Ken Ugbechie

No single human has defined the treachery of Nigerian politics than President Goodluck Jonathan. For some uncanny reasons, Jonathan has become the prime target of a legion of treacherous politicians massing like garrisons in a war-ragged zone. The All Progressives Congress (APC), a party of strange bedfellows, religious extremists, ethnic jingoists and certified public till looters of yesterday now masquerading as paragons of good governance personify the anti-Jonathan army. As it stands, Jonathan can do no right. The President is daily packaged and sold as a misfit in government house.

Strangely, some Nigerians seem to have bought their story without contextualizing the substance, if any, in their concocted tales against the man who ‘had no shoes’ growing up. The elemental existence of any government is to guarantee the security of the citizenry. From this, stem other incidentals of development namely food security, shelter, wealth creation (job creation, investments, human capital development etc). The band of anti-Jonathan campaigners dismisses the man from Otuoke as too weak and horrifyingly ineffectual in the aspect of guaranteeing the peace and security of the citizenry. They point to the insurgency of Islamic sect, Boko Haram, a group of demented minds from the pit of hell, as evidence that Jonathan has failed the nation. This synopsis in itself is wrong therefore the prognosis of blaming the insurgency and its consequence on Jonathan is faulty and holds no water.

The nature of the Boko Haram siege should be seen as part of the global reign of terror which given its hydra-like tentacles has caused damage in the United States, parts of Africa, Asia, Europe, Middle East and the Americas. To think that the Boko Haram scourge is a Nigerian problem is to make light of a very grave matter that requires critical attention. The terror profile of the North eastern part of the country is a wrong barometer to measure the good governance index of the Jonathan government. Violent crime, terror and such like still stalk the landscape of the most powerful and sophisticated nations of the world.

In the 2014 ranking of top 10 Most Dangerous Countries of the world (www.alltoptens.com) Nigeria did not make the notorious grade but nations like US, Russia, South Africa and Brazil, all of them far more advanced than Nigeria, made the list which expectedly paraded countries like Iraq, Somalia, Burundi and Afghanistan. We cannot because America is ranked high in insecurity dismiss President Barack Obama as incompetent or weak. The aggregate crime quotient in the whole of Nigeria cannot be compared to the criminality and banditry in Johannesburg alone.

This is the context in which those who measure President Jonathan’s performance on account of his ability or otherwise to contain terror in a section of the north miss the point. And for those who created and sustained the terror hoodoo to smear the president, you would really need to rethink your strategy. The issue of terror, given its colouration and ideology, is a global issue requiring bilateral and multilateral approaches. It is not localized to Nigeria, neither does it take its nativity from this country. When the human clones from hell which is what members of the Boko Haram sect really are, abducted the Chibok girls, they may have intended their act to rubbish the government of the day. Going by the rules of logic, this deduction is plausible as the only Nigerians who displayed the littlest remorse and no sensitivity on the matter happens to be members of the main opposition party, the APC. The manner leaders and arrowheads of the party have taken turns to politick with the matter with some shedding crocodile tears smells of sheer mischief. By their actions and utterances, they mock Nigerians, mock reason and slur their already jaded reputation.

If anything, the Chibok episode has become the retributive entrapment for Boko Haram, their sponsors and behind-the-veil supporters. Prior to the Chibok crime against humanity, the menace of Boko Haram was left solely in the hands of the Nigerian state to contain but the Chibok incident has brought global focus on the evil and this may well mark the beginning of the end of the insurgency and everything it represents.

The weighted heightening of violence via bomb blasts by Boko Haram as the nation marches forward towards 2015 general elections indexes the theory that the determination to epigraph Nigeria as a violent and dangerous nation is a calculated attempt to short-sell President Jonathan to the Nigerian populace. But this does not seem to be working, instead it has kicked up yet another halo of sentiments for the man with a streak of good luck. Yes, it’s all about Jonathan. The political garrisons erected by the likes of Muhammadu Buhari, Bola Tinubu, Atiku Abubakar including the latter day joiner, Olusegun Obasanjo, among others will self-destruct because it was not out of altruism to make the nation better but driven by vengeful and malicious fury. Playing the card of terror will not work against Jonathan, it will work in his favour because Nigerians can now see through the eyes of the terrorists to deduce that they act not of their own but are driven into it by the validation they got from some well-placed Nigerians who see the leadership of the Nigerian state as their birthright.

Fortunately for Jonathan most Nigerians are still ruled by sentiments…religion, ethnic, professional affinity including the sentiment of aligning with the ‘victim’. In this instance, they see Jonathan as the victim of a weird national conspiracy. And out there on the streets, in the marketplaces these same masses of the people who take the pains to cast their votes on election day are already ‘sympathising’ with the president and if these are the same Nigerians I know so well, Jonathan has their votes. And why not? Among the platoon of presidential pretenders jostling to seize power, is there any we can really call ‘squeaky clean, democratic or truly presidential in the wholesome sense of it? None.