"If Jonathan Don't Get What He Wants There Will Be War"

“If the President and Commander-in-Chief of Nigeria insists he wants something and you say you will not allow him to have it, what do you think will happen?” The above was the question asked by a former state governor in Nigeria’s South-west. He answered the question himself: “War”

But at the front of this war would be some actors:

President Goodluck Jonathan, Bola Tinubu, Gen. Muhammadu Buhari, Bamangar Tukur, Senate President David Mark, Speaker Aminu Waziri Tambuwal, Pa E K Clark, Chief Tony Anenih, PDP and APC governors and legislators, INEC Chairman Attahiru Jega. The list is endless.

Now, for war to be just, there is required a just cause. That is according to Thomas Aquinas. A scholastic appreciation of Aquinas’ position, without prejudice to the pacifism that Christianity preaches, posits that it is sometimes necessary to “preserve or restore peace in the face of aggression; and there must be conditions precedent”. Aquinas called these conditions jus ad bellum (right to war) which were different from the jus in bello (the rules of just conduct in war). For a just war to be hinged on a just cause, it must have rightful intention, authority of the sovereign and the raison d’etre.

In simple, plain language, all these relate to the need to preserve or restore a status quo that has peace or the well-being of the state and sovereign as it’s central objective.
Now, Nigeria’s 2014 will witness some war – in a manner of speaking.
It would be a war of many sides; a war possibly of ideas, of intentions (seen and unseen), and of ego.
But it would also be a war of stupidity in which all sides would attempt to outdo one another in a show of shame.

It would be a war of the locusts.
For the average Nigerian who is not directly involved in this war, he could as well go to hell. Whereas the warring parties make unbridled pretense to fighting for the masses, daylight is easily brought into the pretense as the masses are almost always left for dead.

Beyond the mantra of non-performance that the opposition continues to chant is the real issue of loss of political power and control by a section of the country. This has been further accentuated by the role fate played in the death of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua in May 2010, paving the way for President Jonathan’s emergence. Worse still for them, Jonathan contested and won a supposed four-year tenure meant for the North and is now in the process of seeking a constitutionally guaranteed second term of office.And that is where the war starts and ends.

Unfortunately for Jonathan, through a shambling mix of myopic advisers, associates, friends and family members,what ought to follow a Nigerian pattern of easily retaining power is now in danger of crumbling; it is for this same reason that some have poked fun at both Mr. President and his office. For the first time in Nigeria’s history, a sitting President is daily buffeted by confetti of insults and abuses.

There is an Arab saying that a pack of sheep led by a lion is more likely to defeat a pack of lions led by a sheep. We have consistently written about the problem of a gentleman president. What makes it more pitiable is that even around Mr. President there are dangerous locusts.

Take, for instance, one Asari Dokubo who is allowed by the authorities to insult other Nigerians because the presidency of Nigeria has become commoditized in his view and, therefore, is a property owned by a kinsman.

Then there is the Information Minister and supervising Minister of Defense, Labaran Maku, who said publicly that government is no longer bothered about criticism because “we are used to it; Mr. President is used to it”. That statement means Nigerians can go to hell. That is a wrong approach.

Might Maku be reminded, the selfsame thing he is today criticizing about the media was a shade of what he did and which made him hit limelight while he was a journalist. Somebody once described him as a minister who speaks before he thinks.

That may not be true and it is uncharitable. But Maku and a few around Jonathan should strive genuinely to provide wise counsel and not the counsel of the locusts the likes of which had led past leaders nowhere because there shall be 10 kings for 10 seasons – nothing lasts forever.

Opportunities still abound.
Niccolo Machiavelli (1469 – 1527) made us understand that “A prudent ruler cannot and must not honour his words”. The context of this statement fits perfectly the Olusegun Obasanjo-inspired PDP zoning arrangement of eight years South and eight years North which he tried to torpedo in 2006 with his Third Term agenda. For him to now attempt to pull wool and counsel Jonathan not to do that which is constitutionally guaranteed is not only wicked but ungodly.

To follow the counsel of Machiavelli comes with consequences. In being prudent, the retention and stability of sovereignty constitute the principal reason why a ruler exists. Whichever way it is achieved becomes secondary and of less or no consequence.

So, is the President prudent enough not to honor his words?
He should be prudent and, therefore, cannot and must not honor his words. Prudence in this context relates to him using the instrumentality of the constitutionally guaranteed window to seek re-election while prudently managing the affairs of state for the masses.

That is what he has been promising. That is what he promised again during his latest broadcast. But has he delivered?

BY BEN AGANDE, ABUJA
source: Vanguard