POLITICS
Tinubu’s Buhari Burden
Published
2 years agoon
By
Editor
By Chidi Amuta
President Bola Tinubu’s success or failure in office may not be the result of his own making. It would be the weight of a political burden he is so far carrying apparently quite willingly. Every policy pronouncement he has so far made and measures he has hinted at taking is an inherited yoke from the immediate past Buhari presidency. In a sense, Tinubu’s presidency so far is looking more like a reactive incumbency. He has merely been reacting to what his predecessor left in the in-tray at the Aso Villa office. Insecurity. Monumental poverty. Economic hopelessness. Subsidies and entitlements. A critically divided nation. Unprecedented corruption. Name it. It is all inherited from Mr. Buhari. But Tinubu and his cohorts seem reluctant to say so.
The most elementary lesson of the presidential systems and indeed every democratic succession is that the new leader is elected not just to clean up the mess made by his predecessor but also to leave room to make his own peculiar mess. So far, Mr. Tinubu seems too preoccupied with the baggage left by his Daura friend instead of getting ready to make his own mess or landmarks.
In some sense, president Tinubu has carried on literally like a beast of burden. He has not complained to the nation about the burden he inherited nor the extent of the mess on his plate. One or two random arrests have been made and a probe of the Central Bank has been instituted. It is of course true that government is a continuum. Each new leaders is chosen to deal with the trouble he finds on the plate. Leaders are elected to lead, not to lament or offer excuses on behalf of those gone by especially when the past and the present are born of the same party. But it is also an elementary responsibility of leadership to name the source of present headaches so that the public can minimally understand and empathize.
And this is where Tinubu’s publicity machinery is failing. They are busy constructing political enemies from among the opposition of Atiku Abubakar’s PDP and Peter Obi’s Labour Party. This is quite excusable. But it is lazy public relations. Tinubu’s existential adversaries are not the current opposition. They are not yet a full blown opposition figures since they are still in court. His most consequential political enemies might lie in his ruling party and the devotees of his predecessor. His greatest enemy is to be found in the inner cultic followership of his immediate predecessor. It is Mr. Buhari that laid all the booby traps that are likely to fell Tinubu or keep him busy for the next four years. The best test of party solidarity would be to try and upset Buhari’s apple cart. The political fangs and jack knives will come out.
And yet so far, the Daura general is comfortably savouring his cosy retirement in his ranch. He has even had the temerity to unleash his megaphones on the public to justify his actions in office. The most disastrous leader in the whole of Nigerian history is being revised as a man without regrets and who took the best decisions in the best interest of the nation. It is either being trumpeted that he has no regrets for the disaster he unleashed on the nation. And because we live in a nation where leaders face no consequences for their actions in office, Buhari is sufficiently shameless and immune as to use every occasion to preach to or lecture Nigerians on patriotism, good governance and the value of good leadership. In every other self respecting republic, a man with Buhari’s record in office should either be in jail, facing trial at the Hague or quarantined in disgraceful internal exile for the rest of his life. And here is just a tip of why.
Under Mr. Buhari’s eight years, close to 90,000 citizens were killed by bandits or kidnappers. Fewer than 100 known bandits and kidnappers were were either arrested or brought to book for these crimes. Any number of our young daughters, wives or female relations were abducted, raped, abused, carted off into forceful matrimony or sold off into direct slavery. Under Buhari’s watch, insecurity forced an estimated 7 million Nigerians to become Internally Displaced Persons, sequestered from home, kith and kin and livelihood for an indefinite period.
In this period, Nigeria climbed up the global insecurity index. We became among the top five most dangerous nations of the world in the league of Somalia, Syria, Yemen, Libya and Sudan while our police force is now grouped among the worst in the world.
Under this illustrious Daura general, the national economy was literally eviscerated. Arguably, we have been set back a good three decades in economic terms. An external debt of anywhere between $80 billion and $100 billion hangs over our collective neck with over N30 trillion in domestic debts. Our external reserves, long brandished as $34-$37 billion was surreptitiously used to leverage clandestine external loans from American banks to the extent of over $18 billion with neither parliamentary approval nor other statutory due processes. We are now spending over 98% of our total revenue on debt servicing. Only this week, the World Bank designated the Nigerian Naira as one of the worst currencies in sub Saharan Africa. As we speak, over N1000 is equivalent to $1 USD!
Not long before the 2023 presidential elections, a dubious Nair re-design project was suddenly unleashed on Nigerians by the duo of Presdient Buhari and his Central Bank Governor, Mr. Godwin Emefiele. People’s bank deposits were literally confiscated by the government. An unanticipated cash crunch hit the nation. People could not access their own hard earned money. Others went through untold hardship to get into banks that had no money- ether new or old currencies- to dispense. People died of poverty, disease and hardship. Up to this moment, hardly more than a trickle of the new currencies on which huge public expenditure had been incurred is in circulation. And no questions are being asked.
Still on money matters, close to N29.3 trillion of worthless currency was printed and pumped into the economy by a colluding Central Bank through a dubious Ways and Means mechanism, thereby fueling further runaway inflation which today hovers above 27%. Under Buhari’s eight years, Nigeria witnessed the largest migration of citizens into multidimensional poverty than at any other time in our history. An estimated over 130 million Nigerians now live in poverty being the largest ‘poverty republic’ in the world, more than India with a population of over 1.4 billion people.
As Petroleum Minister, Mr. Buhari presided over the emergence of oil theft, illegal bunkering and illicit refineries as an industry and a sector of Nigeria’s expanding insecurity sub sector. At its worst moments, close to 30% of Nigeria’s daily oil production was being creamed off by oil thieves often with official and security knowledge and enablement. Under Buhari, the nation witnessed the institutionalization of corruption. The leadership of the very agencies established to fight corruption (EFCC and ICPC) were themselves investigated and found culpable of condoning high level corruption and there were no consequences. No arrests. No prosecutions. No recoveries. No reasonable forfeitures.
Mr. Buhari presided over a deliberate and reckless mismanagement of our national diversity through aggressive nepotism, nativism and divisive politics. In response to irritations from secessionist movements in the South East, Buhari could not hide his allergy to the Igbos as a nationality. He threatened on Twitter to unleash genocidal violence on them by speaking to them “in a language they understand from the civil war years.” He capped this xenophobic vituperation by describing the igbos as a mere ‘dot’ surrounded by ‘a circle’ of Nigerian security viciousness. Twitter scrubbed this twit as ‘hate speech’ for which Twitter was banned from the Nigerian web space for close to a year!
Back to Tinubu’s self -imposed Buhari burden. It is true that faithfulness to party demands that Tinubu should remain silent on the culpability of Mr. Buhari for the myriad burdens he has to contend with. Faithfulness to party perhaps dictates that he should gloss over some of Mr. Buhari’s excusable lapses. But we are not dealing with casual lapses but fundamental acts of epic incompetence or deliberate misdeed occasioned by ignorance or patent wickedness and insensitivity. We are dealing with acts and policies that have literally destroyed the nation we all call home.
Within the rubrics of faithfulness to party solidarity and policy continuity, it is perhaps understandable that President Tinubu has continued to own the highpoints of his predecessor’s infamous rule. He may have been emboldened in this regard by the outcome of the 2023 presidential elections. After all, he ran under the platform of the APC and was declared winner. This may indicate that the Nigerian populace saw nothing wrong with Buhari’s or the APC’s rule. That would be a conventional democratic wisdom. Ordinarily, the electorate should ‘punish’ a party with a defective performance record at the next election. The controversial result of the 2023 presidential election indicates widespread public hesitation to endorse the return of the APC after the Buhari infamy. It stops short of a wholesale rejection of the APC. A vote tally of less than 9 million in a registered voter population of over 83 million and a population of over 200 million cannot by any stretch be described as an endorsement of a ruling party.
Even at that, President Tinubu needs to understand the dividing line between faithfulness to party solidarity and his own political self interest. While party solidarity dictates a rhetorical commitment to continuing with the Buhari legacy, real politik dictates that he distances himself, as much as possible, from the worst of Buhari.
As Buhari and his jaded acolytes continue to bring him out for occasional airing, his plight reminds me of Joseph Stalin win his last days. Towards the end, he was adjudged as somewhat unhinged by the public and his close lieutenants. But he insisted that he was acting rationally and in the best interests of the nation. Somehow, his derangement had progressed so far that he could not distinguished between illusion and reality. He mistook each act of deluded autocracy as illustrious service to the nation.
He noticed that the attendance at his weekend garden parties was getting unusually scanty. On one occasion, when he made his usual grand entrance, he asked aloud: ‘Where have all my friends gone?’ An aide leaned over and whispered into his ears: ‘All gone, all purged…’ Stalin, in his delusion, failed to see that his sweeping purges of ‘anti revolutionary elements’ had also wiped out majority of his friends and allies. Close to 6 million had perished on Stalin’s orders. The man of power had eroded and destroyed the very nation in whose name he was wielding the power of the state. But the suffering and death of the masses meant little to him. As he famously said: “The death of one man is a tragedy. But the death of many is statistics…”
To Buhari in is final days in power, Nigerians were no more than mre subjects and statistics. The nation was a playground. The nation of his legacy is best described as a field after a locust invasion. For President Tinubu to see his presidency as a continuation of this legacy is political hara-kiri. He needs to choose now.
Dr Chidi Amuta is a Public Affairs Analyst in Nigeria.
You may like
POLITICS
Israel’s Expansion in Gaza: A Turning Point in the Conflict and the Future of Palestinian Territory
Published
2 months agoon
April 16, 2025By
Editor
Baba Yunus Muhammad
In an alarming escalation, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz has announced the “capture of large areas” of the Gaza Strip to be permanently integrated into Israeli “security zones.” This declaration, made on April 15, 2025, signals a dangerous and irreversible shift in the decades-long Israeli occupation: the transition from occupation to de facto annexation.
Israeli airstrikes continue to pummel Khan Younis and Rafah, killing dozens, including women, children, and the elderly. Gaza’s Health Ministry reports over 900 people killed in recent days alone — many of them children. The cumulative death toll now exceeds 50,000, with more than 110,000 injured, many maimed for life. The majority are civilians.
In the most chilling development this week, a mass grave was uncovered in Khan Younis containing the bodies of 15 Palestinian rescue workers — bound, shot, and buried. These were not combatants, but medics and volunteers. The execution-style killings speak to a deepening moral crisis that now grips the conflict.
Strategic Expansion: Occupation Masquerading as Security
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has recently confirmed Israel’s intentions to create a “second Philadelphi corridor,” effectively carving Gaza into disconnected territories. This would further divide and control the population, while seizing critical border areas along the Egypt-Gaza frontier.
Human rights organizations, including Israel’s own Gisha, warn that Israel has already seized 62 square kilometers of Gaza — nearly one-fifth of the territory — under the guise of “buffer zones.” These so-called zones increasingly resemble permanent annexations. What began as a war is morphing into a land grab, executed under the fog of military necessity.
As one analyst told The Islamic Economist: “This is not just about dismantling Hamas. It is about redrawing the map of Gaza, erasing Palestinian sovereignty, and engineering a demographic reality where Palestinians are forced to leave or live under siege indefinitely.”
Trump Administration and the Shift in American Policy
Under the current Trump administration, Israel enjoys unprecedented diplomatic latitude. Former President Biden opposed any moves to reoccupy Gaza or expel its residents, insisting on a political solution. President Trump, however, has openly spoken of Gaza as a potential “Riviera” and suggested relocating Palestinians to Egypt or Jordan — ideas widely condemned as ethnic cleansing.
Simultaneously, the Israeli government has quietly launched a bureau for the “voluntary transfer” of Gaza’s population. But with Gaza reduced to rubble, its hospitals shut down, bakeries burned, and humanitarian aid blocked, what appears voluntary on paper is, in reality, coerced displacement.
The UN and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) have warned that such transfers violate international law, potentially amounting to war crimes. But with a muted response from key Western capitals, including Washington, the machinery of occupation continues unabated.
Deliberate Starvation as a Tool of War
Since January, Israel has imposed a near-total siege on Gaza. Water systems have been destroyed. Fuel is forbidden. Wheat reserves have run out. The United Nations World Food Programme says all bakeries are now closed. Only a few humanitarian kitchens remain — and they too are on the verge of collapse.
The result: Gaza is now facing famine. Children are dying from dehydration and starvation, not just bombs. Diseases are spreading through overcrowded shelters and makeshift camps. The siege is not a byproduct of war — it is the strategy itself.
By making Gaza uninhabitable, Israel appears to be pressuring its civilian population to flee. As history has shown — from the Nakba in 1948 to today — displacement is not a side effect. It is the plan.
Hostages and the Politics of Delay
Israel continues to justify its campaign by citing the 59 hostages held by Hamas since the October 2023 attack, which killed 1,200 Israelis. But as families of the hostages grow increasingly vocal, many accuse the government of sacrificing their loved ones for political and territorial gains.
Polls show that the Israeli public now favors a ceasefire deal that brings the hostages home, even if it means withdrawing from Gaza. But the Netanyahu government — emboldened by far-right coalition partners and a sympathetic White House — refuses to halt the offensive.
Hamas, meanwhile, demands a permanent ceasefire and the right to remain in power. Israel insists on total military victory and Hamas’s destruction. The resulting deadlock is costing lives — every day.
A Moment of Reckoning for the Muslim World
The silence from many Muslim capitals is deafening. While some countries have condemned the atrocities, few have taken tangible steps — whether diplomatic, legal, or economic — to halt the carnage. The Ummah watches in horror, but action remains limited.
Yet this is not just a Palestinian issue. It is a moral and existential test for the Islamic world. Gaza is not just being destroyed — it is being erased. If this moment passes without consequence, the precedent will be set: that under the right geopolitical conditions, a people can be displaced, their land seized, and their history rewritten — with impunity.
The Muslim world must ask: what kind of future are we building, if the soil of the Holy Land can be soaked in blood and the world simply watches?
Conclusion: Toward Justice, Not Just Ceasefire
This is not just a war. It is a transformation of Gaza’s geography, identity, and people. The Palestinian struggle is no longer about borders — it is about survival.
The Islamic world, together with all people of conscience, must raise its voice against this unfolding injustice. Ceasefire is no longer enough. What is needed is an international movement — legal, economic, political, and moral — to end the occupation, prevent annexation, and restore dignity and self-determination to the Palestinian people.
Gaza may be small in landmass. But in the story of justice, it has become a vast battlefield for the soul of humanity.
POLITICS
The Battle for Khartoum: Tracking Sudan’s War over Two Years
Published
3 months agoon
April 2, 2025By
Editor
After nearly two years of brutal fighting, Sudan’s civil war is at a critical juncture: the Sudanese Armed Forces announced it has regained control of the capital Khartoum from its rivals, the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces. It’s yet to be seen if this signals a break in the war or is simply another phase in the fighting. In this article, Kagure Gacheche tracks the conflict since it began in 2023.
Sudan has been engulfed in brutal conflict since 15 April 2023, when tensions between the country’s two most powerful military factions erupted into civil war.
The conflict stems from a long-standing power struggle over military control and integration. Fighting between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces began in the capital, Khartoum, and quickly spread across the country. International efforts to broker peace since have largely failed.
The conflict, which has been going on for two years now, has created one of the world’s worst humanitarian emergencies. An estimated 30 million Sudanese civilians are in need of aid. Brutal attacks, looting and destruction of infrastructure have become commonplace. Millions of people lack access to essential medical care. Food shortages and economic collapse have worsened the suffering. The war has also triggered a massive displacement crisis, with more than 14 million people forced to flee their homes. Many have sought refuge in neighbouring countries, while others remain trapped in dangerous conditions within Sudan.
As the conflict drags on, the toll on Sudan’s people continues to grow. Estimates of those killed vary widely, from 20,000 to 62,000, but the actual figure could be much larger. With no clear resolution in sight, Sudan’s crisis is one of the most urgent and devastating conflicts in the world. At The Conversation Africa, we have worked with academics who have tracked the conflict since 2023.
Weapons flow
Early on, it was clear that both the Sudanese army and the paramilitary force had a sufficient supply of weapons to sustain a protracted conflict. The country was already awash with firearms. It is ranked second – after Egypt – among its regional neighbours in total firearms estimates. Khristopher Carlson, part of a research project tracking small arms and armed violence in Sudan, noted that the two Sudanese forces might have different fighting methods but were adequately equipped to trade fire. The army’s superiority was its air force and heavy arsenal on the ground. The paramilitary force relied on nimble mobile units equipped primarily with small and light weapons.
External interference
This proliferation of weapons has been compounded by financial and military support from external states. Various foreign players – Chad, Egypt, Iran, Libya, Qatar and Russia – have picked a side to support. However, the influence of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates has been particularly problematic. Political scientist Federico Donelli explained that the two nations viewed Sudan as a key nation because of its location. Following President Omar al-Bashir’s ouster in 2019, the two monarchies bet on different factions within Sudan’s security apparatus. This external support exacerbated internal competition. Riyadh maintained close ties with army leader Abdel Fattah al-Burhan. Abu Dhabi aligned itself with the head of the Rapid Support Forces, Mohamed Dagalo, or Hemedti.
Regional dynamics
The support from international players in Sudan’s war has had a damaging effect on regional dynamics. The Sudanese army recently accused the United Arab Emirates of supplying the Rapid Support Forces with weapons through Chad. At a ceremony for an officer killed in a drone strike carried out by paramilitary forces, a senior army official said Chad’s airports would be “legitimate targets” should retaliatory action become necessary. This heightened the risk of a spillover of the Sudanese conflict. Sudan shares borders with seven countries in an unstable region, including Chad, South Sudan, Eritrea and Ethiopia. Economics professor and legal expert John Mukum Mbaku warned that a spillover of the fighting could devastate the region economically, socially and politically.
Protecting civilians
The conflict has put millions of civilians in Sudan in the crossfire. A UN report in September 2024 called for an independent force to protect civilians; Sudan’s officials rejected the proposal. However, peace talks have yet to achieve a lasting ceasefire. Sudan had a peacekeeping force between 2007 and 2020, followed by a UN-led political mission that exited in February 2024. Since then, there has been no security presence in Sudan responsible for protecting civilians. Peacekeeping researcher Jenna Russo noted the need for a regional or international peace force that could create “green zones”. This would help protect areas where displaced persons were sheltering and facilitate humanitarian aid.
What’s been missing?
High-level peace talks brokered by the African Union and the UN to negotiate a ceasefire have largely been unsuccessful, putting civilians at constant risk. Talks held in Switzerland and Jeddah have had little impact. Philipp Kastner, a peace scholar, highlighted that the countries hosting or supporting these talks were pursuing competing interests in Sudan, which affected their impartiality. Progress to negotiate an end to the war would be unlikely if external military support to the warring parties continued unabated. Civilians would continue to pay the price.
Kagure Gacheche is the commissioning Editor, East Africa.
Courtesy: The Conservation
POLITICS
Russia-Ukraine War: A Delicate Pause Amid Geopolitical Maneuvering
Published
3 months agoon
March 20, 2025By
Editor
B.Y. Muhammad
In a surprising development, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has agreed to a mutual pause in attacks on energy infrastructure with Russia for 30 days, marking a potential step toward a broader cease-fire. The agreement, facilitated through a phone conversation with former U.S. President Donald Trump, underscores the shifting dynamics of international involvement in the ongoing conflict.
The Cease-Fire Agreement: Tactical or Strategic?
While the 30-day truce is being framed as a diplomatic breakthrough, there are indications that the Kremlin has not deviated from its broader objectives in Ukraine. Russia’s agreement to pause strikes on energy infrastructure, participate in prisoner exchanges, and discuss security in the Black Sea has been presented as a concession. However, these elements align with longstanding Russian interests, making it unclear whether the Kremlin has genuinely altered its stance or is simply buying time.
Zelensky, while agreeing to the deal, expressed skepticism regarding Russia’s commitment, emphasizing the need for U.S. monitoring. “Just the assertion and the word of Putin that he will not strike energy sites is too little,” he remarked, underscoring the deep mistrust between Kyiv and Moscow.
Russian Strategy and Western Concerns
Western analysts argue that the Kremlin’s approach remains fundamentally unchanged. Putin’s overarching demand—a complete cessation of foreign military and intelligence support for Ukraine—would, if met, leave Kyiv vulnerable to Russian dominance. While Trump denied discussing aid with Putin, the Kremlin’s statement suggested otherwise, raising questions about the true nature of their discussions.
This development has heightened fears that Moscow is merely playing for time, anticipating that the U.S. may eventually disengage from Ukraine. The timing of this cease-fire agreement, coupled with Russia’s battlefield momentum and growing Western fatigue, suggests that Moscow might be maneuvering for a strategic advantage rather than pursuing genuine peace.
U.S. and Russian Diplomatic Calculations
Trump’s involvement in the negotiations signals a potential shift in U.S. policy. The former president has historically expressed skepticism toward Ukraine’s strategic importance, and his willingness to engage with Putin could indicate a broader recalibration of Washington’s stance. Russia, in turn, appears eager to leverage this opportunity to normalize relations with the U.S. without making significant concessions on Ukraine.
Moscow has already floated the prospect of economic cooperation with American firms, particularly in the rare earth metals and energy sectors. Additionally, discussions have included cultural engagements, such as a proposed U.S.-Russia hockey tournament—seemingly trivial, yet indicative of Russia’s broader attempt to reframe its relationship with Washington beyond the Ukraine conflict.
Implications for Ukraine and the Global Order
For Ukraine, the stakes remain high. While a temporary cessation of hostilities on energy infrastructure provides some relief, the country remains in a precarious position. The prospect of losing its principal backer, the U.S., could force Kyiv into unfavorable compromises that undermine its sovereignty.
For the broader international community, the Russia-Ukraine conflict continues to reflect a contest not only between two nations but between geopolitical blocs vying for influence. Russia seeks to restore its sphere of control, while the West struggles to maintain a unified front in supporting Ukraine. Meanwhile, the Islamic world, with its historical ties to both Russia and Ukraine, watches closely, balancing economic interests and diplomatic relations in a rapidly evolving global landscape.
While the 30-day cease-fire offers a temporary reprieve, it is far from a definitive step toward peace. The agreement highlights the ongoing complexities of diplomacy in wartime, the strategic calculations of global powers, and the uncertain future of Ukraine’s sovereignty. As negotiations continue, the world waits to see whether this pause will serve as a bridge to lasting peace or merely as a tactical interlude in a protracted conflict.

In Memoriam: Professor Khurshid Ahmad (1932–2025). An Intellectual Giant and Father of Islamic Economics.

Absent from Abuja, Present in Paris

Collateral Damage: The Global Fallout of Trump’s USAID Cuts
Topics
- AGRIBUSINESS & AGRICULTURE
- BUSINESS & ECONOMY
- CULTURE
- DIGITAL ECONOMY & TECHNOLOGY
- EDITORIAL
- ENERGY
- EVENTS & ANNOUNCEMENTS
- HEALTH & EDUCATION
- IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
- ISLAMIC ECONOMY
- ISLAMIC FINANCE & CAPITAL MARKETS
- KNOWLEDGE CENTRE, CULTURE & INTERVIEWS
- OBITUARY
- OPINION
- POLITICS
- PROFILE
- PUBLICATIONS
- REPORTS
- SPECIAL FEATURES/ECONOMIC FOOTPRINTS
- SPECIAL REPORTS
- SUSTAINABILITY & CLIMATE CHANGE
- THIS WEEK'S TOP STORIES
- TRENDING
- UNCATEGORIZED
- UNITED NATIONS SDGS