Please read this article dispassionately and comment.

Brink
What Happens If the 2011 Elections Fail? John Campbell
September 9, 2010
Article Summary
The January 2011 elections could tear Nigeria apart. Is there anything the Obama administration can do to help the country avoid North-South conflict or a military coup?
JOHN CAMPBELL, the former U.S. Ambassador to Nigeria from 2004 to 2007, is the Ralph Bunche Senior Fellow for Africa Policy Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. His book, Nigeria: Dancing on the Brink, will be published by Rowman & Littlefield in November.

PrintSend to friendDecrease font sizeTextIncrease font sizeView This Article as Multiple Pages
Essay Nigeria's Rigged Democracy
Jean Herskovits
Nigeria's elections last April were among the most seriously flawed in the country's history, thanks largely to the manipulations of the U.S.-backed ruling party. With Nigerians increasingly clamoring for accountability, Washington's continuing support could generate more unrest -- and could pose a risk both to oil supplies coming out of Nigeria and to the stability of West Africa.

Read
Essay Democracy in Nigeria
Jean Herskovits
On October 1 Nigeria added to its list of vital statistics a new status as the world's fourth largest democracy. The list was already impressive. One African in four is a Nigerian; with a population of 80 million or more, Nigeria is larger than any country in Europe. It is also the world's eighth largest producer of crude oil and has been the United States' second largest supplier for six years, neither joining in the Arab boycott of 1973-74, nor cutting exports for policy reasons subsequently.

Read
Would you like to leave a comment?

3CommentsJoin

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.The 2011 elections in Nigeria, scheduled for January 22, pose a threat to the stability of the United States’ most important partner in West Africa. The end of a power-sharing arrangement between the Muslim North and the Christian South, as now seems likely, could lead to postelection sectarian violence, paralysis of the executive branch, and even a coup. The Obama administration has little leverage over the conduct and outcome of the elections -- and if the vote does lead to chaos, Washington may no longer be able to count on Nigerian partnership in addressing African regional and security issues such as the conflicts in Darfur, Southern Sudan, and Somalia.

Nigeria’s current political drama dates to November 2009, when its president, Umaru Yar’Adua, was hospitalized for a kidney condition in Saudi Arabia. Yar’Adua refused to comply with the Nigerian constitution and hand over executive authority to Vice President Goodluck Jonathan. The result was a power vacuum until February 2010, when the National Assembly extralegally designated Jonathan the “acting president” by resolution, even though there is no constitutional provision for doing so. In April, Acting President Jonathan attended the nuclear safety summit in Washington, where U.S. President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden warmly embraced him, not least because his designation forestalled a possible military coup. In May 2010, the first act of Nigeria’s political tragedy ended when Yar’Adua died and Jonathan became the constitutional president. Now, Washington may be tempted to move its attention away from Nigeria -- but that would be a mistake.

Nigeria has held three national elections since the end of military dictatorship in 1998. In 1999, active and retired military officers, along with a few civilian allies, oversaw the transition from military to civilian rule. They established the nonideological People’s Democratic Party (PDP); selected Olusegun Obasanjo, a Christian from the South, as the presidential candidate; and placed him in office with a northern Muslim vice president. An elite consensus formed around an unwritten power-sharing agreement, which dictated that presidential candidates would henceforth alternate between the Christian South and the Muslim North -- a system designed to avoid presidential contests that could exacerbate hostility between the regions and religions.

With the advantages of presidential incumbency, and access to unlimited oil money, Obasanjo secured elite support for a second presidential term in 2003. Northerners reluctantly acquiesced to a rotation cycle of two terms rather than the one they had foreseen in 1999. Once re-elected, however, Obasanjo reneged on his two-term promise by attempting to run again in 2007. This bid was defeated due to public anger and northern leaders’ insistence on power sharing. Nevertheless, Obasanjo remained powerful enough to impose his handpicked candidates on the ruling party in 2007: Yar’Adua, a northern Muslim, for president and Jonathan, a Christian southerner, for vice president. Obasanjo’s chosen candidates fit the terms of the power-sharing convention, and accordingly, they took office after the 2007 election, which was marred by fraud and irregularities. However, Yar’Adua’s subsequent death and Jonathan’s presidency upended the power-sharing arrangement.

In the event of postelection sectarian violence and a political breakdown, the army could intervene if the civilian government loses control. Unlike in every previous election since 1999, no elite consensus exists for the 2011 poll, nor is there an Obasanjo-like figure strong enough to impose one. Although it is still dominated by elites and their patronage networks, the Nigerian political sphere is wide open.
Many in the North believe it is still their turn for the presidency, but the northern power brokers do not agree on who should be their presidential candidate. Several northern politicians, including Ibrahim Babangida and Muhammadu Buhari, both former military dictators, are running for the presidency. Other potential candidates are Aliyu Mohammed Gusau, the national security adviser under Obasanjo and Jonathan, and several northern governors. Nigerian democrats are advocating the candidacies of Nasir El-Rufai, the former minister of the Federal Capital Territory, and Nuhu Ribadu, formerly the head of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, the anticorruption agency. Both are seen as having the potential to restore public faith in the political system. But so long as the current elites remain the country’s political power brokers, candidates operating outside the PDP will be long shots at best.

Jonathan, with the advantages of presidential incumbency, has also announced that he will run. This could mean the presidential contest will feature one or more northern Muslim candidates opposing Jonathan against the backdrop of ethnic and religious violence in the Middle Belt, Muslim extremism in the North, and an ongoing insurrection in the oil-rich Niger Delta. In such a fraught environment, supporters of candidates might exploit religious and ethnic identities, a dangerous and potentially explosive dynamic that until now has largely been avoided.

Logistical preparations for the 2011 elections have not started. There is no voters roll, and despite the president’s signing of an electoral reform bill, some of these reforms remain unimplemented four months before the election. The election therefore will almost certainly lack legitimacy, especially in the eyes of the losers. This will further drive the country to the brink, especially if winners and losers are defined by their religious and ethnic backgrounds. There is at the moment no standoff between northern and southern leaders, at least nothing comparable to that between Robert Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangirai in Zimbabwe or between Kenya’s Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga in the aftermath of the 2007 elections. Nevertheless, the danger of Nigeria plunging into postelection violence is a real possibility.

The Nigerian military still regards itself as the ultimate guarantor of the state’s security, and most political elites agree. In the event of postelection sectarian violence and a political breakdown, it could intervene if the civilian government loses control. The army, given its history, could move quickly, and unlike in Kenya following the 2007 postelection crisis, there would probably be little time for the international community to try to facilitate a political settlement. Only if the military itself fragments would there be space for the international organizations such as the African Union to intervene in search of a political solution. Yet the return to power of the so-called men on horseback in Nigeria would pose special challenges for Washington, considering congressional requirements that Washington scale back contact with military governments that overthrow civilian governments. It would also be anathema to the African Union’s principled stand against military coups.

Some Nigerians are privately urging the Obama administration to intervene behind the scenes to forestall a postelection crisis. Yet intervention on behalf of one candidate could do more harm than good. If Delta militants sense that Washington is opposed to a Jonathan candidacy, and should he withdraw or lose, they might escalate their attacks on U.S.-owned oil facilities, thereby cutting off production. If, on the other hand, northern leaders see the United States as supporting Jonathan, they are likely to become even more estranged from the federal government. The North would likely see support of Jonathan as part of the perceived U.S. war on Islam.

Given these realities, what can the Obama administration do? At present, the United States enjoys significant support among Nigerians, even though it lacks the capacity to have much impact on the 2011 elections. It cannot reform the electoral commission, nor can it change Nigeria’s corrupt political economy, which is fundamental to vote-rigging efforts. It could, however, establish and publicize the benchmarks it would use to measure improvement in the electoral process. It could also focus election-related assistance on select states where polling in recent elections has been better than elsewhere; Lagos and Cross Rivers State are two such possible venues. As the elections approach, the United States must be scrupulously neutral on the presidential candidates while reiterating its call for free, fair, and credible elections.

The Obama administration should also look for ways to support such civil-society organizations as the Nigeria Bar Association, which actively works to strengthen the rule of law. The United States already provides assistance for civic groups involved in voter education and the strengthening of political parties as open institutions. That support should continue. In the event of a confrontation between the North and South over failed elections in 2011, these organizations could play a role in mitigating the worst excesses of a crisis.

Such steps by the Obama administration are worthwhile to promote the long-term development of democratic institutions. However, in the event of a bloody crisis that splits the country along regional and religious lines, neither the Obama administration nor any other foreign government or international organization will have much leverage. Faced with such a cataclysm, Nigeria’s friends should seek to mitigate the humanitarian consequences and prevent the resulting instability from spreading to other parts of the continent.

Nigerians have long danced on the edge of the cliff without falling off. Yet at this juncture, the odds are not good for a positive outcome, and it is difficult to see how Nigeria can move back from the brink.


http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/66746/john-campbell/nigeria-on-the-brink?page=show&ref=nf

This is a grim black and white picture of our country. An American respective. But believe me, we exist in the grey areas of political drama. We'll pull this off once again, like we've always done. Our problems are real and dangerous but the solution is here in Nigeria with Nigerians. God bless Nigeria

True,
But we must not take these issues likely. The political landscape is changing, and so are external factor which are real and present (Mend, Boko Haram), these are real issues which could so easily go out of hand

adultebony:

This is a grim black and white picture of our country. An American respective. But believe me, we exist in the grey areas of political drama. We'll pull this off once again, like we've always done. Our problems are real and dangerous but the solution is here in Nigeria with Nigerians. God bless Nigeria

in other words the youth will continue to be fools, becoz that is the only reason why Nigeria has existed in the grey areas of all this political dramas as you put it.

Because an America said so, therefore we must begin to fret?

It is not because they said so. You know we are very good at not seeing what is wrong with our country and doing something about it. someone has taken an inpartial look at the true state of our country and we blame them.

The stack reality is that things are very volatile in Nigeria. That is just plain fact, look at ND, Jos crisis, Boko Haram, there is just so much that can potentially go wrong if we are not careful. I am not too sure of the coup thing, but one thing I have been scared about for years is the potential for massive trouble in the country with everyone fighting their corner, and we not really knowing who the real enemy is.

If INEC or Government comes out today to ask for more time for the elections, y'all will scream hidden agenda- not so? So, if INEC wants to go ahead amidst all the above, and you still shout, what then do we do?

They established the nonideological People’s Democratic Party (PDP);

That was the phrase that caught my attention. Nigerian ruling party does not believe in anything. Thats just what that means and if you have that kind politics there is no way the country can make progress.

The same is also true of all the opposition parties.

Very true, and I have often preached that as being the biggest problem in politics in Nigeria. All the Parties stand for absolutely nothing. PDP worse than the rest.

I was hoping that the Labour party would call on the different unions to join hands to pose a formidable force, because that is waht we need. A party aligned with the needs of the common man. I even wrote to the chairman of the party and never got an answer. I have said it before and will say it again. Nigeria is not going to be ready to conduct any credible elections come January 2011. best case scenario is that jega would make GJ win look legitinate nothing more.

Let me quote this from the article

At present, the United States enjoys significant support among Nigerians[b], even though it lacks the capacity to have much impact on the 2011 elections. It cannot reform the electoral commission, nor can it change Nigeria’s corrupt political economy

Well i dont think so

At present, the United States enjoys significant support among Nigerians, even though it lacks the capacity to have much impact on the 2011 elections. It cannot reform the electoral commission, [b]nor can it change Nigeria’s corrupt political economy

But it could do something about the politicans i see they have formed their own economy "nigerias corrupt politicians economy" NCPE they can bail out african countries in need and they can cpugh up money for supplemetary budget
But where do they money go? mostly US they have houses,cars,businesses in US
US could stop this but they cant why?It is helping them Economically


And John Campbelll this is a nigerian problem, we DO NOT need Obamas intervention or whateva except what i just said above
Please we need to solve our own problem

monkeyleg:

It is not because they said so. You know we are very good at not seeing what is wrong with our country and doing something about it. someone has taken an inpartial look at the true state of our country and we blame them.

The stack reality is that things are very volatile in Nigeria. That is just plain fact, look at ND, Jos crisis, Boko Haram, there is just so much that can potentially go wrong if we are not careful. I am not too sure of the coup thing, but one thing I have been scared about for years is the potential for massive trouble in the country with everyone fighting their corner, and we not really knowing who the real enemy is.

That is my worry too. I don't think Nigeria is ready for another 2007-style electoral theft. Whatever the outcome of the election our political leaders must eschew selfish interest and tread with caution so as to not heat up the polity. The Militants may forment trouble if Jonathan does not win and  the North, unless they win , will pretty much feel cheated with how bile will rise up from the realisation that this should be their "undisputed" slot. It is worrying seeing all the careless and egotistical political pontifications that seems not to consider the volatility of the current situation on the ground.

There is just no way to predict what will happen unless the various actors start behaving responsibly in viewing their various ambitions as secondary to the peace of the nation. The unchecked gangsterism going on in Ogun State right  is acting as a sure hint of how brazen "do or die" and "operation totality" adherrents are willing to test the patience and docility of Nigerians to achieve their despised political ambitions/goals  . This report , even if pessimistic,  is thought provoking . We should not be entirely dismissive of it.

@Gbawe, you have spoken well. A lot of people have dismissed the article as scare mongering, with the writer not having the good interest of Nigeria @ heart, but to me this is just an inpartial analysis, which in some way seems far fetched, but then again can easily materialise. There is so much uncertinty in the country, too many fractions, the ingredients for real trouble.

There must be real understanding, this might be the reason why GJ have not formaly declared, or has he?

Most of what John Cambell said are true just that it was taylored to the point of view of the West's interest in terms of simply protecting oil installations in Nigeria and having a Nigeria stable enough to fund wars without getting anything in return in the name of peace keeping in Africa.

John Cambell's attitude to the write up was not one of genuine concern for the lives and future of 150million Nigerians but that of protecting the interest of his country.

However most of what he said are plain facts.

mikeansy:

Most of what John Cambell said are true just that it was taylored to the point of view of the West's interest in terms of simply protecting oil installations in Nigeria and having a Nigeria stable enough to fund wars without getting anything in return in the name of peace keeping in Africa.

John Cambell's attitude to the write up was not one of genuine concern for the lives and future of 150million Nigerians but that of protecting the interest of his country.

However most of what he said are plain facts.

My opinion too. In international relations , beyond the rhetoric , representatives of Nations are , first and foremost , obliged to view issues from an angle of what is most favourable for their nation. I think we have to learn to play the game too in Nigeria with a homogeneous policy of pragmatically placing the interest of our nation above everything else in our dealing with others .


The article itself , even if it appears written by arrogant 'chess' strategist discussing dispensible pawns , should still be viewed with objectivity by those whose interest are most at risk - Nigerians .

We can on be seen and rationalised by foreigners with respect to their own interest. In doing so they neglect our strengths and amplify our weaknesses. John Campbell or whoever authored that piece is stating the obvious FACTS but the TRUTH is this: Nigeria will pull this off, again.

All the youth that comes to nairaland and run there mouth fails.
It will be a shame on our generation that we have this website as a tool but never care to use it.

Anybody who knows Nigeria, its history and still insists the disintegration of the colonial contraption is not the best option for about 150 million inhabitants remains condescendingly disingenuous.

It will amount to self-deprecation and foolhardy for a right-thinking so-called Nigerian to look elsewhere for an enemy. The enemy is abound and identifiable within the confine of Nigeria.

All this na mere regular yarn . . . We are still on the issue of Nigeria, a Nation where the people have proven that no matter how much rubbish you throw at them, they are more than willing to make up new excuses for why they should remain complacent and ok with the status quo, no matter what new shape it takes.

I would have taken this article seriously maybe last year. But not anymore. Reason being that we have come out of worse off political imbroglio without the country being torn in shreds. If we could survive the Yaradua Saudi palaver, then we van survive the 2011 elections anyhow it goes!

I think John Cambell has been in Nigeria long enough and it is pretty obvious from his article.

It is our responsibility as Nigerians to ensure these elections dont fail. There is this cool website (www.reclaimnaija.net) that allows for citizen's reporting of electoral happenings. This way, Nigerian citizens can monitor the elections from their own polling zones.

wevote:

It is our responsibility as Nigerians to ensure these elections dont fail. There is this cool website (www.reclaimnaija.net) that allows for citizen's reporting of electoral happenings. This way, Nigerian citizens can monitor the elections from their own polling zones.

True talk bro