Making Haste Slowly and Killing Nigeria Softly: The Challenge of Tinubumania of ‘Emi l’Okan’

Bola A. Akinterinwa 

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu (PBAT) has a publicly misunderstood mania of political governance (Tinubumania) based on ‘Emi l’Okan’ philosophy. ‘Emi l’Okan are Yoruba words meaning ‘it is my turn.’ PBAT never gave any particular meaning or methodological exegesis of it. However, ‘Emi l’Okan implies that fairness and justice should be allowed in Nigeria’s presidential successorship system. He explained that he had helped many others to clinch state power, that he had been tolerant, waiting for his turn, and therefore, there could not be any good reason to deny him his own turn. And true, he was not denied. He was elected and inaugurated on May 29, 2023

Emi l’Okan philosophy is predicated on surprise-giving, tolerance-driven and me-tooism style of governance. He believes that giving Nigerians surprises might make Nigerians enthusiastic and supportive. PBAT would not be bordered if his surprises are not well received. In other words, with or without the people’s support, Emi l’Okan as a policy philosophy should prevail. This is one interpretation of his many official actions so far.

For example, in his maiden presidential address to the Nigerian people on May 29, 2023, he said ‘fuel subsidy is gone,’ meaning that the policy of fuel subsidy had been thrown into the garbage of history.’ The policy decision was announced without expatiation. As a result, the announcement has generated much fury and divided the political class. Besides, the sufferings generated by the purported fuel subsidy removal prompted the perception of PBAT as a wicked person and his being given other bad names that may not be his. He undoubtedly and unnecessarily made haste by announcing the policy decision at his inauguration ceremony. 

Since the announcement, the policy has been killing Nigeria softly and prompting the wearing by many Nigerians of the toga of attitudinal irrationalities which have also been threatening Nigeria’s national unity, territorial integrity and raising troubling questions about his foreign policy of 4-Ds. Hence, there is the need to begin to make haste slowly. 

Tinubumania of ‘Emi l’Okan’

Tinubumania of ‘Emi lokan’ policy is manifested in various ways. First, it can be likened to the governance styles of the Southeast Asia countries. The Asian tiger economies are generally export-led, outperforming, and rapid development achieving. PBAT appears to like this development policy approach, especially in Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan and particularly in Singapore, which not only acceded into international sovereignty in 1965, but has also qualified to be described as a member of the First World. The Singaporean feat is said to be because of Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew who ignored the temporary sufferings of the people of Singapore to the advantage of the need to promote his economic policies of transformation and development. 

Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, alias LKY, served as the first Prime Minister of Singapore from 1959 to 1990. He was adjudged to be the founding father of the modern Singaporean State before he died in 2015 at the age of 91 years. His ideological stand was that ‘the ultimate test of the value of a political system was whether it helps that society to establish conditions which improve the standard of living for the majority of its people.’ More interestingly, his governance principles (maintaining a balance between nurturing excellence and encouraging the average to improve; promoting cooperation and competition between and among the people; payment for work and not for lying around; dictatorship because ‘the exuberance of democracy leads to undisciplined and disorderly conditions which are inimical to development’; etc.) appear to have considerably impacted on PBAT who wants a truly federal Nigeria, a vibrant economy and a strongly united Nigeria.  For instance, LKY disagreed with the western conception of democracy. He said, ‘with a few exceptions, democracy has not brought good government to developing countries,’ democracy had not worked in countries like China because of its large population. Consequently, LKY subscribed to the idea of state interferences in private lives, media, etc. From the action policies of PBAT so far, it is clear that he wants to be on record for transforming and waking up the sleeping or slumbering Nigeria to move away from the Third World to the First World like Singapore. But in doing so, he has been violating fundamental human rights and the constitutional right of the press to hold the government accountable.

Put differently, based on the foregoing, PBAT knows well the suffering implications of the policies of LKY to which I am arguing he appears to have subscribed. It is because PBAT knows the implications that he is asking Nigerians to be more tolerant. Nigerians, in response, do not quarrel with the plea for tolerance but are asking for how long? They are asking why it should be the governed that should be tolerant when the governing elite is publicly seen to be engaging in profligacy. And more notably, no one can rightly say that there has been fuel subsidy. The issue has been quite controversial. Some experts and even a former Minister of Petrol, Professor Tamuno David-West, have argued that the alleged policy of fuel subsidy is a fraud. What is even more fraudulent is that PBAT announced he has jettisoned the policy, and yet, people are still engaged in the controversy. Another deepening controversy on crude oil is that it is being mortgaged for external loans. Why is it that every financial policy in Nigeria is never devoid of allegations of fraud? There is the need to make haste slowly.

Second, at the level of Nigeria-South Africa relations, PBAT cares less about the official and officious attitudinal dispositions towards Nigeria. Nigerian leaders wrongly give impression that the relationship is warm, whereas it is not. At the recent re-inauguration of the South African president, Cyril Ramaphosa, it was apparent that PBAT was not seated in a more befitting place, even if he was on the second row. Nigeria’s president should not have been equated with traditional rulers in South Africa, who reportedly were seated in the front row.

Perhaps what was more disturbingly was not the place of the sitting, but the happiness of PBAT’s close collaborators that the PBAT delegation was well received. It was even defiantly argued that media reports claiming that the delegation was not snubbed. The truth as clearly shown in various videos supported the argument of snubbing of the Nigerian delegation. PBAT, from a physiognomic angle wanted to have a friendly handshake with the South African leader from the second row but the South African leader turned his head to the right and therefore refused to see whatever was to happen at his left side. This was a perfect diplomatic snubbing in the open.

On the other margins of the presidential inauguration, President Cyril Ramaphosa probably tried to make amendment by warmly receiving PBAT and his team, but in the pattern of close door. Giving a special or red carpet welcome in the secret and snubbing in the open only sends wrong diplomatic signals to observers. Observers are not unaware of the fact that something went wrong even if the handlers of PBAT are pretending or arguing to the contrary. If snubbing is denied, no one can deny another fact of a cold war underlying Nigeria-South Africa relations. Again, even if we want to admit that inter-governmental relations are fairly warm, the same cannot be rightly said of the people-to-people relations.

If you do not agree with this story of snubbing, the story about the perception of Nigeria not being a truly and major Frontline State during the anti-Apartheid struggle is another case in point. Besides, what about the most recent story of the 23-year old Miss Universe Nigeria, 2024, Chidimma Adetshina? Who has forgotten the fact that she was initially the 2024 Miss South Africa beauty pageant finalist as at July 2024, but was forced to withdraw, a development that compelled her to accept the kind invitation to compete in the Nigerian pageant. While her withdrawal paved the way for Mia Le Roux to become the first Miss South African winner, the same withdrawal stopped the chances of the already leading competitor in Nigeria.

However, the point is that Chidimma Adetshina was rejected, undoubtedly because of her Nigerian connectivity. The explanations given by Chidimma herself are very thought-provoking. As she put it, ‘I have lived there (South Africa) for 23 years and it’s heartbreaking to see that I wasn’t welcomed and accepted. There were certain things that happened behind the scenes that made me withdraw. It was heartbreaking that I had to withdraw close to the finale but a decision had to be made and it hit social media as well. But what I know is that I was born in South Africa and I am a South African. I am still proudly Nigerian as well.’

This self-explanation raises more questions than answers. If Chidimma is a South African by the principle of ius soli or place of birth, does it not mean that South African nationality is not conferred by place of birth and if it does, it cannot be enough? Besides, how can African leaders be preaching the gospel of continental integration and the sermons of one African people, on the one hand, and at the same time, be underscoring national protectionism and sovereignty, on the other hand? These are issues in Nigeria’s foreign policy attitude that are hardly reckoned with in the foreign policy strategic calculations of Nigeria under PBAT. There is the need to make haste slowly when dealing with South Africa and continental integration. Grosso modo, not making haste slowly can only begin to kill Nigeria the more in a subtle manner.

Making Haste and Killing Nigeria  

PBAT must learn to make haste slowly because whatever he is trying to do tooth and nail has a foundation already laid by his predecessors. In strengthening existing relationships, great caution must always be exercised to avoid tainting them. For example, PBAT reportedly went on a 3-day official visit to China before the China-Africa summit. The official visit was in furtherance of the cooperation agreements done under President Olusegun Obasanjo in 2005. More importantly, what President Obasanjo told the Chinese leader in Abuja in April 2006 was quite inspiring: ‘this twenty first century is the century for China to lead the world. And when you are leading the world, we want to be close behind you. When you are going to the moon, we don’t want to be left behind.’

As a matter of fact, Nigeria’s relationship with China became very noteworthy that the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs established a Nigeria-China Dialogue Series in 2013 in order to begin to document Chinese activities in Nigeria (vide Bola A. Akinterinwa and Ogaba D. Oche, eds., Nigeria-China Dialogue Series: Issues in Contemporary China-Africa Relations, No. 1: NIIA and CICIR. August 5-9, 2013). But how does the Government of Nigeria understand this relationship? Great, it can be rightly argued.

It is on record that Nigeria’s Foreign Minister, Ambassador Yusuf Tuggar, OON, first played host to a team of 18 scholars from the Schwarzman Scholars Programme at the Tsinghua University in Beijing on 2nd May, 2024 and seizing the opportunity to explain Nigeria’s diplomacy of the 4-Ds. Further still, the Foreign Minister, following PBAT’s return from his 3-day official visit and participation in the 2024 Summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation, held from 4th to 6th September, 2024, also seized the opportunity to explain the importance of Nigeria-China relations. He argued that Nigeria is not a child; that Nigeria knows what she is doing, and that China is not an exploiter. This is a good statement that completely ignores the non-implementation of some obligations agreed to in 2005 under President Olusegun Obasanjo. 

That Nigeria knows what she is doing is a moot question.

Another area of concern is the construction of gas pipelines. There is the gas pipeline project between Nigeria and Morocco which is currently generating heated controversy between the Niger Deltans and the Federal Government of Nigeria. The people of Niger Delta are complaining that they were not reckoned with in the making of the contract deal with Morocco. The people of Niger Delta want to know what their gains are from the project.

As good as the Nigeria-Morocco gas pipeline may be, it has the potential to be seriously and adversely endangered in light of the establishment of an Alliance of the States of Sahel (ASS) to which the Republic of Niger now belongs. The project necessarily passes through Niger and Nigeria-Niger bilateral ties are currently frosty, and therefore demanding making haste slowly in the quest for economic growth and development. 

There is also the Gulf of Guinea gas pipeline agreement which was done during PBAT’s 3-day State Visit (14th-16th August, 2024) to Equatorial Guinea. The agreement was done to ‘facilitate the development of gas resources, accelerate industrialization and enhance energy security.’ The pipeline will pass through the Gulf of Guinea, an object of global strategic calculations. One major rationale for the US interest in the Gulf is security, the need to contain international terrorism in the area. In fact, the pressure on Nigeria to accept the relocation of the US Africa Command from Stuttgart in Germany to Nigeria, is partly because of the Gulf. Global strategic calculations may therefore conflict with the local bilateral interests, hence the need to make haste slowly. For instance, in the joint statement of Nigeria’s Foreign Minister and his Equatorial Guinean counterpart, Simeon Oyono Esono Angue, on PBAT’s visit they noted in paragraph 6 that ‘the two Heads of State expressed their concerns over insecurity, instability and emerging crises across Africa. They reaffirmed the need to promote African-led solutions to African problems and committed to limiting foreign interference in the continent.’

In this regard, when is a problem typically African? Manifestations of terrorism in Africa are not necessarily African in design, in target, in containment strategy, etc. Consequently, how do Nigeria and Equatorial Guinea want to prevent foreign intervention when it comes to the global war on terror? This question is raised in light of the Malabo Declaration on Terrorism and Unconstitutional Changes of Government and the Abuja Process for Consolidating Regional Counter-Terrorism Approaches. In summary, should PBAT be seen as a democrat or as a dictator? Does the impression given above that the philosophies of Lee Kuan Yew might have impacted on PBAT also imply that he has become despotic in political governance? 

Media reports had it yesterday, 6th September, 2024, that Chief Ajuri Ngelale, PBAT’s spokesman and Special Presidential Envoy on Climate Action, and Chairman of the Presidential steering Committee on Project Evergreen, has resigned all his portfolios. What is relevant to our discussion here is the dimension brought to it by Jaafar Jafaar, a Nigerian investigative journalist. He reportedly noted on Saturday, 7th September, in his X handle that ‘Ajuri Ngelale is the first presidential spokesman whose television face and Oyibo accent – not PR or media expertise – earned him the plum job. Tinubu’s family brought him for cosmetic effect to smarten the president’s geriatric outlook and guttural voice. But soon afterwards, his inflated sense of importance and domineering attitude put him at odds with other powers around the president.’

If Chief Ngelale has a feel of self-importance and a domineering attitude, it should be expected. He cannot be a presidential spokesperson, whose responsibilities require full time attention on whatever is officially and officiously said about PBAT, and at the same time still be expected to operate fully as Special Presidential Envoy on Climate Action, and as Chairman of the Presidential steering Committee on Project Evergreen. This is a manifestation of a ‘Jack of all Trades’ policy that should not have been entertained.

Additionally, but more disturbingly, Jafaar Jafaar said his appointment was not based on PR (Public Relations) or media expertise but on his ‘television face and oyibo accent.’ A television face connotes a good look. ‘Oyibo,’ if I am not wrong, is a Yoruba word meant to connote the white man or whoever is behaving like a white man. By implication, his accent which is that of a white man is what was considered in appointing him ab initio. If the observation is true, it is most unfortunate if expertise had not been considered for purposes of political appointments. More unfortunate is the general arrogance of people in political positions who always arrogate to themselves the better-than-thou, the holier-than-thou attitudes. If PBAT is currently facing mounting criticisms of governance, can the appointment into very sensitive political offices of people on the basis of wrong physiognomic prognosis not be at the epicentre of PBAT’s many problems?

Without any whiff of doubt, there is nothing wrong in resigning because of one’s family concerns. The family must always take priority. So must one’s health. Commitment in the Civil and Public Service cannot but be largely defined by a settled home, a healthy family. In fact, there is no healthy nation without healthy families. However, if Chief Ngelale noted in his letter of resignation that he looks ‘forward to returning to full-time national service when time, healing, and fate permit.’ Additionally, ‘I respectfully ask for some privacy for my family and me during this time,’ he said. Privacy for the family is still pardonable but for the ex-spokesman, it is not because he is a public functionary. He cannot and should not expect that offices would be reserved for him until he is ready. His resignation letter clearly reflects how Nigerian politicians behave and why PBAT is currently challenged by crisis of governance and legitimacy at various levels. This should not be. It is against this background that ‘Emi l’Okan’ policy attitude should be further explained and understood.

Without doubt, ‘Emi l’Okan’ is an activist policy and quest for fairness and justice in the political governance system of Nigeria. It is an expression of self-claim, self-assertion, self-esteem and self-seeking agenda. More importantly, it is also a direct guiding and philosophical principle of PBAT’s governance of Nigeria. Most unfortunately, PBAT’s tenure as President is limited to four years. The chances of re-election in 2027 are still uncertain. This uncertainty probably explains why he is always in a haste to achieve his set development objectives, some of which are good and some of which are killing Nigeria softly. Emi l’Okan should not be ordinarily interpreted to imply ‘I am born to rule,’ but as an opportunistic turn to help develop Nigeria by drastically reducing the high level of institutional corruption, political chicanery and violent irrationalities. PBAT is on the trial scale and is battling for survival. Influence politics of the West, boko haramism, armed banditry, regional disintegration, deepening agitation for separate existence of many sub-nationalities in Nigeria, etc., are some of the challenges warranting that PBAT must begin to reflect on the need to make haste slowly in order to stop the unconscious killing of Nigeria softly. The dictatorial approach of Lee Kuan Yew might have been good for Singapore. However, Nigeria’s environmental conditionings are different. Nigeria is more sophisticated.