge of narratives (many easily conflicting with each other) to deviate them from asking the correct questions and seeking answers to same, or condone the kaleidoscope of perspectives to lure them into another metaphoric ‘wild goose chase’?

This enquiry has become necessary, as in not a few similar instances where the nation’s pride was put to question, the same tendency of sterile talk-shows followed with the result of no significant remediation taking place and things ended up as business as usual. Not surprisingly, the same scenario may be playing out in this current situation, to once more actualise the   wisdom in the African proverb that says ‘plenty talk never fills a basket.’  

To lend credence to such a forlorn hope of many Nigerians of a significant change in the status quo is the current fixation of the administration – less on providing good governance for the country and more on capturing undiluted political power, as well as sway across as many states of the federation as possible come 2027 polls. 

This fixation was what led the Tinubu administration to allow for significant capitulation to the terrorists and insurgents, who literally annexed portions of their choosing of the country’s legitimate territorial space.

Currently, parcels of the country’s territorial expanse are not under the government of President Bola Tinubu but under the control of one terrorist leader or another, who not only holds court in that space but also engages openly in social functions within his area of ‘authority.’

This is the reality of governance in Nigeria – under what can be termed ‘composite leadership’ structure – where a greater portion of the country is under President Bola Tinubu and the rest under a complement of terrorist leaders.

That is why, before Nigerians justifiably crucify Trump further, let President Bola Tinubu address himself to doing the needful, pursuant to the remediation of this anomaly. As far as this matter is concerned, Nigeria’s problem lies less on Trump than the Tinubu administration.