IT is unlikely that at any time in his presidency, Muhammadu Buhari will ever bore his audience. His inauguration speech was a model in terseness, with no frills, and nearly with no memorable sound bite. The speech was relieved perhaps only by the almost aphoristic “I belong to everybody, and I belong to nobody” statement he used to underscore his wistful desire for personal and political independence. His inauguration speech was supposed to be the biggest thing on the day he was sworn in, something to announce his return to power, his grand success after three failed attempts at the presidency, and something to define the new Buhari. It rose to no such peak, having of course exhibited no ambition to soar either at the rhetorical or tactical level. Indeed, the speech was absolutely idiosyncratic. It gave Nigeria the essential Buhari, the one forgotten from 1985, the one that has in fact changed little since then.
President Buhari has since then given a few other speeches at home and abroad. To his credit, none has been denounced as long-winded. All have been as terse as possible, ending barely moments after he started delivering them. In France, he was laconic; and in the United States, he exampled brevity. But as terse as they often were, the speeches gave no opportunity to his audience to make up their minds to like or dislike what he had to say. Someday in the future, when a verbose and tedious president will weary the country with offensive nothings, and lather them with pompous, jaded and swollen phrases, the beauty and even nobility of President Buhari’s taciturnity will be appreciated anew.
It was no surprise, however, that two days ago the president once again failed to conflate a great speech with a great and unique moment. October 1, Nigeria’s Independence Day, had been consistently belittled by past leaders, sometimes in favour of May 29, the so-called Democracy Day, but President Buhari who claims to exemplify change was expected to lead a reawakening of that irreplaceable and historic day. Alas, in his speech, he paid only lip service to the day. After acknowledging it as an anniversary the country should be proud of, he then proceeded to misconceive the spiritual and political import of the anniversary. Other than a few platitudes, and one or two florid statements, there was nothing else in the speech to qualify it as an Independence Day anniversary speech, nor anything memorable to emblematise the change he spoke fondly and glowingly of, nor yet something deep, historical and inspiring.
Really, the speech was inappropriate for the occasion. It was reassuring and thoughtful of President Buhari to acknowledge the contributions of former president Goodluck Jonathan to the peaceful succession that enthroned the All Progressives Congress (APC), a fact his first few giddy weeks in office seemed to ignore until some Christian leaders, including Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor the Christian Association of Nigeria president and Bishop Hassan Kukah, angrily reminded him. And he also spoke fervently of the country’s natural endowments as springboard for Nigeria’s economic development. Then he applauded the country’s staying power, remarked its unsteady ability to transcend open divisions, and announced its resolve to overcome security challenges, especially the Boko Haram war.
All the president managed to say about the allegations of vendetta leveled against his government is that he bore no one ill will. While this would have been sufficient to answer questions about his altruism in calling the previous government to account over allegations of corrupt practices, it was certainly inadequate to explain his government’s puzzling and sometimes hesitant approach to the full-fledged rebellion in the Senate by lawmakers elected on the ruling party’s platform. He needed far more nuanced and analytical exposition on the matter, backed with a short excursion into historical antecedents, but he gave nothing of such.
On the equally deeper and complex issue of the country’s raison d’etre, especially the convoluted search for a national identity, the president offered the even blander solution of “unity of purpose’. In his view, the country’s inability to rise to world prominence is caused essentially by the failure of its people to achieve unified purpose. To resolve this problem he launched into a platitudinous admonition of his countrymen, from whom he expects exemplary behaviour. Said he: “You and I and all of us must appreciate that we all have our part to play if we want to bring change about. We must change our lawless habits, our attitude to public office and public trust. We must change our unruly behaviour in schools, hospitals, market places, motor parks, on the roads, in homes and offices. To bring about change, we must change ourselves by being law-abiding citizens. ” There were of course moments in his speech when the president seemed set to achieve some flourish and depth. The bland ending of the October 1 speech thwarted all that.
Overall, the speech was undone by its failure to recognise what the day called for. Even if he hated lengthy speeches, a prerogative no one can take from him, it was still important that he avail his long-suffering and sometimes confused countrymen his view on the salient, deeper and complex issues that trouble or even undermine Nigeria as a state. He talked at length on the manifestations of the problems that ail the country; when he instead needed to draw upon historical analysis to explain where the country is situated, why it has found it difficult to soar, and how it can be made to run competitively.
Except for his views on corruption, insecurity and discipline, there was nothing in his speech on economic blueprint or the much-needed new ethos that should form the bedrock of the country’s focus and purpose. In fact, the president enunciated a rather confusing and a little detached perspective on democracy, particularly partisan politics and the limits and possibilities of presidential powers. Not too long ago he had embraced troubling political anachronisms, whether as it concerned the value of his cabinet or the lack of breadth of his kitchen cabinet. And now he has incredibly zeroed in on the absence of unity of purpose as the reason for Nigeria’s troubles, when clearly, to nearly everyone, and especially analysts and leaders themselves, the problem is much more that of leadership failing than anything else.
It is understandable why President Buhari, a ranking member of the country’s leadership elite, is reluctant to indict that elite for undermining the nation’s peace and progress. But there is no running away from the fact that Nigeria’s underdevelopment is in large parts attributable to leadership failing than any other factor. If on October 1, the president was unable to provide his own unique perspective on the country’s woes, nor agree to leadership failing as an explanation, then the road will be much tougher and longer than anyone may presume. No country has been able to rise above the quality and competence of its iconic leaders. Nigeria will not be an exception. If President Buhari can’t persuade his countrymen that he understands the nation’s problems, he cannot also persuade them he has the magic wand. Without a magic wand, it is unlikely his remedies will go beyond addressing the superficial, let alone achieve anything more than the placebo effect.
President Buhari needs help. There is no question he is a more appropriate and zealous leader for these times than his predecessor, the undisciplined Dr Jonathan. But he must be made to understand that theory drives practice, and abstract comes before reality. Except he is helped to conceive or envision great things, it is impossible to engender great and anticipated realities with energy and passion.
No comments:
Post a Comment