In light of President-elect Muhammadu Buhari’s brutal past, many outsiders are scratching their heads at the results of the recent election, asking themselves “was Jonathan really that bad?”
Buhari, 72, assumed power after a 1983 military coup, overthrowing then-President Shehu Shagari. His rule was notoriously firm, highlighted by a no-holds-barred anti-corruption campaign that publicly executed drug dealers, deported immigrants, jailed journalist and opposition activists without due process, and sent 475 politicians and businessmen accused of corruption before tribunals that sentenced some to life in prison.
In the end, Buhari’s regime left the same way it came — by a coup d’état.
For the past three decades, Buhari has done all he could to prove he is a changed man and believes in the virtue of democracy. After three failed attempts at winning back his power by the ballot, it seems the people of Nigeria have finally forgiven “the General,” or have they?
Here are four reasons analysts believe Buhari so decisively won the election:
1. Too much corruption
Goodluck Jonathan’s administration has not only been riddled with alleged corruption, but many feel these accusations were swept under the rug with little or no investigation. For instance, when Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, the fedora-wearing president’s former boss, was accused of money laundering, the Council of States under Jonathan’s leadership pardoned him. As other government officials were accused of various forms of corruption, Jonathan’s administration simply fired the whistle blowers, hushing up the scandals.
When asked to reveal his assets, Jonathan, who once famously claimed his parents couldn’t afford shoes, refused on the grounds that he didn’t “give a damn,” what anyone thought about his wealth.
2. The rise of Boko Haram
Though Nigeria and a coalition of allied forces have made great recent progress in retaking lands captured by the radical Islamist group Boko Haram, many Nigerians feel their former Commander-in-Chief was slow at the wheel, allowing them to grow and resulting in over 20,000 people dead, several children kidnapped, and over three million forced from their homes.
Even as the coalition reclaims Nigeria’s captured lands, Chad’s president Idriss Déby complained Nigeria has played a weak role in the operation.
“We want the Nigerians to come and occupy, so we can advance,” said Déby.
3. Jonathan’s political party crumbling
The People’s Democratic Party (PDP) was once the strongest in the land, dominating politics at various levels of government, but many of its key players have splintered away, leaving Jonathan to his own demise.
Even former President Olusegun Obasanjo pledged his opposition to Mr. Jonathan.
4. The poor remain poor
Though Nigeria’s economy has reportedly grown under Jonathan’s lead, and his administration has responsibly handled fiscal policy, keeping the debt-to-GDP ratio around 18 percent and the budget deficit under 3 percent, the country’s growing wealth has not trickled down to the poor, who make up the majority of the population.
Outside of Lagos, where most of the wealthiest Nigerians live, very little has been invested in infrastructure, making commerce increasingly challenging. Roads connecting major cities in the north remain broken as trucks spend more time dodging pot holes than delivering goods.
As such, the numbers look far better on paper for the armchair economist than for the common Nigerian.
Enter Buhari
Clearly Nigerians have had their reservations about Buhari, rejecting his bid in the past three elections. However, for all his sins, he is the polar opposite of Jonathan in all the areas where many are screaming for a change. Rather than allow corruption, he has a record for punishing corrupt officials to the point of excess.
He has recently claimed he will “spare no effort,” in fighting Boko Haram, and his military records suggest he is more likely to keep such a promise than Jonathan. As Nigerian resident Kennedy Dixons puts it, “Goodluck is too weak to rule Nigeria. We need to compete and challenge the world.”
For many Nigerians, it would appear, Buhari was never their ideal candidate, per se, but the only one with a realistic chance of winning the election and a better alternative to what they had.
Jonathan’s defeat marks the first time an incumbent lost a bid for re-election in Nigeria. Rather than fight to stay in power, as so many African presidents have historically done, he conceded his loss like a true sportsman.
Many westerners see this peaceful transition of power as a sign of good things to come for the embattled country. I hope they’re right, but remain cautiously skeptical as I’ve seen firsthand how a “peaceful election” can, years later, turn into campaign to dissolve Congress, rewrite the constitution, and turn a democratically elected president into a “president for life.”
I sympathize with Nigerians in their “lesser of two evils” mentality, but I just think they deserve better.
