This man won't give up, would he? It's foolhardy for him to keep contesting every four years without using a new strategy. This man beat GEJ in the core north but fell short to capture votes in the south. Infact, the votes he got in the south compared to the votes that GEJ got in the north in 2011 just shows that he's not widely accepted. Imagine, getting an average of three thousand votes in east state in the south. Now, that's abbysmal. If he wants to turn the tide this time around, he should reach out to rest of the country. He should pick a very well known southerner and not Buhari who has no pedigree in politics. Imagine if Buhari picks a Tinubu as his vice. That will go a long way to helping his case in the south-west if not the entire south. I wish him luck this time around. Btw, i voted for him in 2011.

GREAT! GREAT! GREAT!.I AM VERY HAPPY BUHARI HAS DECLARE TO RUN IN 2015.THANK GOD THIS COUNTRY STILL HAS HOPE.I HAVE NEVER SEEN AN HONEST FORMER MILITARY LEADER LIKE GENERAL BUHARI.THANK GOD THIS COUNTRY SILL HAS HOPE.NIGERIANS LET US WISE UP,THE RIGHT MAN HAS DECLARE AGAIN.GOD IS GIVING US ANOTHER CHANCE.BUHARI/BAKARE FOR 2015!BAHARI/BAKARE FOR 2015!BUHARI/BAKARE FOR 2015.LET THE CAMPAIGN START NOW.THIS ARE THE PEOPLE WE NEED.

Buhari is perhaps the only Nigerian leader that has a clear-cut economic ideology:

Buharism is a term rooted in the Politics of Nigeria, referring to the economic principles and the political ideology of the military government of Nigeria headed by General Muhammadu Buhari from 31 December 1983 to 27 August 1985. This ideology shares common features with Fascism. The government was a right-wing nationalist government that pursued bourgeois economic programs and curtailed personal freedoms.[1] It was characterised by radical but progressive move away from a political economy dominated by a parasitic and subservient elite to one in which a nationalist and productive class gains ascendancy. Buharism represented a two-way struggle: with external global capitalism and with its parasitic and unpatriotic internal agents and spokespersons.[2]
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Economic Theory
* 2 See also
* 3 References
* 4 External links

[edit] Economic Theory

Buharism rejected the forceful approach of the Washington Consensus, but rather held that for a crisis-wrecked country to successfully improve its Balance of Payments through devaluation, there must first exist a condition that the price of every country’s export is denominated in its own currency. As such condition do not exist, Buharism believed that, for any country that Washington Consensus conditions do not exist clearly enough, there are alternate and superior approaches to solving the problem of its economic crisis.[2] Therefore, instead of applying devaluation to get the then crisis-wrecked Economy of Nigeria back on track, Buharism rather employed a policy of curbing imports of needless goods, curtailing oil theft and improving exports through counter trade policy of bartering seized illegally bunkered crude oil for needful goods like machineries, enabling it to export above its OPEC quota.[3]

Source: wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buharism

This Sanusi's article on Buhari(2002) remains the most seminal discussion of the man Buhari, beyond idle talks about his personalities.



BUHARISM: Economic Theory and Political Economy

By

Sanusi Lamido Sanusi
2002

I have followed with more than a little interest the many contributions of commentators on the surprising decision of General Muhammadu Buhari to jump into the murky waters of Nigerian politics. Most of the regular writers in the Trust stable have had something to say on this. The political adviser to a late general has transferred his services to a living one. My dear friend and prolific veterinary doctor, who like me is allegedly an ideologue of Fulani supremacy, has taken a leading emir to the cleaners based on information of suspect authenticity. Another friend has contributed an articulate piece, which for those in the know gives a bird’s eye view into the thinking within the IBB camp. A young northern Turk has made several interventions and given novel expressions to what I call the PTF connection. Some readers and writers alike have done Buhari incalculable damage by viewing his politics through the narrow prism of ethnicity and religion, risking the alienation of whole sections of the Nigerian polity without whose votes their candidate cannot succeed.



With one or two notable exceptions, the various positions for or against Buhari have focused on his personality and continued to reveal a certain aversion or disdain for deeper and more thorough analysis of his regime. The reality, as noted by Tolstoy, is that too often history is erroneously reduced to single individuals. By losing sight of the multiplicity of individuals, events, actions and inactions (deliberate or otherwise) that combine to produce a set of historical circumstances, the historian is able to create a mythical figure and turn him into an everlasting hero (like Lincoln) or a villain (like Hitler). The same is true of Buhari. There seems to be a dangerous trend of competition between two opposing camps aimed at glorifying him beyond his wildest dreams or demonizing him beyond all justifiable limits, through a selective reading of history and opportunistic attribution and misattribution of responsibility. The discourse has been thus impoverished through personalization and we are no closer at the end of it than at the beginning to a divination of the exact locus or nexus of his administration in the flow of Nigerian history. This is what I seek to achieve in this intervention through an exposition of the theoretical underpinnings of the economic policy of Buharism and the necessary correlation between the economic decisions made and the concomitant legal and political superstructure.



Taxonomy

Let me begin by stating up front the principal thesis that I will propound. Within the schema of discourses on Nigerian history, the most accurate problematization of the Buhari government is one that views it strictly as a regime founded on the ideology of Bourgeois Nationalism. In this sense it was a true off-shoot of the regime of Murtala Mohammed. Buharism was a stage the logical outcome of whose machinations would have been a transcendence of what Marx called the stage of Primitive Accumulation in his Theories of Surplus Value. It was radical, not in the sense of being socialist or left wing, but in the sense of being a progressive move away from a political economy dominated by a parasitic and subservient elite to one in which a nationalist and productive class gains ascendancy. Buharism represented a two-way struggle: with Global capitalism (externally) and with its parasitic and unpatriotic agents and spokespersons (internally). The struggle against global capital as represented by the unholy trinity of the IMF, the World Bank and multilateral "trade" organizations as well that against the entrenched domestic class of contractors, commission agents and corrupt public officers were vicious and thus required extreme measures. Draconian policies were a necessary component of this struggle for transformation and this has been the case with all such epochs in history. The Meiji restoration in Japan was not conducted in a liberal environment. The Industrial Revolution in Europe and the great economic progress of the empires were not attained in the same liberal atmosphere of the 21st Century. The "tiger economies" of Asia such as Taiwan, South Korea, Indonesia and Thailand are not exactly models of democratic freedom. To this extent Buharism was a despotic regime but its despotism was historically determined, necessitated by the historical task of dismantling the structures of dependency and launching the nation on to a path beyond primitive accumulation. At his best Buhari may have been a Bonaparte or a Bismarck. At his worst he may have been a Hitler or a Mussolini. In either case Buharism drawn to its logical conclusion would have provided the bedrock for a new society and its overthrow marked a relapse, a step backward into that era from which we sought escape and in which, sadly for all of us we remain embedded and enslaved. I will now proceed with an elaboration of Buharism as a manifestation of bourgeois economics and political economy.



The Economic Theory of Buharism

One of the greatest myths spun around Buharism was that it lacked a sound basis in economic theory. As evidence of this, the regime that succeeded Buhari employed the services of economic "gurus" of "international standard" as the architects of fiscal and monetary policy. These were IMF and World Bank economists like Dr. Chu Okongwu and Dr Kalu Idika Kalu, as well as Mr SAP himself, Chief Olu Falae (an economist trained at Yale). At the time Buhari’s Finance Minister, Dr Onaolapo Soleye (who was not a trained economist) was debating with the pro-IMF lobby and explaining why the naira would not be devalued I was teaching economics at the Ahmadu Bello University. I had no doubt in my mind that the position of Buharism was based on a sound understanding of neo-classical economics and that those who were pushing for devaluation either did not understand their subject or were acting deliberately as agents of international capital in its rampage against all barriers set up by sovereign states to protect the integrity of the domestic economy. I still believe some of the key economic policy experts of the IBB administration were economic saboteurs who should be tried for treason. When the IMF recently owned up to "mistakes" in its policy prescriptions all patriotic economists saw it for what it was: A hypocritical statement of remorse after attaining set objectives. Let me explain, briefly, the economic theory underlying Buhari’s refusal to devalue the naira and then show how the policy merely served the interest of global capitalism and its domestic agents. This will be the principal building block of our taxonomy.



In brief, neo-classical theory holds that a country can, under certain conditions, expect to improve its Balance of Payments through devaluation of its currency. The IMF believed that given the pressure on the country’s foreign reserves and its adverse balance of payments situation Nigeria must devalue its currency. Buharism held otherwise and insisted that the conditions for improving Balance of Payments through devaluation did not exist and that there were alternate and superior approaches to the problem. Let me explain.



The first condition that must exist is that the price of every country’s export is denominated in its currency. If Nigeria’s exports are priced in naira and its imports from the US in dollars then, ceteris paribus, a devaluation of the naira makes imports dearer to Nigerians and makes Nigerian goods cheaper to Americans. This would then lead to an increase in the quantum of exports to the US and a reduction in the quantum of imports from there per unit of time. But while this is a necessary condition, it is not a sufficient one. For a positive change in the balance of payments, the increase in the quantum of exports must be substantial enough to outweigh the revenue lost through a reduction in price. In other words the quantity exported must increase at a rate faster than the rate of decrease in its price. Similarly imports must fall faster than their price is increasing. Otherwise the nation may be devoting more of its wealth to importing less and receiving less of the wealth of foreigners for exporting more! In consequence, devaluation by a country whose exports and imports are not price elastic leads to the continued impoverishment of the nation viz a viz its trading partners. The second, and sufficient, condition is therefore that the combined price elasticity of demand for exports and imports must exceed unity.



The argument of Buharism, for which it was castigated by global capital and its domestic agents, was that these conditions did not exist clearly enough for Nigeria to take the gamble. First our major export, oil, was priced in dollars and the volume exported was determined ab initio by the quota set by OPEC, a cartel to which we belonged. Neither the price nor the volume of our exports would be affected by a devaluation of the naira. As for imports, indeed they would become dearer. However the manufacturing base depended on imported raw materials. Also many essential food items were imported. The demand for imports was therefore inelastic. We would end up spending more of our national income to import less, in the process fuelling inflation, creating excess capacity and unemployment, wiping out the production base of the real sector and causing hardship to the consumer through the erosion of real disposable incomes. Given the structural dislocations in income distribution in Nigeria the only groups who would benefit from devaluation were the rich parasites who had enough liquidity to continue with their conspicuous consumption, the large multi-national corporations with an unlimited access to loanable funds and the foreign "investor" who can now purchase our grossly cheapened and undervalued domestic assets. In one stroke we would wipe out the middle class, destroy indigenous manufacturing, undervalue the national wealth and create inflation and unemployment. This is standard economic theory and it is exactly what happened to Nigeria after it went through the hands of our IMF economists under IBB. The decision not to devalue set Buharism on a collision course with those who wanted devaluation and would profit from it-namely global capitalism, the so-called "captains of industry" (an acronym for the errand boys of multinational corporations), the nouveaux-riches parasites who had naira and dollars waiting to be spent, the rump elements of feudalism and so on. Buharism therefore was a crisis in the dominant class, a fracturing of its members into a patriotic, nationalist group and a dependent, parasitic and corrupt one. It was not a struggle between classes but within the same class. A victory for Buharism would be a victory for the more progressive elements of the national bourgeoisie. Unfortunately the fifth columnists within the military establishment were allied to the backward and retrogressive elements and succeeded in defeating Buharism before it took firm root. But I digress.



Having decided not to devalue or to rush into privatization and liberalization Buharism still faced an economic crisis it must address. There was pressure on foreign reserves, mounting foreign debt and a Balance of Payments crisis. Clearly the demand for foreign exchange outstripped its supply. The government therefore adopted demand management measures. The basic principle was that we did not really need all that we imported and if we could ensure that our scarce foreign exchange was only allocated to what we really needed we would be able to pay our debts and lay the foundations for economic stability. But this line of action also has its drawbacks.



First, there are political costs to be borne in terms of opposition from those who feel unfairly excluded from the allocation process and who do not share the government’s sense of priorities. Muslims for example cursed Buhari’s government for restricting the number of pilgrims in order to conserve foreign exchange.



Second, in all attempts to manage demand through quotas and quantitative restrictions there is room for abuse because there is always the incentive of a premium to be earned through circumvention of due process. Import licenses become "hot cake" and the black market for foreign exchange highly lucrative. This policy can only succeed if backed by strong deterrent laws and strict and enforcible exchange rules. Again it is trite micro-economic theory that where price is fixed below equilibrium the market is only cleared through quotas and the potential exists for round tripping as there will be a minority willing and able to offer a very high price for the "artificially scarce" product. So again we see that the harsh exchange control and economic sabotage laws of Buharism were a necessary and logical fallout of its economic theory.



Conclusion

I have tried to show in this intervention what I consider to be the principal building blocks of the military government of Muhammadu Buhari and the logical connection between its ideology, its economic theory and the legal and political superstructure that characterized it. My objective is to raise the intellectual profile of discourse beyond its present focus on personalities by letting readers see the intricate links between disparate and seemingly unrelated aspects of that government, thus contextualizing the actions of Buharism in its specific historical and ideological milieu. I have tried to review its treatment of politicians as part of a general struggle against primitive accumulation and its harsh laws on exchange and economic crimes as a necessary fallout of economic policy options. Similarly its treatment of drug pushers reflected the patriotic zeal of a bourgeois nationalist establishment.



As happens in all such cases a number of innocent people become victims of draconian laws, such as a few honest leaders like Shehu Shagari and Balarabe Musa who were improperly detained. The reality however is that many of those claiming to be victims today were looters who deserved to go to jail but who would like to hide under the cover of a few glaring errors. The failure of key members of the Buhari administration to tender public and unreserved apology to those who may have been improperly detained has not helped matters in this regard.



This raises a question I have often been asked. Do I support Buhari’s decision to contest for the presidency of Nigeria? My answer is no. And I will explain.



First, I believe Buhari played a creditable role in a particular historical epoch but like Tolstoy and Marx I do not believe he can re-enact that role at will. Men do not make history exactly as they please but, as Marx wrote in the 18th Brumaire, "in circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past." Muhammadu Buhari as a military general had more room for manoevre than he can ever hope for in Nigerian Politics.



Second, I am convinced that the situation of Nigeria and its elite today is worse than it was in 1983.Compared to the politicians who populate the PDP, ANPP and AD today, second republic politicians were angels. Buhari waged a battle against second republic politicians, but he is joining this generation. Anyone who rides a tiger ends up in its belly, and one man cannot change the system from within. A number of those Buhari jailed for theft later became ministers and many of those who hold key offices in all tiers of government and the legislature were made by the very system he sought to destroy. My view is that Nigeria needs people like Buhari in politics but not to contest elections. Buhari should be in politics to develop Civil Society and strengthen the conscience of the nation. He should try to develop many Buharis who will continue to challenge the elements that have hijacked the nation.



Third, I do not think Nigerians today are ready for Buhari. Everywhere you turn you see thieves who have amassed wealth in the last four years, be they legislators, Local Government chairmen and councilors, or governors and ministers. But these are the heroes in their societies. They are the religious leaders and ethnic champions and Nigerians, especially northerners, will castigate and discredit anyone who challenges them. Unless we start by educating our people and changing their value system, people like Buhari will remain the victims of their own love for Nigeria.



Fourth, and on a lighter note, I am opposed to recycled material. In a nation of 120million people we can do better than restrict our leadership to a small group. I think Buhari, Babangida and yes, Obasanjo should simply allow others try their hand instead of believing they have the monopoly of wisdom.



Having said all this let me conclude by saying that if Buhari gets a nomination he will have my vote (for what it is worth). I will vote for him not, like some have averred, because he is a northerner and a Muslim or because I think his candidacy is good for the north and Islam; I will vote for him not because I think he will make a good democrat or that he was not a dictator. I will vote for Buhari as a Nigerian for a leader who restored my pride and dignity and my belief in the motherland. I will vote for the man who made it undesirable for the "Andrews" to "check out" instead of staying to change Nigeria. I will vote for Buhari to say thank you for the world view of Buharism, a truly nationalist ideology for all Nigerians. I do not know if Buhari is still a nationalist or a closet bigot and fanatic, or if he was the spirit and not just the face of Buharism. My vote for him is not based on a divination of what he is or may be, but a celebration of what his government was and what it gave to the nation.



All views are strictly personal

Lagos, July 2002
http://www.nigerdeltacongress.com/barticles/buharism.htm

BOKO HARAM OR BUHARI FOR PRESIDENT 2015? OVER MY DEAD BODY.
GEJ ALL THE WAY TO 2019.

Good choice for 2015,we will rally round u,U got my respect any time and any day

AGBOR-MAN:
BOKO HARAM OR BUHARI FOR PRESIDENT 2015? OVER MY DEAD BODY.
GEJ ALL THE WAY TO 2019.

Nwa Nna, don't say over your dead body because you don't know if you'll be in Kaduna when Buhari loses again.

I hate going to hell places like Kano or Kaduna. Prevention is better than cure.
Thks Nwa ne.

Even the British Government Advised us not to travel to Northen Niaja if possible.
Life is very precious & something money cannot buy.
Peace n Love to my dear Fatherland.

teskyg: he will be disgrace again.pls,groom some one younger or peharps u want to die in power like ur brothers.

I wont call his loss in the last election a disgrace!

Ilekokonit: Hope we will shun tribal politics in 2015 and vote for this God sent man.

He is going no where, We cant afford to have him as a president. He will only be president in Federal Republic of Arewa... He will never rule the South!

I expected him 2 try again.. Thomas edison tried 99 tyms b4 he had a brktru... U neva rch 10 yet.. #carygo....

GboyegaD:

You actually don't need to if you feel there is another contestant better than he is. But your idea of concluding he is a blood thirsty politician is the only thing that baffles me.

I dont have the grace to convince you he is one bloodthirsty bankrupt islamic fanatic. Even in my next world, I wont vote for him or his cohorts.

Odunnu:
I dont have the grace to convince you he is one bloodthirsty bankrupt islamic fanatic. Even in my next world, I wont vote for him or his cohorts.

The problem with people that hold this view is that they've been unable to provide proof that he's indeed a religious fanatic.

4everGod1: So despite all the GEJ supporters have witnessed during GEJs tenure they still have not done away with tribal sentiments and shallow mindedness? Wow! Most of you here voted for GEJ and voila! the whole nation has been thrown into mourning and confusion ever since. Even suddenly Nigeria became voted as a nation filled with sad people.

I am an easterner and during the elections I decisively voted for Buhari and God willing I WILL DO IT AGAIN . This is not and has never been about sentiments or age or number of times he runs for office without being elected. It is about doing what is right and stepping up to the challenges of Nigeria and not wishing them away. I STILL STAND SOLIDLY BEHIND BUHARI and you guys want to know why? Its because he is just like me.... A MAN OF INTEGRITY AND A MAN OF THE PEOPLE! . Your Children and your humble selves have become corrupt because they have all been led by corrupt people you or your fathers voted in. Take a stand and change it in your time. Let it be said that you truely left a legacy for your children and your grandchildren and what is this Legacy?..... Its called INTEGRITY Because a man is just as good as his word!

i dint even waste my time to read this post...

Buary think since he has used boko haram to reduce the number or southerners in the north it ll be easy way to match any southern candidate

No cause for alarm! He ll lose as usual. God ll never allow a tribalistic, religious fanatic to rule this country.

But y is he always going back on his word? I think he is too self-centered thats y he is not thinking of grooming d younger generation. An i-know-it-all kind of person.

But 'no lele' he will lose again and again and again .......

Whether Buhari like it or not, his chances of failing again is brighter than a star. I think people usually over-estimate this man's popularity. Down south and even in the middle-belt, nobody is checking him and his party out. He has failed to convince us that he will run a secular government which will be characterized by the seperation of religion from governance.

Of course, he wasnt the CIC and not responsible for the protection of lives and properties but as a being with conscience, i expected that during the post-election violence, he should have just called for calm generally but no his silence was like an authorization to the primitive almajiri hoodlums to keep doing what they were doing. GEJ is a failure no doubt but Buhari is not the answer in this current Nigeria.

Anyone who refers to Buhari as corruotion free and credible with good economic policies is most likely less than 30years old. Buhari is neither corruption free nor credible. He was petroleum minister under OBJ's first regime and supervised the siphoning of serious oil monies. His flogging of people on the streets was not a fight against corruption, it was simply a typical sharia way. The same thing you find in countries like Afghan and Pakistan! In inran, they di executions in between football matches and flog women in public. That has nothing to do with fighting corruption. Buhari was simply trying to introduce sharia into Nigeria. He was the first to support Yerima of Zamfara wheb Yerima started the sharia saga in 2002! Yerima used sharia issue to divert attention from his corruption issue and he received Buhari's prompt support! That sharia move by Yerima is one of the biggest catalyst in the Boko Aram you see today.

Buhari knos what he is doing. He is trying to use the present Nigeria situation to further his ambition and he doesn't care how many lives are lost in the process. That is why he never sympathised with the victims of the post election riots but instead tried to politicise it and use it to score cheap points. He is a typical born to rule fulani cabal! He is in the school of those who believe Nigeria is theirs to rule forever. That's why he won't give up. That's hy he won't groom anyone. He sees every southerner as second class citizens. In the last election, he didn't even bother to campaign in most southern states and when he was confronted, he gave a flimsy excuse about financial jargon. Meanwhile, he had Abacha's son as a major sponsor! And sone folks still go around saying the election was rigged. I don't know how they thought Buhari would have won such an election. His perceived popularity is also something I don't understand. Maybe he is popular here in NL but out there, especially in the SS and SE and NC, nobody gives 2 cents about him. Am suprised he even got up to 5000 votes in some states. Maybe its the abokis that voted for him.

After the post election riots, Buhari will not even get as much votes as he got the last time. Maybe he will be the president of the proposed Boko Aram Republic!

Buhari is a shameless failing whimp . . .

[/b][b][/b][b][b][/b][b][/b]If the reasons some people wont vote for Buhari are his tribe and religion, Please let us think again. Read the article below.

Buhari, Regionalism, Religion, And Politics In Nigeria I


• Uchenna Osigwe
• June 11, 2011
• More from this author
The presidential election held in Nigeria on the 16th of April 2011 has come and gone but the dust raised by that election is yet to settle. Even as we wait for it to settle, or, more likely, for more dust to be raised, we can now look back at what happened before, during and immediately after the election in a more detached way in order to see the role that regionalism, ethnicity, religion and politics played in that election and its aftermath.
My question is this: Is it possible for the supporters of Jonathan and Buhari to look beyond regionalism, ethnicity, religion and politics and look more dispassionately at what those two figures represent for Nigeria?
Jonathan represents the PDP. The party may call itself a democratic party, but there is nothing democratic about it. All the elections overturned in the country have been those ‘won’ by the party. Each time after rigging elections, they tell us that even if they didn’t rig, they would still have ‘won.’ That hackneyed argument involves too many fallacies the analyses of which will take us too far afield. So let me use an analogy to puncture it: It is like the student who cheats in exams and when caught, says that without the cheating s/he would still have passed. So, if you’re so sure of passing, why cheat in the first place? Except for a few exceptions, the PDP is made up of a bunch of leeches. Everyday we hear how they are stealing billions from the public purse, and this has been going on since their earlier incarnation as NPN. A close look at Jonathan’s budget shows that he has given more money to petroleum subsidies and import waivers than to critical areas like education, power and healthcare. They have simply cornered the country’s wealth and are sharing it among themselves. What the PDP is running looks like a kleptocracy, walks like a kleptocracy and quacks like a kleptocracy. Nigeria is among the highest consumers of private jets in the world, and this in a country with poor or no health care, poor or no education system, where amenities that poorer countries in the world take for granted are simply non-existent. The vision the party has for the country is a retrogressive vision. It has no clear cut principles but makes the rules as it goes. Like unscrupulous business people, all the members of the party look for are opportunities to fill their pockets at the expense of the hapless masses. Nobody represents this opportunism more than Jonathan.
To start with, as a PDP member, their constitution stated that the presidency, as well as other offices should rotate around the different zones in the country. He signed on to that. So why didn’t Jonathan respect the constitution of his party? Would there have been post electoral violence if that zoning was respected? Can we ever take Jonathan on his word? During the campaign he stated repeatedly that he would not serve beyond 2015. But even before his inauguration, he let it be known that a four year-term is too short for a ‘performing president,’ (forgetting that by 2015 he would have been president for five years), even as he stated that his country needs an over bloated cabinet! He promised free and fair election, but we have credible allegations that his party wrote results that have nothing to do with the actual voting. I agree that the election was peaceful. But something can be peaceful and fraudulent. Think of 419! If the elections were free and fair, there was no way it would not have gone to a second round at the very least. PDP entered into a secret deal with some notable politicians in the south west in order to stop Buhari. Notice that the ACN says nothing anymore about the presidential election. The silence of their flag bearer is even more puzzling!
Jonathan promised to fight corruption but there were credible stories that delegates to his party’s primary election were bribed in hard currency, and this was just after he shared the excess crude oil money among the governors allegedly to buy their support. We also know of a case where a bribe (in hard currency) was offered (as transport money) to the SNG group by Jonathan’s aides in Abuja! Pat Utomi accused Jonathan of spending hundreds of billions of public money in his campaign. Right now has not given up in its scheme to get a rubber stamp NASS. OBJ made the mistake of doing that in mid-stream. In the meantime the agents of the PDP planted in the CPC are doing their best to discredit their own party for daring to challenge Jonathan’s election!
One of the first things Jonathan did as president was to round up some of the most retrogressive individuals in the country and give them national honours. One of them is Patricia Etteh, the disgraced former speaker of the lower house. His SGF has serious allegations of corruption surrounding him. His ministers may not be any different.
Now with all these credibility problems surrounding Jonathan, many people still support him based solely on the fact that he is a Christian and a southerner, nothing more, nothing less. Indeed we have heard it said many times that it was God who ordained that he should be president at this time!
Now compare a man whose brief public service has been trailed by allegations of corruption, some well documented, from the time he was governor to now that he is the president, with the man who has been in public service for much longer and has no credible allegation of corruption against him. Add to that the fact that the first has no known political philosophy, no vision to speak of. Compare that to the fact that the latter has shown what he is capable of doing with political power, and that it was largely for the good of his country, his vision having been put into action with very good results. Consider also the fact that allegations of election rigging have trailed the former, both personally and as a member of a well known election rigging party, while the latter has made no attempt whatsoever to rig elections. Add to that, finally, the fact that the former has been president almost as long as the latter has been president. The difference is clear, isn’t it? But if after all these you still want to claim that Buhari is not good enough to lead the country because he a Moslem or because he is from the north, then how do you escape the charge that you are a religious fanatic and an ethnic bigot?
I ask again: is it possible for the supporters of Jonathan and Buhari to look beyond regionalism, ethnicity, religion and politics and look more dispassionately at what those two figures represent in Nigerian politics?
The concluding part of this essay focuses on Buhari.


BUHARI REGIONALISM RELIGION AND POLITICS IN NIGERIA II
I end with the question I started with: Is it possible for the supporters of Jonathan and Buhari to look beyond regionalism, ethnicity, religion and politics and look more dispassionately at what these two figures represent in Nigerian politics?
I’ve never hidden my admiration for Buhari, on this forum and elsewhere, especially at this point in the history of our nation. But that makes the task I stated above a lot easier for me. I am neither a Moslem nor a northerner. So my support for Buhari is based solely on what he stands for. But let me quickly add that Buhari’s personality and the qualities that endear him to me and millions of other Nigerians have nothing to do with the accidental fact that he happens to be a Moslem and a northerner. He was neither the first northerner nor the first Moslem to lead Nigeria. But the difference between him and the rest is clear.
Even Buhari’s worst enemies know what he stands for. They know that he is a man of integrity. They know he is incorruptible. And most importantly, they know that there will be zero tolerance for corruption (past and present) if he becomes president. He said he would like to know what happened to the 16 billion dollars spent in the last twelve years to give Nigerians more darkness. Jonathan can never say anything like that. Long before Sanusi Lamido Sanusi told a shocked nation that the country spends 25% of its budget on the members of the National Assembly as emoluments, Buhari had already called for a downward review of that jumbo pay. If Buhari were the president, the nation would not have spent billions for the inauguration of the president in a nation where children have no modern classrooms, where the basic amenities that poorer countries in Africa take for granted are lacking. So, when those powerful enemies of Buhari began to advance their straw man argument to paint him as a religious fanatic and an ethnic bigot, they knew exactly what they were doing: warding off a real danger to the protection of their past, present and future loot. And because they were very powerful, they were able to spread their propaganda, what with journalists who were all too willing to help in that unpatriotic mission. Even many reasonable people from the south fell for the subterfuge, especially after the violent bloodshed that followed the presidential election. But was Buhari responsible for that violence?
During the presidential campaign, Buhari was being blamed for the violence that was being instigated by the PDP wherever he went. Bombs were going off left, right and centre, and many people, including youth corpers, were killed in the bomb blasts. In Gombe state in particular, where the entourage of President Jonathan was stoned during a campaign, and their campaign headquarters his party was vandalized, the governor, Alhaji Danjuma Goje, was quick to blame Buhari’s supporters. Buhari even apologized, saying: ‘‘The governor has made this allegation against my supporters and I must say that we are not violent people but if the allegation has anything to do with any of those who received us, I tender apology for such and I want you to give my apology to the president.’’ Later, another PDP man, namely Alhaji Abubakar Muazu, accused the governor of lying about the incident in order to smear Buhari’s name. Muazu revealed that it was the governor who called Buhari and requested for a courtesy visit. It was a set up! Muazu continued: “The governor lied to the president on the issue of stoning and vandalism. The governor sent his thugs to the office to destroy and finish all the things left in the office.” Muazu also revealed the motive of the governor in planning the attacks: “The governor was only trying to give the impression that there was no security so that the president would give directive to the governor to arrest the CPC people in the state. The governor is doing it because he wants his sons-in-law contesting for the House of Representatives in Gombe Funakye and Kwami federal constituency and Dukku and Nafada federal constituency to have an easy election. He wanted to use the excuse of the attack to arrest the CPC candidates in those constituencies.” Muazu concluded that if the president had acted on that lie, Gombe would have been on fire.
This is quite revealing when one considers what happened after the presidential elections in some parts of the north that literally went on fire. Is it possible that, as El Rufai, a PDP insider, stated in a recent interview, the attack on southerners was instigated by the PDP chieftains who bore the brunt of the attack in the first two days? What I know is that Buhari did not ask anyone to go to the streets, knowing that it could get out of hand. Indeed, he did the exact opposite: He asked his supporters to be law abiding as the party had decided to challenge the elections in the courts. In that statement, Buhari stated that those who were burning churches and mosques were not his supporters. Knowing that no one has been able to point out a lie this man ever told in his long years in public service, I am willing to presume him innocent until proven guilty.
What many people miss about Buhari is that he is not all about fighting corruption. Here is a man with a bold vision for his country, whose word as good as his bond. The example is there for those who want to see. In his 18 months as president, he gave Nigerians a sense of belonging. Education received an attention that no other administration has given to it ever since. Nigerians began to see what it means to behave in a disciplined manner, what it means to live in a clean environment, what it means to have an economy that is worth the name, what it means to make things work. In short, what it means to lead by example. Buhari’s fight against corruption was only one aspect of his vision for the country he loves so much.
Buhari, of course, is not a saint. He is often rigid in his principles. But even this weakness, if weakness it is, is what Nigerians need in a president at this point: a president who says what he does and does what he says.
For Nigeria to claim its rightful place in the comity of nations, she needs a Buhari. It may not necessarily be this General Muhammad Yassim Yinusa Buhari. But it has to be somebody, man or woman, who has inculcated the values that make Buhari what he is.
Give me that and I won’t care where such a president comes from, his or her religion, ethnic affiliation, or age.

alj harem: Certainly. Would support him as well

I will follow the suit.

oly g: GREAT! GREAT! GREAT!.I AM VERY HAPPY BUHARI HAS DECLARE TO RUN IN 2015.THANK GOD THIS COUNTRY STILL HAS HOPE.I HAVE NEVER SEEN AN HONEST FORMER MILITARY LEADER LIKE GENERAL BUHARI.THANK GOD THIS COUNTRY SILL HAS HOPE.NIGERIANS LET US WISE UP,THE RIGHT MAN HAS DECLARE AGAIN.GOD IS GIVING US ANOTHER CHANCE.BUHARI/BAKARE FOR 2015!BAHARI/BAKARE FOR 2015!BUHARI/BAKARE FOR 2015.LET THE CAMPAIGN START NOW.THIS ARE THE PEOPLE WE NEED.

Stop decieving yourself.am so pathetic dat u can utter dis kind of statement considering the dynamism of the present world.do we need to focus on an aging ex-general as a succour to Nigeria?d answer is NO.don't forget that Buhari is also and ethnic and religous bigot!even his hausa brothers don't like him.its only the alimajiris he had succeeded in breeding likes him.any youth who votes for Buhari has shown that dey do not have hope in youth any longer.we need dynamism.we want pple lyk pat utomi,professor soludo,sanusi lamido sanusi,obi ezekwesili,FOla adeola,nuhu ribadu.dis are the modern pple who can champion change not aging general like buhari who is not compliant wit millenium challenges like GEJ

qualified: No cause for alarm! He ll lose as usual. God ll never allow a tribalistic, religious fanatic to rule this country.

But y is he always going back on his word? I think he is too self-centered thats y he is not thinking of grooming d younger generation. An i-know-it-all kind of person.

But 'no lele' he will lose again and again and again .......

I share ur ideology bro. Whoever supports Buhar(an ageing general),it means that they don't believe in the strength of youth any more.I can neva give my vote to soon-to-die general where we have aspiring and vibrants youths like Nuhu ribadu,prof soludo,pro pat utomi, SLS,fashola,oby ezekwesilli,etc.let's focus on giving the vibrant youth a chance and see wat dey can do rather dan concentrating effort on a milienium non-complaint human

Let d dead remain dead. If buhari should win election in a 21st century Nigeria, then nigeria should be concidered a gigantuan cemetary. He should simply remain in year 1983. If he hasnt gotten oil bloc, let him go meet ATIKU, IBB, ABDULSALAMI et al for a quick lesson in line. We r nw way wiser than d dagger n cloak politics of d northern oligarcs (master IMPOVERISHERS). He is jst simply fit for president of ALMAJIRI REPUBLIC. Enof of all dis nonsense BLAH BUHA BLAH! Curse of a nation

Is Buhari telling Nigerains that apart from himself he has no intelligent and responsible Nigerian to sponsor or support? It is a shame. Na im only one dey Nigeria that can solve the problems facing us? Where are his children? He should be advised properly.

The Article did not say he will contest. Just distraction from supporter of that man in Aso Rock. He is in the Hall Of Fame of the hearts of those who abhor bad governance and corruption.
Like someone said we dey kampe while there are authoritative warning that we are going broke. Nothing to show for the breakage supervised by the fresh air man. Even Omokri knows their Goverment is putrid and stinks of corruption.

Zicciot
Others are coming to flood this thread too. They told us how GEJ was going to be a messiah. Now he is failing, they are telling us how he could not be one. Buhari is a tested and trusted figure. Nigerians would use their initiatives this time around.[/quote]

rafhell: i hope he become president so that we can all be free from his boko boys

By God's grace, we would soon be free from boko haram, as for Buhari, he will never enter or smell Aso Rock for life.

Hon. SuQ Ma'DIQ:
Let d dead remain dead. If buhari should win election in a 21st century Nigeria, then nigeria should be concidered a gigantuan cemetary. He should simply remain in year 1983. If he hasnt gotten oil bloc, let him go meet ATIKU, IBB, ABDULSALAMI et al for a quick lesson in line. We r nw way wiser than d dagger n cloak politics of d northern oligarcs (master IMPOVERISHERS). He is jst simply fit for president of ALMAJIRI REPUBLIC. Enof of all dis nonsense BLAH BUHA BLAH! Curse of a nation

Na wetin Shypills cause make you carry that name dey talk anyhow. Syphilis no good.