BY ETHELBERT OKERE

In a previous article on Mr. Atiku Abubakar’s earlier pronouncements on the restructuring of Nigeria, I noted that one fear Nigerians may entertain is that the former vice president may buckle under partisan pressure to abandon the struggle. In the article, titled “Atiku: Not Just Another Anti Party”, I noted that the conventional wisdom would be to see Atiku Abubakar engaging in some anti party demeanor, given that his party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), of which he is a leading light, is anti restructuring. Since after Atiku’s earlier submissions at a book lunch in Abuja and my subsequent article, both the APC and the federal government it controls have come out to formerly oppose the idea of restructuring.

At least the Vice President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, did not mince words on that at an event in Lagos recently. Before and after that statement by Osinbajo, some other pro-APC and friends of President Muhammadu Buhari have spoken in a manner that clearly shows that as far as the ruling party and the federal government are concerned, Atiku and others who are talking about restructuring are on their own.

As a matter of fact, there were even fears that Atiku Abukakar might have already landed himself into trouble over his stance on restructuring, amid further speculations that he was concluding plans to form another political party on which platform he will run for the office of the president, most probably against President Buhari, in 2019. So strong were the speculations that he had to formerly refute them.

It is against this backdrop, that Mr. Abubakar’s speech at the recently held memorial conference in honour of former military governor of the defunct northern region, the late General Hassan Usman Katsina, is to be evaluated. Speaking with greater vehemence, Atiku Abubaka said, as widely quoted in the media, thus: “whether we like or support it or not, restructuring will eventually happen in Nigeria”.

That was quit a strong statement; so strong that, for me, it leaves nobody in doubt that the Adamawa-born politician is looking beyond partisan camaraderie or affinity in his current disposition on restructuring. What this also means is that those who nurse the fear that he may be confronted with the challenges of an apparent or real dilemma, given the position of his party, should no longer entertain such fears. Nigerians can now see that Mr. Abubakar has chosen a more transcendental, more nationalistic and patriotic position.

In my view, he is doing a world of good for the APC establishment as well as all other anti restructuring persons or groups of persons, especially from his native North; in the sense that they would be swimming against the tide of popular opinion if they continue in that direction. For the APC establishment in particular, the anti restructuring posturing will definitely work against the interest of the party even as it is yet to demonstrate to Nigerians that restructuring will prevent it from pursuing policies and programmes that will be beneficial to the generality of the people. It is quit baffling that the party and its federal government is so openly canvassing against restructuring when its inevitability, as pointed out by Atiku, is staring us at the face.

Indeed, Atiku Abubakar gave his Northern brethren an expo when he reminded them of the pervading belief, rightly or wrongly, among a majority of Nigerians that the North is the greatest beneficiary of the status quo. And this he attributed to their apparent resistance to calls for restructuring, a situation made more worrisome by the fact that the North provided much of the leadership of the country during the period a chunk of the current structure was put in place. Apart from being frankness at its highest measure, it should provide a good lead for Atiku’s Northern brethren who need to repudiate that notion because it is no longer in its interest.

To be sure, a few Northern elements have said that the region is not against restructuring but the general body language amongst them seems to say otherwise. This has led to the impression that as far as the Northern establishment is concerned, Atiku is on his own. Nothing can be more fallacious, however. Atiku Abubakar cannot be on his own, out of the entire North, on this matter; not just because he is a former vice president but also because Nigerians outside that section of the country know that he is at home with his people. The North should therefore come out clean and support this patriotic son of theirs who has demonstrated a good flair for reading the political barometer better than most of his contemporaries.

It is possible that his pan-Nigerian stature might have the effect of lowering the visibility of a few Northern leaders who are sympathetic to restructuring but something has to be done to erase the impression that the North, generally, is against it. As for the South, Atiku’s voice is resounding across with the needed crescendo.

But by far the most striking point made by the former vice president was in painting a beautiful picture of the options before the generality of Nigerians: “The question is whether it will happen around a conference table, in a direction influenced by us and whether we will be an equal partner in the process. Or will it happen in a more unpredictable arena and in a manner over which we have little influence”.

Evidently, this is where we are today but I would have loved Atiku to go further to sound a note of warning, to the effect that the chances of the first option are diminishing by the day, leaving us more with the second. He could be excused either for demonstrating the statesman he is or because there is really no need over flogging what is already too well known.

As a patriotic Nigerian, Atiku has stated his own preferences and his wishes for his beloved country. He says: “it should be at a table and we need to be at that table”. But who says the table will be there standing for ever and waiting for us to sit at it? In my view, the jolts are becoming too many and rough; so many buildings are quaking; there is so much stampede going on; and so much panic that we may soon, knowing and unknowingly, upturn the table, thereby loosing the chance of ever sitting around it.

The Atiku preferences, that the restructuring should be at the table instead of in an “unpredictable arena”, gladdens my heart. Of course, it tempting to dismiss his mention of the “table” as meaning calling for another conference which some believe had led us to nowhere in the past. But as he noted, it is not just conferences that failed. All other measures, including multiplication of states from 12 to 36, a civil war to force the different parts together, several military operations to quell agitations for self determination, federal character principle, unity schools, National Youth Service Scheme, etc, etc have, in his own words, “failed woefully”. The result is a fragile unity, unstable democracy and more grievances.

Therefore, we cannot be tired of talking at the table since the alternative is the picture which the front line leader has painted so beautifully: an unpredictable arena and in a manner over which we have little influence.