0
0
A Polemical Examination of Political Necessity in Times of National Crisis.
In an epoch where political leadership has been reduced to theatrical posturing and the cynical manipulation of tribal sentiments, the emergence of a figure who transcends the mediocrity of contemporary statecraft demands not merely acknowledgement but rigorous philosophical vindication. Atiku Abubakar represents precisely such a phenomenon: a colossus bestriding Nigeria’s fractured political landscape with a synthesis of intellectual acuity and practical wisdom that our democratic experiment desperately requires. Yet honest inquiry compels us to examine this proposition with the same philosophical rigour we apply to its articulation, weighing evidence against assertion, achievement against aspiration.
Let us dispense immediately with the tepid equivocations that characterise much political discourse. The question before us is not whether Atiku possesses leadership qualities; it is whether Nigeria, at this historical juncture, can afford to ignore a leader whose entire political trajectory demonstrates what Aristotle termed phronesis, practical wisdom married to virtuous action.
“The function of leadership,” Aristotle wrote in the Nicomachean Ethics, “is to produce more leaders, not more followers.” By this metric alone, Atiku’s capacity to unite disparate factions, to translate labyrinthine party complexities into comprehensible political language, establishes him as precisely the pedagogical statesman our fractured polity requires. Consider his tenure as Vice President from 1999 to 2007, during which he chaired the National Economic Council, a body that brought together governors from all 36 states to deliberate on critical economic policies. His establishment of the American University of Nigeria in Yola in 2003, which admitted its first students in 2005, exemplifies this pedagogical commitment. The institution stands as Africa’s first development university modelled on the American liberal arts system, representing a substantial private investment in Nigeria’s educational infrastructure.
What distinguishes the mere politician from the genuine statesman is the ability to forge coherence from cacophony. Atiku possesses that rare gift, what we might call linguistic alchemy, the capacity to distil complex ideological tensions into a vernacular that resonates across educational, ethnic, and socioeconomic divides. This is no trivial accomplishment. During the 2023 presidential campaign, his town hall meetings across Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones demonstrated this capacity for direct engagement with citizens. His policy document, “My Covenant with Nigerians,” articulated comprehensive positions on restructuring, economic reform, and national unity, translated into multiple Nigerian languages for wider accessibility.
As Jürgen Habermas observed, democratic legitimacy itself depends upon communicative rationality, the ability of political actors to create spaces of mutual understanding through discourse. In a nation where political communication has degenerated into ethnic dog-whistles and religious demagoguery, Atiku’s demonstrated ability to speak a language of national integration represents not merely a personal virtue but a structural necessity.
His political career has been characterised by bridge-building across Nigeria’s most intractable divides, earning respect from politicians across the ideological spectrum. Former military head of state General Abdulsalami Abubakar has acknowledged his role in national reconciliation efforts. Even political opponents have, at various points, recognised his administrative experience and capacity for consensus-building, though such recognition has naturally ebbed and flowed with the tides of political competition. This capacity for earning respect even from rivals speaks to a political temperament suited to Nigeria’s deeply plural democracy.
The coupling of magnificent intelligence with gentle wisdom in Atiku’s political persona represents a rare synthesis that political philosophy has long identified as essential for just governance. Plato, in The Republic, argued that the ideal ruler must possess both sophia (wisdom) and andreia (courage), but also sophrosyne, a kind of temperate self-mastery. It is this temperance, this “gentle wisdom,” that prevents raw intelligence from degenerating into technocratic arrogance or authoritarian overreach.
Atiku’s academic credentials include a Master’s degree in International Relations from Anglia Ruskin University, and his intellectual engagements extend beyond politics. He has authored several books, including his autobiography “My Life” (2018), which achieved significant commercial success, and policy documents outlining his vision for economic restructuring. His 2018 policy proposal for comprehensive privatisation articulated specific targets for revenue generation through strategic divestment of national assets, though the feasibility of such projections remains subject to implementation and market conditions.
Atiku’s intellectual achievements, from his business acumen to his policy sophistication, are matters of public record. As co-founder of Nigerian Container Services (NICOTES), later known as INTELS, and founder of several other enterprises including Adama Beverages Limited, he built a business portfolio spanning logistics, agriculture, education, and petroleum distribution. These ventures have created substantial employment, though precise figures for direct and indirect job creation are difficult to verify independently. His investment portfolio includes operations across multiple African countries, demonstrating entrepreneurial success beyond Nigerian borders.
Yet what marks him as exceptional is the absence of the intellectual hauteur that so often accompanies academic or commercial success in politics. His approach demonstrates what Michael Oakeshott called “political wisdom,” not the application of abstract blueprints but “the pursuit of intimations,” a pragmatic responsiveness to the concrete realities of governance rather than ideological rigidity. During the 2006 fuel subsidy crisis, whilst serving as Vice President, he participated in negotiations between labour unions threatening a nationwide strike and the federal government, contributing to a compromise that averted economic paralysis. The extent of his individual role in these negotiations, versus that of other government actors, remains a matter of historical interpretation.
Max Weber distinguished between three types of authority: traditional, legal-rational, and charismatic. The “aura of good leadership” that surrounds Atiku represents charismatic authority in its most legitimate form, not the dangerous charlatanism of the demagogue, but charisma grounded in demonstrated competence, in what we might call earned authority. His political longevity and repeated presidential campaigns speak to an enduring base of support, though this support has not yet translated into electoral victory at the presidential level.
His political reflexes, that instinctive capacity to read shifting political currents, combined with his dedication to duty and capacity for crisis response, constitute what Machiavelli termed virtù: the dynamic political capability to master fortuna, to navigate and shape circumstances rather than be overwhelmed by them. During the early 2000s Sharia implementation crisis, which generated violent conflicts in several northern states with significant loss of life, Atiku participated in reconciliation missions and interfaith dialogue initiatives. Whilst specific quantitative measures of violence reduction attributable to these interventions are difficult to establish with precision, such bridge-building efforts represented important contributions to conflict mitigation during a period of acute sectarian tension.
In The Prince, Machiavelli wrote: “A prince must have no other objective, no other thought, nor take up any profession but that of war, its methods and its discipline.” Translated into democratic terms, this means that effective leadership requires constant vigilance, strategic acumen, and the capacity for decisive action, precisely the qualities Atiku has demonstrated throughout his political career. His restructuring proposals, consistently articulated since 2010, advocate for devolution of powers to states, particularly in areas of policing, resource control, and infrastructure development. “The Atiku Plan: Let’s Get Nigeria Working Again” (2018) proposed specific constitutional amendments and policy reforms, projecting potential GDP growth acceleration, though such projections must be understood as aspirational targets contingent upon successful implementation rather than guaranteed outcomes.
Yet capability without character is a recipe for tyranny. What distinguishes Atiku’s leadership proposition is the moral architecture that undergirds his political practice. “Forthrightness, honesty of purpose, consistency and hard work,” these are not mere platitudes but the cardinal virtues that Cicero, in De Officiis, identified as essential to political legitimacy.
“The foundation of justice,” Cicero insisted, “is good faith, that is, truth and fidelity to promises and agreements.” In a political culture corroded by corruption and characterised by the systematic betrayal of public trust, Atiku’s record stands as a testament to institutional reform and transparency. His advocacy for anti-corruption measures during his vice presidency proved instrumental in the establishment of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), a landmark institution that has become central to Nigeria’s anti-corruption architecture. Whilst political opponents, including his former principal President Obasanjo, have levelled allegations against him during periods of intense political rivalry, it is significant that none of these accusations have resulted in criminal conviction despite extensive investigations spanning multiple administrations. This distinction between political rhetoric and judicial fact cannot be overlooked in any serious assessment. His corporate holdings have consistently maintained transparent financial reporting practices, with INTELS Nigeria Limited—where he previously held significant interest,having published annual financial statements and adhered to international quality management standards, a practice that remains regrettably exceptional amongst indigenous Nigerian enterprises and demonstrates a longstanding commitment to accountability that extends beyond political necessity into business practice.
His capacity for magnanimity reflects what Seneca called clementia, not weakness, but the strength to temper justice with mercy, to recognise the humanity in political opponents. His charitable foundation, established in 1999, has provided scholarships to students from across Nigerian states, representing a significant personal commitment to educational access. During the COVID-19 pandemic, he made public donations to support healthcare infrastructure. Following the devastating 2012 floods that affected multiple Nigerian states, his foundation participated in relief efforts. Whilst specific monetary values for these interventions are difficult to verify independently, the consistent pattern of philanthropic engagement is well-documented.
The dismissal of frivolities in Atiku’s political practice speaks to a deeper philosophical commitment: the recognition that governance is serious business, that the fate of millions hangs upon the decisions of leadership. This is not puritanical joylessness but what Hannah Arendt called “the burden of our time,” the recognition that political action carries profound moral weight. Associates and media coverage document a demanding schedule characterised by early mornings and late nights of consultation and engagement. During his 2019 presidential campaign, he visited 35 of Nigeria’s 36 states, demonstrating the kind of grassroots engagement that characterises serious political leadership.
Simultaneously, his pragmatism is coupled with innovation and “dynamics in perspectives,” the intellectual flexibility to adapt strategies to changing circumstances without abandoning core principles. This represents what John Dewey called “creative intelligence”: “the ability to recast and expand experience, to make it yield new meanings.” Nigeria’s challenges, from economic stagnation to security crises, demand precisely this kind of adaptive, innovative leadership. His economic blueprint proposes comprehensive reforms including: reduction of the cost of governance through streamlining of federal agencies; integration of out-of-school children into the educational system through increased investment in basic education infrastructure; job creation through targeted support for small and medium enterprises; and achievement of improved electricity supply through investment in power generation and distribution. These proposals represent ambitious policy visions that would require substantial political capital, fiscal resources, and implementation capacity to realise.
The claim that Atiku deserves the leadership of this country and he shall lead the country to prosperity is not monarchical pretension but democratic assertion. In a genuine democracy, leadership is not bestowed by divine right but earned through demonstrated capacity and popular mandate. The philosophical case for Atiku’s leadership rests not on inevitability but on fitness, on the correspondence between the qualities required for national transformation and the qualities he embodies.
In presidential election cycles spanning 2007, 2019, and 2023, Atiku has garnered approximately 21 million votes cumulatively across these general elections, representing a significant base of popular support. His voter base spans all geopolitical zones, with documented support across Nigeria’s regional divides, though support levels vary considerably by zone. In 2019, he secured 11.3 million votes (41% of valid votes cast), finishing second. In 2023, he secured almost 7.0 million votes (29%), again finishing second. These results demonstrate sustained electoral appeal whilst also revealing that a majority of Nigerian voters have, to date, preferred other candidates. This electoral history must inform any honest assessment of his political prospects.
As John Stuart Mill argued in Considerations on Representative Government, the quality of governance depends fundamentally on the quality of the governed and their representatives. Nigeria’s progress requires citizens willing to choose competence over ethnicity, vision over venality, substance over spectacle. In Atiku, we have a candidate whose entire political trajectory has prepared him for this historical moment. His 40-year political career includes service as a Customs officer (1969-1989), where he rose to become Deputy Director; Principal Secretary to General Shehu Yar’Adua (1989-1993); founding member of the Social Democratic Party; elected Vice President on the PDP platform (1999-2007); and consistent presidential aspirant representing sustained advocacy for economic liberalisation, restructuring, and federal reform in contemporary Nigerian politics.
We stand at a crossroads. The path of least resistance leads towards continued mediocrity, towards the recycling of failed leadership models and the perpetuation of systemic dysfunction. The path of transformation requires courage, the courage to embrace proven leadership whose record, capacities, and character position it to guide Nigeria towards prosperity. With Nigeria’s GDP growth rate fluctuating between 2-4% in recent years (below the population growth rate of approximately 2.5-3%), unemployment measured at 4.9% in Q4 2024 according to National Bureau of Statistics using ILO methodology (though this figure masks substantial underemployment and the prevalence of low-productivity work), inflation remaining elevated, and substantial portions of Nigeria’s population living in multidimensional poverty according to recent indices, the urgency of transformative leadership cannot be overstated.
Edmund Burke reminds us: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” In our context, the evil is not melodramatic villainy but structural incompetence, the normalisation of failure, the acceptance of perpetual underachievement as Nigeria’s destiny.
Atiku Abubakar represents a challenge to that acceptance. His leadership offers not utopian fantasy but realistic hope, hope grounded in competence, experience, and a demonstrated commitment to national unity and prosperity. The question is not whether he deserves our support, but whether we deserve the leadership he offers, and whether Nigerian voters will, in future electoral contests, make a different choice than they have in previous cycles.
His track record includes measurable contributions: as Vice President, he participated in the economic management team that secured $18 billion in debt relief from the Paris Club in 2005; he contributed to the implementation of the National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) during a period when Nigeria’s GDP grew substantially (from approximately 0.6% in 1999 to rates exceeding 10% by 2003, using World Bank data); he supported the telecommunications deregulation that transformed Nigeria’s ICT sector, with mobile phone penetration increasing from negligible levels in 1999 to tens of millions of subscribers by 2007, creating substantial employment in the sector; and he advocated for privatisation policies that attracted significant foreign direct investment during the 2003-2007 period. These achievements must be understood within the context of the broader Obasanjo administration, in which Atiku served as Vice President rather than President, and therefore represent shared rather than individual accomplishments.
The philosophical case for Atiku’s leadership rests ultimately not on infallibility, but on fitness for purpose: the alignment between Nigeria’s needs and his demonstrated capacities. Every leader brings both strengths and weaknesses; honest advocacy acknowledges both whilst making the case that strengths outweigh limitations. The answer to Nigeria’s leadership crisis will be determined not merely by the next electoral cycle, but by voters’ willingness to weigh experience against novelty, substance against rhetoric, and proven capacity against untested promise.
The case has been made, with both its supporting evidence and its necessary caveats. Now the choice remains with the Nigerian electorate.
Aare Amerijoye DOT.B
Director General,
The Narrative Force.
SB E-news.
About the Author
