Waiting for Jonathan: by Levi Obijiofor

How has President Jonathan fared?

If we were to evaluate the performance of President Goodluck Jonathan by the number and nature of words he uses in his mission to solve the country’s socioeconomic problems, there would be near unanimity that the man is doing very well.

But has Jonathan lived up to public expectations? Do his words furnish us with insights into the kind of leader that Jonathan has become? Presidential performance is never evaluated on the basis of a president’s ability to throw words around.

Whether he likes it or not, the public expects Jonathan to provide modest but concrete evidence of his achievements in office. This is a simple test of character. Jonathan should point to his achievements and leave the public to evaluate his performance. Nothing else counts.

Unfortunately, in a country in which there are too many presidential courtiers who are prepared to sing the praises of their boss till he falls into a ditch, Jonathan’s defenders are likely to argue that it is too early to assess the man’s performance because he has only been in office for no more than six months – four of which he spent as acting president. That is a valid argument.

However, a counter-punch would maintain that Jonathan is not new in the presidency. He was vice president for more than two years before Umaru Musa Yar’Adua was incapacitated and finally consumed by ill health on May 5, 2010. So, it is proper to ask whether Jonathan, as the nation’s master chef, has been cooking and serving us words rather than action.

Every day, every week and every month, he talks. He derives motivation from talking. He uses words to articulate and condense national problems into manageable concepts. He seems to have pegged his vision for a greater Nigeria on words and more words. But, are words enough?

In his public speeches, Jonathan does not come across as a pragmatist. He dwells on fanciful words that make him appear to be more patriotic than the rest of us. Here is an example. In an address read on his behalf four days ago by Yayale Ahmed, Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), at the opening of the fourth National Diaspora Conference in Minna (Niger State), Jonathan said: “There are many areas of developmental challenges in which you channel your interventions. It is quite obvious that all sectors of the economy would require rapid developmental changes if we are to attain our target of becoming one of the 20 most industrialised nations in the world in year 2020.”

First of all, this target is unachievable because it is unrealistic. It is based on fictional expectations of where Nigeria wants to be in 10 years’ time. How could anyone, including Jonathan, expect Nigeria, with all the problems that have been sitting with us for the past 50 years, to become “one of the most 20 industrialised nations in the world in the year 2020” when we can’t even provide in 2010 sufficient and stable electricity to power our industries, when we don’t even have decent infrastructure to provide basic services in public hospitals, in road transportation and in our primary and secondary schools (not to mention universities).

During his coronation as president in Aso Rock in early May this year, everyone expected Jonathan to hit the ground running, not to wait to master the art of governance, as his predecessor pleaded in his days. We expected Jonathan to pick a couple of projects and to use his presidential authority to supervise those projects till completion. If he could do that, the Nigerian press and the public reasoned, Jonathan could turn out to be the presidential hero that has long eluded Nigeria.

As a mark of the nation’s goodwill toward Jonathan, some eminent and non-eminent Nigerians presented him (in his early days) with a list of core projects he should concentrate on and nurture till they have been concluded. Top on that list were the elusive electricity project, the unresolved electoral reforms, as well as the worsening and embarrassing security situation (aggravated by ceaseless cases of kidnapping), to mention just a few. Unfortunately, six months on, Jonathan has not solved any of these problems.

Nigerians cannot say with beaming faces that they have experienced any significant improvement in the supply of electricity since Jonathan became president, despite the pledges that Jonathan made publicly to his foreign audience during his celebrated visit to the United States in April 2010.

Stable supply of electricity has proved to be Jonathan’s weakest point. There is a history of official rambling commentary about how to solve electricity problem in Nigeria. This goes back to Obasanjo’s era, as well as Yar’Adua’s time as president and Jonathan’s tenure as vice president.

Just as much, the security situation has worsened, especially in the south eastern states of Anambra and Abia where abduction has been elevated to an industry managed efficiently by a coalition of unemployed thugs, rogue police officers, fraudulent traditional rulers, and dishonest pastors who double as crime bosses. Abduction has tarnished Nigeria’s image irrevocably.

If Jonathan wants to demonstrate his modest commitment to national leadership, he must ensure that electricity supply is stabilised across the country, that kidnappers and their sponsors are snuffed out and jailed, that electoral reforms go beyond the appointment of an agreeable chairperson of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and that basic infrastructure is provided to make life easier for everyone. Jonathan has the presidential power to make a difference in the lives of Nigerians. He must use that power decently, meaningfully and effectively.

Before his supporters rush to his defence, let us establish a few facts why it is appropriate to scrutinise Jonathan’s performance since he became acting president on 9 February 2010 and substantive president in May this year. From the time he was given the nod by the National Assembly to step in as acting president in February 2010 to the present day, Jonathan has been in charge of national affairs for up to six months.

Add to this period the two years he served as vice president before fate propelled him to the presidential throne in May this year. So, Jonathan is not by any means a rookie politician in Abuja. He is experienced in governance at national and state levels.

During his exchange with journalists (otherwise known as “media chat”) on Sunday, 20 June 2010, Jonathan justified his argument for a delayed decision on his position in regard to the presidential election. He said: “Anyone interested in declaring must declare it very close to the primaries so that governance will not suffer. If I will declare, I will declare close to the primaries.” I am not persuaded that governance across the country has not suffered already, just because Jonathan has withheld clarification of his position.

Already, everywhere you go, government activity seems to have stalled, overtaken by debate over whether Jonathan would contest the election. At the state level, the situation is worse. Major projects have been grounded. And no new projects are being rolled out. It is this kind of situation that feeds corruption by senior government officers and gross abuse of office by state governors and commissioners. This is a mirror image of the situation that prevailed in Nigeria prior to the 2003 presidential election when Olusegun Obasanjo refused to answer questions about whether he planned to seek re-election in that year’s election.

Again, in 2006, ahead of the 2007 presidential election, Obasanjo evaded questions about his secret plans to amend the constitution in order to enable him to contest the presidential election so he could legalise his vile ambition to serve a third term as president. These experiences show that the more a sitting president delays clarification about his personal ambition to contest an election, the more uncertain the political situation would be, and the less productive the economy.

Every election year in Nigeria is an opportunity for just about every state official to raid the public treasury. Funds budgeted for specific projects are often withheld or diverted to private purposes. This year will not be different. The anticipation is that once Jonathan signals his interest in the presidential election, public money and property would be converted into personal acquisitions to be used by governors and commissioners to support their re-election campaigns. This is how we recycle and sustain a corrupt system.