• Friday, March 29, 2024
businessday logo

BusinessDay

Arise! Buhari spoke at last, but only to himself

Muhammadu-Buhari-1

The British would say: “You wait ages for one bus and then three come at once.” Well, Nigerians waited for ages to hear directly from President Muhammadu Buhari and then, recently, within a week, he spoke three times: first, in an interview with the ThisDay/Arise Television; second, in an interview with the Nigerian Television Authority (NTA); and third, in his June 12 Democracy Day broadcast. The Arise TV interview was the weightiest. Kudos to the media outfit and its high-powered team who interviewed the president. Well done!

For me, there are two ways of looking at the president’s Arise TV interview. One is through the prism of symbolism; the other is through the lens of substance.

Symbolically, President Buhari came out very well in the sense that he dispelled rumours, innuendos, and conspiracy theories about his mental acuity. The Buhari we saw in that interview is expressive, mentally alert, and even jocular. However, on substance, that is, what Buhari actually said, he came out extremely badly.

Some commentators put symbolism above substance, and, understandably, are exultant about the interview; they see Buhari in a better light. Well, I am not in that space at all.

For a start, I have never questioned President Buhari’s mental state. When I say he is clueless, I do not mean that he has no views or can’t express himself. Rather, I mean that he has no idea how to solve Nigeria’s socio-economic problems, how to unite this ethnically diverse country and transform it; that he is, in fact, part of the problem. The Arise TV interview confirmed my views.

On a general note, two things emerged from that interview. First, Buhari is not a unifier, not an uniter, but a divisive leader. Second, he is a leader set in his views, a man wise in his own eyes. He was lecturing, didactic, and know-all in his answers. There were no attempt to show an understanding of, let alone be sympathetic to, other people’s interests or desires.

Buhari told the interviewers he would spend his remaining two years in office, “convincing Nigerians that I mean very well.” That has long been his leadership style: to convince, not to be convinced; to persuade, not to be persuaded. But by being so condescending in that interview, he spoke to himself and his base, not to the nation.

In his best-selling book ‘How to Win Friends and Influence People,’ Dale Carnegie set out several rules of persuasion. Take just two: “Be empathetic and sensitive to other people’s interests; “Talk about your own mistakes before criticising other people.” President Buhari broke every rule of persuasion.

Take politeness and empathy. Buhari was unbelievably rude to the Igbos throughout that interview. When asked why there was no Igbo security or service chief, he said: “You can’t just pick people to balance out; the positions have to be earned.” So, presumably, the Igbo in the armed forces have all along been doing clerical jobs, none operationally experienced enough to reach the top.

Why are there few Igbo heads of MDAs? He said there are Igbo in the Civil Service, “but they have to go through the mill.” In a country where, based on the Federal character principle, a poorly educated person from a certain part of Nigeria can head a parastatal, this is extremely rude to the Igbo, and unacceptable from a president, who should be an uniter, a unifier!

Carnegie quoted Abraham Lincoln as saying: “A drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall.” But there was not a drop of honey in Buhari’s words. Throughout the interview, he set out his own stall, nailed his colours to the mask, read the riot act, and threatened fire and brimstone. But, as Carnegie said, getting someone to do something by sticking a revolver in his ribs is a crude means of persuasion. Well, that’s Buhari’s style.

What about taking responsibility? Did you notice, if you watched the interview, that President Buhari never once accepted any mistake, but kept blaming others? Take one example. He said he sent away two South-West governors who came to complain to him that Fulani herdsmen were killing their farmers. He said he told them to go back to the “old system” when communities worked with traditional rulers to tackle crime.

But the same Buhari said that “sophisticated” AK47-wielding Fulani herders have flooded Nigeria from neighbouring Niger and Chad republics. So, what “old system” can the governors use to deal with that novel situation? The governors have no control over the security apparatus and regional security outfits like “Amotekun” cannot be fully armed. Yet, Buhari said: “I just sent them back to sort it out themselves.” Unbelievable!

By the way, how did the foreign Fulani herdsmen enter this country? Of course, Buhari, who came across as a Fulani chauvinist, let them in. As he said, but for colonialism, all Fulani in Western Africa would be together; indeed, he said he has cousins in Niger and Chad. Truth be told, Buhari is relaxed about foreign Fulani herdsmen swamping Nigeria, and he will always defend their cause; after all, as he said: “I can’t deny that I am one of them.”

Yet, under President Buhari’s watch, Fulani herdsmen became the world’s fifth most dangerous terror group and have killed tens of thousands of people. He can’t blame the governors for creating that monster or for their atrocities. By the way, as foreign Fulani flood Nigeria, has anyone considered that they would be voting and influencing Nigerian elections? Those who guarantee their free entry will ensure they can vote in elections, thereby distorting Nigeria’s democracy.

President Buhari’s lack of self-awareness also came out in the Arise interview. He said he told the South-West governors: “You just can’t go round and win elections and then sit tight and think somebody will do your job for you.” Haba! Isn’t that akin to the pot calling the kettle black! Buhari sought the presidency four times, yet, on his watch, Nigeria is far worse today than six years ago. Carnegie told leaders: “Talk about your own mistakes before criticising other people.” No, not Buhari. It’s always the fault of others!

Think about this. President Buhari was asked what he would do to make Nigeria a more competitive and more attractive destination for foreign direct investment. Well, he started blaming the #EndSARS protests. But investors were deserting Nigeria in droves long before #EndSARS. His administration’s misguided policies, his own anti-business body language, disincentivise inward investment. How, for instance, would banning Twitter increase investor confidence in Nigeria? Buhari said the #EndSARS protests created an unstable environment. But nothing has contributed more to instability in Nigeria than his divisive leadership, his nepotism, and his failure to show leadership on political and constitutional reforms.

This brings us to restructuring and devolution of power. President Buhari kept talking about how things worked well in the First Republic, but when asked whether he supported devolution of power to mirror the halcyon era, he said: “It depends on what you mean by devolution of power.” Then, when he was told that it meant reducing powers at the centre, including those of the president, he evaded the issue and started talking about discipline in schools.

Some commentators ignorantly argue that systems and structures don’t matter, only “competent and patriotic leadership.” That’s a subject for another day. But truth is, without reconstructing Nigeria’s deeply flawed politico-governance structure, the country will always struggle to make progress.

Yet, as I argued in my Vanguard column last week, both in his TV interviews and his Democracy Day speech, Buhari abdicated leadership on the historic task of restructuring Nigeria and giving the country a new constitution. Well, his media outings were a total failure. He spoke to himself, not the nation!