In the world of Nigerian politics, party loyalty has often been considered an unspoken rule. When a prominent politician like Barrister Nyesom Wike, a stalwart of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), appears to be playing on both sides, straddling both PDP’s legacy and a prominent role within the All Progressives Congress (APC)-led government, the situation calls for scrutiny. For years, Wike championed the importance of party loyalty, decrying cross-party affiliations. Yet today, he occupies a ministerial position under the APC-led administration while maintaining roots within the PDP, casting serious doubts on his previously firm stance. This double standard not only reflects on Wike's political journey but also holds a mirror to broader issues within Nigeria’s political landscape. 

Wike has never been shy about his views on political loyalty. In his years as governor and a leading figure within the PDP, he criticized politicians who switched allegiances for personal gain, asserting that politicians should stand by their parties regardless of the challenges. His speeches from past forums are a testament to his passion for maintaining party loyalty, wherein he argued that leaders should make decisions that align with their party’s vision and should not serve personal interests at the expense of integrity. This standpoint resonated with many Nigerians who saw him as a rare politician committed to a cause larger than himself.

However, Wike’s recent move to accept a ministerial position within an APC-led administration has left many Nigerians questioning his principles. By accepting this role while maintaining ties with the PDP, he seems to be abandoning his long-held position that politicians should be unwaveringly loyal to one party. Wike’s actions raise the question: Can politicians uphold the integrity of the parties they represent while actively serving the interests of another?

Wike’s dual allegiance has implications that extend far beyond his own career. In a political system where party lines should represent ideological and policy differences, such mixed signals from a high-profile figure only blur these distinctions, leaving Nigerian voters disillusioned. If a prominent political figure can alternate between affiliations so freely, it sends the message that the platforms, values, and promises of Nigeria’s political parties are secondary to individual advancement.

This practice further complicates the task of building a solid democratic framework in Nigeria, where parties should ideally be driven by consistent philosophies and principles. The fact that Wike has positioned himself as a member of both parties dilutes the essence of party loyalty and integrity. How can voters believe in a political system when even senior leaders, who once advocated for party loyalty, freely shift alliances without explanation?

To extend the football analogy: In a real-world sports team, loyalty is highly valued because it binds players to a collective purpose, instilling in them a sense of shared identity. Imagine if Lionel Messi donned the jersey of both Barcelona and PSG on the same match day. Such a spectacle would not only disorient fans but erode the competitive spirit of the game. Wike’s recent moves similarly disorient the political “fans”, the Nigerian electorate, who deserve leaders who represent clear, consistent values.

Wike’s stance exposes a concerning double standard. Over the years, he has castigated others for crossing party lines, creating a public image of steadfast loyalty. This reputation, however, is now at odds with his current political choices. While some may argue that his decision to accept the ministerial role in the APC government is a strategic move to secure influence for his home state, this explanation still conflicts with his earlier advocacy. If anything, his decision highlights an element of political expediency that belies his past image.

In a democracy, politicians should be held to account for their words and actions, and consistency is a core aspect of public trust. A shift in allegiance, especially at the ministerial level, should come with a clear rationale to the public that previously supported Wike on the basis of his strong words on loyalty. Leaders cannot build credibility if they abandon their principles when it is convenient. For Nigerian democracy to flourish, the actions of political leaders should align with their stated beliefs, lest the public begin to view all political commitments as hollow.

Wike’s move contributes to the erosion of distinct party identities, which has plagued Nigerian politics for years. In countries with mature democracies, political parties are defined by core values and policies. Members of these parties are expected to embody and promote these ideals consistently. The Nigerian experience, however, is one where ideology often takes a backseat to personal gain. Party switches are commonplace, and alliances shift based on who is in power rather than on shared beliefs or goals.

By playing both sides, Wike risks furthering the perception that Nigeria’s political parties are little more than vehicles for power. This is detrimental to the entire democratic structure. Without clear party distinctions, voters are left with blurred choices and a weakened ability to hold leaders accountable. Wike’s position exemplifies this problem, as he appears to wear the “jerseys” of both parties, diluting the meaning of each and making it harder for the public to place their trust in either.

For Nigerian democracy to progress, its leaders must embrace ideological clarity and respect the principles they claim to uphold. Leaders like Wike, who once advocated for steadfast loyalty, should serve as role models. When politicians demonstrate consistency, voters can make informed choices based on clear differences in policy and philosophy. If Wike is no longer aligned with the PDP’s vision, he should state as much openly and embrace his new political path fully.

The credibility of Nigeria’s political system rests on the transparency and integrity of its leaders. By openly affiliating with both parties, Wike sets a dangerous precedent, one that suggests party allegiance is only necessary until a more beneficial offer comes along. Such a trend threatens to undermine voter confidence, especially among young Nigerians, who may see this as further evidence of a broken system.

Wike’s recent political choices bring to light the urgent need for Nigerian politicians to choose a side and stick with it. His dual loyalty raises questions about the nature of political commitment in Nigeria, and if leaders like him can shift allegiances without consequence, it sets a damaging example for others to follow.

As Nigerian politics continues to evolve, the electorate deserves leaders who stand by their convictions, even when it is inconvenient. If political parties are to serve their purpose as vehicles of representation and vision, their members must abide by the commitments they make. Otherwise, the Nigerian people are left with parties that are only as loyal as their members’ personal interests allow. 

Just as in a football game, where a player’s jersey symbolizes their team loyalty, Wike must remember the significance of his political “jersey.” For the sake of Nigerian democracy, he should embrace one party and give it his full allegiance, anything less is a betrayal of the values he once championed.

Minister of works Dave Umahi has raised an alarm over defective bridges in the country.

He said they may collapse if the federal government fails to address their deteriorating state, having been built over 53 years ago.

Umahi spoke yesterday while inspecting projects in Lagos where he was joined by the National Assembly Joint Committee Members on Works.

He highlighted the need for urgent intervention to rehabilitate defective bridges while advocating for the declaration of state of emergency on the Third Mainland and Carter bridge axis to fast-track essential underwater repairs to prevent further deterioration of road and marine infrastructure.

He warned on the huge financial and safety risks posed by continued delay of rehabilitation and repairs, adding that delay to take quick actions would cost the federal government over N30 trillion to rebuild Carter and Third Mainland Bridges.

Umahi also recommended swift repair of national bridges along geopolitical zones which he said would cost N341 billion to avoid looming disasters.

He said to avert catastrophe, N341 billion would be needed for repair of bridges nationwide.

Umahi further pointed out that the reinforcement of chlorination, carbonisation and marine attacks on the piles of the bridge had further weakened the structural elements of the bridges even as he stressed that illegal mining activities and excavation of sands along the shorelines had also paved way for the deterioration of the piles and pier caps.

He pointed out that the deterioration of the bridges’ pillars was due to illegal sand mining, natural underwater currents, and the rusting of the steel casings.

“When you construct shorelines with steel, over the years there will be attacks from water leading to carbonization and chlorination of critical infrastructure,” he added.

In his remarks, the chairman of the Joint National Assembly Committee on Works, Sen. Barinada Mpigi, applauded Umahi’s efforts to engage with the Senate House Committee on Works to tackle infrastructure deficit in the country.

He highlighted the significant financial burden that would fall on the federal government for the reconstruction of the Third Mainland and Carter bridges if they do not take swift action to rehabilitate the bridge.

Mpigi acknowledged the National Assembly’s readiness to back the Works Minister in declaring a state of emergency for the two bridges in Lagos.

Mpigi called for a state of emergency on the Carter and Third Mainland Bridge, adding that it was of urgent public importance.

[Leadership]

Guinea’s coup leader, Mamadi Doumbouya, has promoted himself to the rank of Army General as the West African country marked the creation of its armed forces.

Doumbouya, 43, seized power in September 2021 by overthrowing former president Alpha Conde who had placed the then-colonel in charge of an elite force tasked with protecting him.

AFP reports that in a decree on Friday evening, Doumbouya — whose supporters have urged him to run for president when the junta does cede the reins — was also awarded the Grand Cross of the National Order of the Colatier, the country’s highest honour.

This was for “his constant efforts to promote social cohesion and cooperation between peoples”.

Doumbouya is one of several officers who have seized power in West Africa since 2020, along with fellow military leaders in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger.

He has presided over an ongoing crackdown on dissent, with many opposition leaders detained, brought before the courts or forced into exile.

AFP

The rich also cry. I have seen wealthy and successful people break down in tears and despondency. You would think that some people have everything made in their favour; the sun smiles at everything that they do. The gods are queuing to crack the rich man’s kernels lest he bites his tongue while attempting the simple task.

Until very recently, Aliko was a synonym for good luck while Dangote could be used interchangeably with the word, wealth. Every Nigerian government, military or civilian, pampered the cement mogul. The Kano lad who rose from anonymity to become Africa’s richest businessman has never failed to fascinate, not just with his famed humility but also with his ability to empathise with the lower cadres of society and fund causes designed to uplift the economically marginalised.

I do not delude myself for a minute that Aliko Dangote is a saint. That is not a quality required of businessmen. I won’t yoke any billionaire with that additional burden. But I can’t describe him as a sinner either, because I don’t have any evidence to that effect. I do, however, have evidence that the man is a patriot, all things considered. It takes somebody who loves his country to invest the bulk of his vast wealth in the country of his birth when those funds could have been working for him in more predictable capitalist climes.

Given what the billionaire has gone through since it became apparent that his petroleum refinery was coming on stream, I often wonder what we would be telling budding investors who are watching the disgraceful drama about patriotism and investing at home. If Dangote could be treated as shabbily as he has been treated (that’s the consensus among Nigerians on social media) what hope does a less connected mortal have?

Doubtful ‘Experts’

The first shock was delivered by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL). Then followed other players in the industry. Suddenly, the same “experts” who had told us that most of our problems would be solved with the coming on stream of the Dangote Refinery, are now saying that Dangote is operating a monopoly. The same people who could not operate the government’s refineries successfully in spite of trillions of Naira thrown at the problem are now trying to teach Dangote how to operate his refinery and how to price his products.

I became suspicious of the sudden pretensions of patriotism by petrol retailers and their accomplices at the NNPCL who were presiding over the inflated figures of local consumption in the days of “subsidy-gate”. Now that we are likely to know the exact quantity of petroleum products locally consumed, the retailers have suddenly put on the garb of our defenders against high prices. When the going was bad, they fleeced us. Now, with a private refinery, they still want to determine the price. Dangote has 500 million litres of products sitting in the belly of his storage tanks while the retailers are mounting a strident media campaign.

With defenders like these retailers, we don’t need leeches. We may not be “experts” but we are not as dumb as some of them think we are.

My worry about the ongoing petroleum roulette is its implications for the future. If Dangote’s refinery falters on account of a perceived gang-up, you can kiss tomorrow’s potential mega investments goodbye. Already, Dangote has announced that he is no longer proceeding with an investment into steel production in Nigeria due to allegations that he is seeking to be a monopoly.

When the stories of these times are told, would it then be said that progress was stultified by the choice of the wrong scapegoat?

History was made yesterday as the United Kingdom’s Conservative Party announced the election of Kemi Badenoch as its leader ahead of her closest rival, Robert Jenrick.
Badenoch, who received 53,806 votes to defeat Robert Jenrick who got 41,388, succeeds Rishi Sunak as leader of the opposition party.

The former British Business Secretary is the first black woman to lead a major political party in the UK and takes charge of a Conservative Party reeling from its worst-ever election defeat.
Born in Wimbledon, London, on January 2, 1980, to Nigerian parents, she spent her childhood in Lagos and the United States until she returned to the UK at the age of 16.

Badenoch is also the first Black woman to head a party that has had three other female leaders – Margaret Thatcher, Theresa May, and Liz Truss.  
During her campaign, Badenoch pledged to return the Conservatives to “first principles” and launch a series of reviews in the coming months to shape a new policy platform.
The North West Essex MP is also the sixth Tory leader in less than eight and a half years and faces the challenge of uniting a fractured party.

“It is the most enormous honour to be elected to this role, to lead the party that I love, the party that has given me so much,” a smiling Badenoch said to a group of Conservative Party members after being announced the winner.
“I hope that I will be able to repay that debt,” she added.
The Labour Party’s landslide victory gave it a huge majority in Parliament and the Tories face at least four years in opposition before the next election is due.

However, James Cleverly revealed the day before the results that he would be returning to the backbenches.
Badenoch has vowed to rebuild the Tory Party on more authentically conservative foundations, saying her training as a computer engineer had taught her how to fix problems.
She spoke often of “first principles” like freedom and individual responsibility.
And she has not hesitated to wade into thorny issues like transgender rights or Britain’s colonial legacy, deploring “woke” ideology and “nasty identity politics.”

Despite the challenges, Badenoch’s no-nonsense approach has earned her a loyal base among the Conservatives.
Known for her outspoken positions on identity politics and her desire to reduce state influence, she appeals to a faction within the party that believes a decisive rightward turn is necessary to reconnect with disillusioned voters.
She has a history of tense interactions with media figures, celebrities, and even some government officials during her time as a trade minister, but this has only bolstered her support among members who are wary of institutional and media influences.

“The first black leader of a Westminster party is a proud moment for our country.
“I look forward to working with you and your party in the interests of the British people.”
Ellie Reeves, who is chair of the Labour Party, delivered a more political attack: “It’s been a summer of yet more Conservative chaos and division.

“They could have spent the past four months listening to the public, taking responsibility for the mess they made, and changing their party.
“Instead, Kemi Badenoch’s election as leader shows they’re incapable of change.
“Meanwhile, the Labour Government is getting on with fixing the foundations of our economy and cleaning up the mess the Tories left behind.”

The combative former equalities minister now faces the daunting task of reuniting a divided and weakened party that was emphatically ousted from power in July after 14 years in charge.
Badenoch will become the official leader of the opposition and face off against Labour’s Starmer in the House of Commons every Wednesday for the traditional Prime Minister’s Questions.
However, she will be leading a much-reduced cohort of Tory MPs in the chamber following the party’s dismal election showing.

She describes herself as a straight-talker, a trait that has caused controversy on the campaign trail.
When addressing immigration, Badenoch said that “not all cultures are equally valid” when deciding who should be allowed to live in the UK.
She was widely criticised after suggesting that statutory maternity pay on small businesses was “excessive” and sparked a further furore when she joked that up to 10 per cent of Britain’s half a million civil servants were so bad that they “should be in prison.”

Just when you are tempted to give up on Nigeria, something happens and your hope survives another brutal assault yet again. The incident involving Hon. Alex Mascot Ikwechegh has once more assured me that Nigeria is not a lost case. We know what is right, even if we fail to do it. We know what is wrong, even if we fail to condemn it. Above all, we can still speak with one voice when we experience a common affliction — regardless of our differences. I have, many times, been on the verge of giving up on Nigeria whenever I see hate-filled exchanges on social media, but something happens and I tell myself: relax, boy, this is not exactly who we are; this is just social media cruise.

A recap. Ikwechegh, a member of the house of reps (Abia north and south), assaulted Mr Stephen Abuwatseya, a cab driver, for refusing to deliver a consignment of “snails” to his living room. Abuwatseya had asked him to come outside to receive it, as it is done everywhere in the world. Ikwechegh, a typically Nigerian “big man”, felt disrespected. He phoned the “snail” seller to complain about the “stupid idiot”. He then added, ominously: “Can you imagine this rat? I can make this man disappear in the whole of Nigeria and nothing would happen.” It was not a threat: many Nigerians are regularly “disappeared” by big men and, usually, nothing happens. It is the height of impunity.

Ikwechegh then said what many Nigerians, particularly big men (and women), love to say: “Do you know who I am?” Who are you? Are you God? Grandstanding is Nigerian culture. Ikwechegh is a just mascot for this. Even girlfriends/boyfriends of politicians who go around town with police protection will ask you: “Do you know who I am?” Ikwechegh issued another threat: “I will slap the hell out of you, lie you down, and lock you in my generator house.” Like I wrote in my previous article, for the typical Nigerian politician, “power is a licence to become a deity, to amass and flaunt obscene wealth in the midst of wretched poverty, and to deploy raw state power to oppress or suppress others”.

Abuwatseya made it known that the lawmaker/lawbreaker was on video and started commentating on the triple slap. Ikwechegh got up and arrogantly introduced himself as “Honourable (indeed) Alex Ikwechegh, a member of the house of representatives” — in case viewers harboured any doubts about his monumentality. The mascot of a man dared Abuwatseya to call the inspector-general of police. He knew what he was doing. If you report a big man to police in Nigeria, you are kidding. There is no crime big people commit that a phone call cannot wash off. In fact, by special arrangement, the complainant can become the defendant. The subject will become the predicate.

When the video of the encounter got to social media, I was happy and worried at the same time. I was happy that there is video evidence. I was happy that this would draw the attention of activists and the authorities. That is the good that comes with the age of social media. Gone are the days when evidence is difficult to produce and it would be “my word against yours”. Despite the risk of manipulation and AI, video evidence is very much valuable because it can be verified and subjected to forensic analysis. When I saw the video, I did not need any special skill to know it would go viral, draw the ire of Nigerians and produce some response — even if cosmetic — from the authorities.

But I was worried at the same time. I felt this might be another golden opportunity for the social media thugs to ramp up hate exchanges, usually along ethnic lines. It happens all the time. A matter that is unrelated to race or religion can be twisted by the merchants of malice to propagate bigotry and bile. It has become a favourite pastime for those in the dirty corners of social media. It gives them a sense of fulfilment in life. I was afraid that Ikwechegh, being Igbo, would draw ethnic slurs and another war would erupt in the cyberspace, obscuring the real issue of abuse of power and privilege that ails the country. I initially avoided going on social media but I later manned up.

To my delight, the Ikwechegh affair did not follow the rule. It deviated from the predictable pattern. What I saw was collective anger. It is not impossible that the bigots still had their say, but they must have been so consigned to oblivion that they did not trend. Once again, I saw Nigerians demonstrate what I have always believed: that our core problem is not ethnicity, religion or region — contrary to what we have been manipulated and brainwashed to believe. Our problems cut across the divides. We live in an unequal society where members of the ruling class lord it over us. And rather than confront them, we are so often distracted by politics that we end up confronting each other.

In reality, we live in a country where there are two countries — the one for the powerful and the power-drunk; and the other for the others. It is a case of “we and they”. No matter their ethnic and religious differences, they enjoy similar privileges: state power and the treasury are at their beck and call, so they can go to Canada on “self-sponsored” trip to study the legislature in a parliamentary system, even though Nigeria practises presidentialism. No matter our ethnic and religious differences, we suffer from similar afflictions: abuse of power, poverty, unemployment, bad roads, bad schools, neglected hospitals, lack of clean water, insecurity, and other things that define misrule.

We are plagued by waste and corruption in every region, but, somehow, we have been brainwashed to think that our problem is because someone is Hausa or Igbo or Yoruba, Muslim or Christian, southerner or northerner. Our brains have been politically engineered to believe that one part of the country is the problem of the other. We are blind to the realities we face every day on our streets and in our local governments, state legislative constituencies, federal constituencies, senatorial districts, states and zones. At election times, we often queue behind “our sons”, “our daughters” and “our brethren” — which is certainly not a crime — but do we hold them accountable afterwards?

I can go on from state to state and zone to zone to show how ethnic champions use power and state resources for personal benefit while taking full advantage of the sectional sentiments of the people on the streets. Sadly, sectional sentiments are the preoccupation of lot of Nigerians, particularly on social media. As a result, most Nigerians are unable to talk with one voice, to genuinely confront misrule, to demand good governance. Our leaders surely like it that way: divide and conquer. Let the people be busy abusing each other and insulting their mothers and grandmothers while abuse and misuse of power continues. Until we wake up from our slumber, we will remain where we are.

I like the general reaction to the Ikwechegh episode so much because I saw the Nigeria I have always yearned for: a country where people can, at least, cast aside bigoted lenses to be able to see and attack a problem that ails our country. How I wish we would do this more often in the other matters that beset us and drag us backward in the quest for development, peace and progress. We definitely have primordial hangovers (I can’t deny that) but I have always insisted that that is not our primary problem. There is no country in the world that is not living with a form of cleavage sentiments, but countries where people are able to focus more on good governance always make progress.

The Ikwechegh affair and our response to it really gladdened my heart. I have seen it several times before. When Sadiq Daba, the late actor, was sick to the point of death some years ago, Nigerians from everywhere rallied around him. Nobody discussed his ethnicity or religion. That is who we are as Nigerians if you take away the political manipulation of our brains. We are all celebrating the global strides of Afrobeats and Nollywood as Nigerians, not because the stars are from our village. That is who we are deep down — without the brainwashing. I don’t know how we allowed the agents of division to hijack the airwaves. We simply surrendered the space to them.

Lest I forget, there is an update: Ikwechegh has apologised. He has also been arraigned on a three-count charge of abuse of office, assault and threat to life. We should remain vigilant as the law take its course. Remember, Hon. Farouk Lawan was jailed for five years for corruption. If we can direct our collective energies in the right direction, there is a lot we can achieve in our desire to clean up this society. But we are rather more tickled by ethnic hate instead of facing the challenges of promoting good governance. That is why I am so delighted that we suspended our differences once again to call a spade a spade in the Ikwechegh affair. That is the Nigeria I dream of and the Nigeria I love to see.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

PRISONERS OF WAR?

Protesters arrested during the #EndBadGovernance rallies in August were finally arraigned in court on Friday. My heart sank on seeing those skeletons. Some collapsed in court. Police said the fainting was stage-managed. Were the skeletons AI-generated? Protesters being treated like prisoners of war in their own country is an all-time low for Nigerian democracy. All suspects, whether adults or minors, have a right to be treated like human beings, no matter the allegations against them. Charging this calibre of people with treason because they flew the Russian flag is ridiculous. What do they know about Russia? Why not go after their sponsors if you want to prove treason? Shame!

FROZEN RIVERS

It has happened again — another court has delivered another weird judgement on Rivers state. Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the federal high court, Abuja, has ruled that federation allocations due to the state should not be released until the passage of a lawful appropriation act by a validly constituted house of assembly. How can a judge rule that constitutionally guaranteed allocations should not be released when the issue at stake is not the allocations but the budget? You can say a budget cannot be implemented because it was not properly passed. At this rate, a judge will soon rule that Rivers state be abolished. The political authorities are playing with fire. Dangerous. 

HARRIS OR TRUMP?

Weeks ago, it looked like Vice President Kamala Harris was all set to clinch the US presidency after entering the race on a high momentum, but former President Donald Trump has caught up with her. This takes us to a November 5 presidential race that is as tight as hair and skin (apologies to Brymo). Trump may be the top choice of racists, bigots and misogynists, but the economy is a major issue in this election and many “neutral” Americans believe he will do a better job based on his record in office. Harris enjoys the support of liberals, immigrants and ethnic minorities but it appears being female — and a black female at that — means she has a mountain to climb. Unpredictable.

NO COMMENT

The senate screening of ministerial nominee, Mrs Bianca Odumegwu-Ojukwu, shows an urgent need for our lawmakers to undergo gender sensitivity orientation. During introductions, Senator Osita Ngwu was praising her beauty instead of reading her résumé. Senator Victor Umeh also said: “I asked her to tone down her beauty when she comes.” These statements all sound like compliments, but they are patronising and actually objectifying. She is beautiful, we know. She was the Most Beautiful Girl in Nigeria 1988, Miss Africa 1988 and Miss Intercontinental 1989. But she was at the senate as a ministerial nominee — and they were salivating at her beauty instead of her credentials. Wonderful.

No matter who wins the November 5^th presidential election in the United States of America, history will be made. If Kamala Harris carries the day, she will become America’s first female president and the second person of colour to occupy that storied office. If Donald Trump triumphs, he will become the second US former president to win two non-consecutive terms, the first being Grover Cleveland who lost his re-election bid in 1888 but regained the office in the 1892 election (and who also happened to be the first and only American president to have gotten married while in the White House).

But the historic significance of whatever happens on Tuesday goes beyond the personal record that will be set by one of the two candidates. It is more about what it says about the state of politics in the US, about what is likely to happen after the election is called, and what the outcome will mean for rest of the world. Post-World War II, America has held outsized significance for global economic and political order. America’s presidential elections are thus closely monitored around world. But there is an extra significance this time around. The world is in a fragile place. How America votes on Tuesday is likely to moderate or deepen this fragility.

The global political and economic order will be the last thing on the minds of the majority of the 180 million Americans who will elect the next president. This is understandable. America itself is in a strange place. It is largely an insular and polarised country, but it is more insular and more polarised today than at any other period in modern times. American voters will be preoccupied with how to navigate the contours of the strange territory they have found themselves. They have pressing local issues to sort out, and the world can wait. In any case, they are electing the next president of the USA, not of the world, and they are the only ones with votes in this pivotal election.

However, the rest of the world will be impacted—for ill or for good, slightly or significantly—by how the Americans vote. This itself is a strange place to be. Others are mere spectators in a game that is likely to have real effects on their fortunes. And unlike spectators in say a football game, they can’t even shape the outcome with the decibel of their support. They can only hope for their preferred side to edge out the other side. But there is another useful thing they can do: they can start to actively prepare for what victory for either Harris or Trump may portend for the global order in general and for their individual countries in particular.

This is more so because the election can go either way, and it is important not to be caught napping. As at this morning, the election, according to most aggregate polls, remains a toss-up. It is a rare sight in American elections for projections to be this tight just a few days to the presidential election. It is important to acknowledge that American election projections/polls have been off a few times either because of errors in polling methods or the bias of pollsters. But in most instances, the majority of pollsters call the election one way or the other ahead of polling day.

We won’t know if the supporters of a candidate have been over-sampled or under-sampled until the actual results are declared. The way things stand, it is safe to project that the election remains close and that the outcome may be decided by which of the candidates/parties succeeds in wooing the few remaining undecided voters to their side and whose get-out-the-vote (GOTV) machine is more effective. At the end of the day, this election may be decided by either the level of turnout overall or by a few thousand voters in the seven battleground states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.   

How Donald Trump has stayed this strong to the extent that he stands a good chance of winning the election still confounds many watchers of US politics. Against an established American tradition, Trump denied losing the 2020 election and said his victory was stolen. He rallied his supporters to ‘Stop the Steal,’ tried to bully state officials to tilt the election in his favour, and gave more than a wink to those who stormed the Capitol on January 6^th, 2021. These were acts thought unimaginable in America, even in the earliest days of its democratic experiment. Trump has a string of indictments and convictions around his neck, he remains a polarising figure, he keeps saying outrageous things against his opponents and those who disagree with him, including threatening those he has termed enemies of the state, and many of the senior officials who worked with him during his first term have said he is unfit for that esteemed office.

Ordinarily, by American and Western standards, Trump’s political career should be dead and buried by now. But the death of his political life has been widely exaggerated. He has remained a major political force and he may as well make a historic return to the White House, and even if he doesn’t make it, he will come closer than the other five US former presidents who tried unsuccessfully to make a return to the White House (and let’s hope his failure will not be followed by the kind of political violence usually associated with the Third World).

There are many reasons for Trump’s improbable resilience in American politics. One, Trump has successfully narrativized the 2020 election as stolen and his trials as persecution. There are those who see him as a victim. Two, his undiplomatic language/approach is seen as a departure from the usual guile of politicians, and most Americans have become so immune to his bad form that they readily give him a pass. Three, American politics is more polarised than ever, and he retains near total control of the Republican Party and has a strong appeal for those who feel they got the short end of globalisation.

So, his gratuitous slander of immigrants and his promise to deport record number of illegal immigrants and impose high tariffs on imports (especially from China) strikes a chord with many blue-collar workers who think outsiders are stealing their jobs. Some have framed this racist pushback, because the core of Trump’s MAGA crowd is white and male. But things are more nuanced, as evident from the support that Trump is now receiving from black and Latino males and from Muslims.

A major driver of Trump’s strong appeal is the state of the economy post-pandemic. America’s economy has recovered well, it is growing at a decent clip (2.8% in Q3-2024), and it is still the envy of the world. Inflation has tracked down from a peak of 9.1% to 2.4%, and after keeping interest rates high for a long time, the Federal Reserves cut the benchmark rate by 0.5% in September and is projected to make further cuts next week. But these macro data is not making as much dent on the standard of living of average Americans who still remember when, not long ago, they used to buy basic things at much lower prices and didn’t have as much struggle paying their bills. That era, just a few years ago, happened to coincide with when Trump was president. Also, many entrepreneurs think Trump will be better for their bottomline.

So, while a significant number of Americans who will vote for Trump do not approve of his style and morality, they think he will be better for their welfare. It is a form of nostalgia, which may not stand close interrogation. But it doesn’t matter. Politics is largely about perception. The key message of the Democrats, especially their flagbearer, has been about how nasty a person Trump is and about how much threat he poses to democracy. Character and institutions still remain important. But they become abstracts when compared to bread and butter issues and they do not resonate with people as much as their ability to pay their bills without stress. Politics is personal.

Other factors that have helped Trump include the obvious cognitive deterioration of President Joe Biden, which forced him off the race four months to the election, the anger of the youth (who believe that Biden didn’t do enough to protect the Palestinians and thus are not excited about turning out for the Democrats) and the short time that Harris has had to define herself as well as her difficulty in erecting a distance between her and an administration in which she is effectively a co-pilot. But she may still be able to swing the presidency her way, especially if women who think that Trump constitutes a threat to their reproductive freedom pour out in record number for her and if she outperforms Trump in most of the battleground states.

There are analysts who feel that the outcome of the election will not have much effect on America’s domestic and foreign policies. They base their analysis on the hope that even Trump will not be able to carry out his many threats either because the institutional guardrails of America will hold firm or because commonsense will prevail. They may end up being right. At the domestic level, there is not much difference in the policy proposals of the two candidates, as Trump has successfully remade American policy landscape in his image, (a case that The Economist made persuasively recently through a review of policy proposals in eight policy areas), and the fact that the Democratic Party has moved mostly to the right to counter the Trump effect. In any case, American politics and economy are sturdy enough to withstand the next four years. America, largely, will be fine.

At the foreign level, however, is where we should worry and brace up for a tumultuous ride. Harris offers a safer bet for the global order. Even if there will be tweaks on her approach to Israel and Ukraine, she is likely to continue on the same path as Biden. But Trump presents a different proposition. While it will sound great to some Americans, Trump’s threat to impose 20% tariffs on all imports and 60% tariffs on imports from China may not only trigger a tariff war that the world does not need but also put free trade and the fragile global economy at risk. His ultra-nationalistic posture will have serious implications for multi-lateral institutions like the United Nations and for traction on global causes like climate change.

The delicate balance of a multipolar world is also likely to be strained under a Trump presidency, and it is important to proactively think about how Trump’s approach and preferences will impact US relations with Europe and China on one hand and the ongoing/potential wars between Russia and Ukraine and between Israel, Palestine, Lebanon and Iran on the other. In capitals around the world, foreign policy experts should be mapping the various scenarios, thinking through their possible responses and preparing for whatever choice America makes on Tuesday. The rest of the world doesn’t have a vote in America’s most consequential election in generations. But it can at least ready itself for the outcome.

Naija News reports that May made this revelation in an interview with Nigerian comedian, Ayo Makun, better known as AY, on his podcast.

May said she has been turning down several movie roles for the past three years.

The businesswoman cum social media influencer added that she does not want to be an actress, even though she is a jack of all trades.

She said, “Omoni said she doesn’t know how I am going to do it, I can’t tell her No. I told her that for the past 3 years, I had gotten script and movie roles, and people were willing to pay mouthwatering amounts. You know, producers have been calling, directors have been calling, some familiar faces have called, and I have rejected everything.

“I said I didn’t want to be an actor or actress. I know that I am this kind of jack of all trades, master of all kinds, type of person. There are a whole lot of things I can do if I set my mind on it.”

[NaijaNews]

The Presidency has denied the allegation that the current administration is favouring the South West at the expense of other regions in terms of appointments in the security sector.

After the appointment of Major General Olufemi Oluyede as Acting Chief of Army Staff, many persons, especially on Social Media, accused President Bola Tinubu of “Yorubanisation”, a term which losely interprets as favouring the Yoruba.

Oluyede was appointed to stand in for General Tahoreed Lagbaja, Chief of Army Staff, who has been away from the country treating an undisclosed ailment.

Some Nigerian had argued that there were equally competent generals who could stand in for Lagbaja other than another person from the South West.

Apparently weighing into the conversation, Sunday Dare, Special Adviser to the President on Public Communications and Orientation, shared a list of the heads of security agencies appointed by Tinubu.

According to the list, the North West has the highest appointees (eight), followed by the South West (five) and North Central (four).

North East has three appointees, according to the presidential aide’s list, while South South and South East have one each.

“Facts do not lie. Below we see laid bare the facts about the regional outlook of President Tinubu’s appointments within 20 security agencies. The label of him favouring Yorubas in the Security set up does not fit. Nigeria we hail thee!,” Dare captioned the post.

[DailyTrust]

Dangote Refinery on Saturday tagged as fake the allegation that it sells petrol between N1, 015 and N1, 028/litre.

Some oil marketers had reportedly on Friday said the price of petrol, produced by the Dangote Refinery stood between N1, 015 and N1, 028/litre.

They said it would be reasonable to import the product from the international market as the landing cost stood at N978.01/litre as of October 31, 2024.

Reacting to the development, Dangote Group on its X handle dismissed the allegation as ‘fake news’.

DAILY POST reported that the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria, IPMAN, had claimed that the price of fuel from Dangote Refinery, as of last week, was higher than in other places.

Yakubu Suleiman, National Assistant Secretary of IPMAN stated this on Friday while fielding questions on Arise Television’s Morning Show programme.

Suleiman said IPMAN members would go where the price is lower and where they get profit, adding that they have to pity Nigerians.

[DailyPost]