2027 elections

By Isyaka Laminu Badamasi

As political parties in the country gear up to conduct primary elections in preparation for the 2027 general elections, they should ensure strict adherence to the laid-down procedures put in place by electoral acts and those of their parties to avoid further internal wranglings and legal tussles that will ultimately harm the party’s chances of winning the election or maintaining victory in courts. 

The process adopted by some political parties in some states for selecting the party’s flag bearers for different posts exposes how stakeholders underestimate voters’ power by fielding candidates who are far below the electorate’s goodwill and requirements for winning elections. 

The electoral acts recognise only two processes that political parties can follow in conducting primary elections: direct primaries, which allow party card-carrying members to elect their candidates, or consensus, which allows contestants to withdraw their contests and announce their support for one person among themselves. 

As seen in many states that adopt the consensus process in selecting their candidates and the issues that followed so far, it is clear that stakeholders neglect the powers of voters by anointing persons with questionable political values as their preferred candidates without considering the legal implications of such decisions (remember Zamfara state) or the electoral values of the persons they selected.

If public acceptance and popularity are the selling points of any politician, then some candidates do not possess the qualities of a counsellor, but present themselves as gubernatorial aspirants, either because they can afford the nomination forms and want to trend and remain relevant in the scheme of things or because they are playing a deceitful game in the event of joining the negotiations table.

While appealing for a peaceful conduct of free and fair process from the remaining political parties that are yet to conduct their primaries, they should also be mindful of the people they will present for elections, as winning elections do not limited to the platform (political party), it is about goodwill, clear and practicable manifesto and the electoral values of the persons they presented as their flag bearers. 

To the electorate, they should ensure their voter cards are accessible. To those who do not possess the ‘electoral weapon’, the third phase of the Continued Voter Registration (CVR) will commence today, Monday, 11th May 2026, and end on Friday, 10th July 2026. During this period, eligible citizens who have reached the age of 18, as well as those who were unable to register in earlier phases, should seize this opportunity to do so.

We at the Initiatives for Sustainable Development (I4SD) are committed to ensuring free, fair and peaceful conduct of the 2027 general elections in the country. 

Isyaka Laminu Badamasi is of No 555, Ajiya Adamu Road, Bauchi, Bauchi State.

By Aremu Haroon Abiodun

Let me begin with clarity and sincerity. I write this not as a partisan actor, not as a loyalist of any political party, and certainly not as a hired megaphone for any candidate. I write from the standpoint of an analyst, a student of democratic behaviour, and a public relations strategist who understands that politics is not only about power; it is also about perception, timing, trust, and structure.

This piece is not designed to insult President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, attack the ruling APC, mock the opposition, or discredit any politician. Rather, it is an honest attempt to interrogate one of the most defining questions of Nigeria’s approaching democratic race: Is the new coalition a movement of salvation or merely a market of ambition?

In every democracy, coalitions can either rescue nations or ruin trust. In Africa, where democracy is still battling poverty, elite capture, and personality politics, the answer matters deeply. Across the continent, from Kenya to South Africa, Senegal to Zimbabwe, fragmented opposition groups often unite to challenge incumbents. Sometimes they succeed; sometimes they collapse under the weight of ego and suspicion.

Coalitions are usually built on five promises: to rescue the nation, restore democracy, defeat bad governance, unite the opposition vote, and provide a better alternative. But behind these promises often lie hidden motives: personal ambition, ticket negotiation, political survival, revenge against former allies, and access to state power. This is why many coalitions look holy in public but bleed distrust in private.

Nigeria may now be entering that exact season. The African Democratic Congress (ADC), once a relatively minor platform, is suddenly being discussed as a possible shelter for heavyweight politicians dissatisfied with their former homes. But before Nigerians clap, they must ask a dangerous question: Do the coalition members even trust themselves? 

Parties are not built by logos; they are built by loyalty, and loyalty cannot be photocopied overnight.

Nigeria’s politics has become a railway station where leaders keep changing platforms while asking voters to stay loyal.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu did not emerge by accident. His journey moved through the AD, AC, ACN, and finally the APC. He mastered a core truth that many others underestimated: structure beats noise.

While others chased headlines, Tinubu built networks, state influence, and grassroots machinery. Whether loved or criticised, he represents a masterclass in long-term political engineering.

Atiku’s route has been equally dramatic, moving from the PDP to the APC, back to the PDP, and now toward discussions with ADC. No politician in modern Nigeria has contested the presidency with as much persistence. 

Supporters call it resilience; critics call it endless ambition. But as time moves on, the ADC coalition may represent strategic urgency rather than just ideology, a final gamble in a house where the inheritance is uncertain.

Peter Obi’s path from APGA to the PDP, the Labour Party, and now ADC tells the story of a reformer searching for a machine. Obi proved in 2023 that popularity can shake systems, but popularity without nationwide structure has limits. 

If Obi brings credibility and a coalition brings machinery, the equation is powerful. However, can a reformist brand coexist with old political warlords? Movements are powered by hope, but coalitions are powered by compromise.

Moving from the PDP to the APC, the NNPP, and now the ADC, Kwankwaso commands a loyal bloc in the North. He has what every coalition needs—a dedicated voter base—but he also has what coalitions fear: independent ambition. The success of any merger will depend on whether arithmetic can overcome ego.

The urgency for a coalition is often driven by the stark reality of election data. In Nigeria’s 2023 presidential election, the opposition’s fragmentation was clear. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu won with 8,794,726 votes (36.6%), while the combined votes of the three main opposition candidates, Atiku Abubakar (6,984,520), Peter Obi (6,101,533), and Rabiu Kwankwaso (1,496,687), totalled 14,582,740.

Mathematically, the opposition held over 60% of the total vote, but their inability to unite resulted in a win for the incumbent’s structure. This “voter math” is the primary engine behind the current migration toward the ADC; politicians realise that without a unified front, sentiment rarely defeats a settled structure.

Having that in mind, can Atiku trust Obi? Can Obi trust establishment figures? Can Kwankwaso trust a ticket arrangement? Coalitions often fail not because they lack votes, but because they lack trust.

Sooner or later, the “Ticket War” arrives. If Atiku wants one last shot, Obi believes his momentum was stolen, and Kwankwaso believes northern arithmetic favours him, the smiles will disappear. A coalition before a primary is romance; a coalition after a primary is war.

Furthermore, many underestimate the “Tinubu Factor.” Hatred of an incumbent is not a development plan. Tinubu remains a formidable strategist because he controls incumbency power and understands coalition management better than many of his rivals. To defeat a strategist, anger is insufficient, but superior organisation could be the way out.

From a strategic communication perspective, the narratives are already forming. APC’s narrative centres on stability, continuity, and ongoing reforms. ADC represents a force for “Rescue Nigeria,” unites the opposition, and restores hope.

Both parties face a risk. The ADC risks being seen as a shelter for serial defectors, while the APC risks seeming disconnected from economic pain.

Lastline 

Nigeria does not merely need a coalition of politicians; it needs a coalition of ideas, competence, and national healing. If the ADC becomes a real reform movement, it can change history. If it becomes only a marketplace of ambition, it will prove that parties change names faster than systems change realities.

The real contest of 2027 may not be APC vs. ADC. It will be structure vs sentiment, trust vs suspicion, and nationhood vs ambition. On that day, Nigerians, not politicians, will deliver the final verdict on who rules in the next four years.

Haroon Aremu is a public relations strategist and wrote in via exponentumera@gmail.com.

By Bilyamin Abdulmumin, PhD

The politics of the Jega/Gwandu/Aleiro federal constituency fascinate me for several reasons: All three major contenders hail from Jega, and for three consecutive election cycles, they have contested in tightly fought primaries and elections.

Now, another cavalry, a former Comptroller-General of the Nigerian Correctional Service, threw his hat into the foray. The addition of Alhaji Jafar Jega to the list has dramatically changed the calculations and trajectory of the constituency politics. Because Ahmad Jafar enjoys the massive goodwill of the people in Kebbi State. Unlike some politicians who claimed that people called on them to contest, Ahmad Jafar genuinely enjoys that goodwill. 

By virtue of the high office he held, the former CG secured a number of jobs, especially in this contingency. Community leaders, clerics, and politicians drove to his house to pay their respects and to appreciate his gesture. Therefore, such a person joining the race must add dynamics to the game. 

The incumbency of officials can either be a tool for success or a vehicle for their downfall. Honourable Mansur Musa (Dan Jamiah), the current House representative, unarguably used this opportunity to his advantage. He used his position and oversight function as deputy chairman of the Federal Road Safety Commission in the lower chamber to bring infrastructure development never seen in this constituency. The citizens left in awe, reduced to asking this burning question: Can an NA member carry out such development? 

It should never be forgotten in a hurry that Dan Jamiah overcame all odds against him, coming from the PDP to defeat the then-incumbent and ruling party, the APC. Now, after getting into office, he consolidated the people’s goodwill even further.

Ahaji Kabiru Labbo Ajiya delves into the current battle as energetically as always. He is a populist, which is why he commands significant goodwill among voters. The part that particularly sets Ajiya apart is his initiatives in business and job creation. It’s without a doubt that Ajiya will hustle through the NA position to bring the developmental projects in this constituency to equal levels. The hurdle that had been standing before Ajiya was the primary elections. The political scheming and calculation were previously against him.

Alhaji Umar Danbuga’s political trajectory is seen as elite-driven. So, in this region where candidates’ emergence highly depends on elite goodwill, this is to the face of Alhaji Umar. In addition, the job opportunities and sponsorships through his office, as well as his personality, are part of his legacy. However, the odds against Alhaji Danbuga, Secretary, are that he has no benefit of doubt. He was the longest-serving member for this constituency. This makes different voters express different views about his candidacy.

I think Dan Jami’ah and Ajiya belong to the Senator Aleiro camp within the APC, while Jafar Ahmed and Danbuga Secretary belong to the Dr Nasir Idris/ Senator Atiku Bagudu camp. This factor may ultimately play a crucial role in deciding who emerges as the ticket-bearer come 2027.

By Usman Muhammad Salihu

In Nigerian politics, defections are no longer surprising. What is surprising now is how quickly they happen and how easily political actors move from one platform to another.

The recent defection of Peter Obi and Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso from the African Democratic Congress (ADC) to the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) is not just another political adjustment. It is a bold move. But bold does not always mean safe.

At first glance, the decision appears strategic. Internal crises within the ADC, legal uncertainties, and the pressure of electoral timelines make stability a priority. From that angle, shifting to a new platform may seem like a necessary step, an attempt to secure political ground ahead of a highly competitive 2027.

There is also strength in the alliance itself. The coming together of Obi and Kwankwaso brings national attention, regional balance, and an existing base of supporters. On paper, that is not just movement; it is potential consolidation.

But politics is not played on paper. It is played among the people. And this is where the real challenge begins.

The Nigeria Democratic Congress is still largely unfamiliar to many Nigerians. Beyond political circles and elite discussions, its presence at the grassroots remains limited. For a significant number of voters, especially at the lower levels, NDC is not yet a known political identity.

And in Nigerian elections, familiarity matters. Voters do not just choose candidates. They choose what they recognise. They choose what they trust. They choose what they understand. That is the gap this move must overcome.

Beyond visibility, there are emerging concerns about the platform’s stability. Reports suggest that the Nigerian Democratic Congress may be grappling with internal legal disputes. If proven true, this introduces an even more delicate risk. Moving from one troubled platform to another does not resolve instability; it simply transfers it. And in politics, uncertainty is a cost few can afford at this level.

Because this is no longer just about transferring political influence, it is about building voter awareness from the ground up within a limited time frame. That is not a small task. It is one thing to move with loyalists. It is another thing to move with the electorate. And history has shown that the two do not always align.

There is also a deeper concern. Frequent political movement, no matter how strategic, raises questions of consistency. When platforms change too often, voters begin to look beyond the movement itself and ask a more difficult question: What exactly is constant? Is it ideology? Is it vision? Or is it simply positioning?

These questions matter because today’s voter is less passive than before. There is growing awareness, scrutiny, and an expectation for clarity. So while this move may be necessary from a political standpoint, it is also risky from a public perception angle.

Because speed in politics can be a double-edged sword. Move too slowly, and you lose relevance. Move too quickly, and you lose trust. And right now, this move feels fast. Perhaps calculated. Perhaps unavoidable. But still fast.

So, is this a strategy or a survival tactic? It is arguably both. Strategy, because the timing aligns with political realities. Survival, because unstable platforms leave little room for hesitation.

From another angle, this move is not just a strategy or a matter of survival; it is a gamble. A calculated one, no doubt, but a gamble, nonetheless. It rests on the assumption that political influence can be transferred faster than voter trust can be built. And in a system where recognition often shapes voting decisions, that assumption may prove too optimistic.

But beyond both lies a more uncomfortable possibility: That this could be a leap into a platform that has yet to fully exist in the minds of the people. Because, in the end, political strength is not measured by alliances alone, but by acceptance. And acceptance cannot be transferred overnight.

So, while the move may look bold in Abuja, its real test will come far away from strategy rooms, in markets, in villages, and at the polling units. Where names are remembered, where symbols are recognised, and where unfamiliar platforms are often rejected.

And if that gap is not closed in time, what appears today as a strategy may tomorrow be seen as a miscalculation. Because in Nigerian politics, you can move ahead of the system, but you cannot move ahead of the people. And when that gap exists, even the most calculated move can quickly turn into a costly gamble.

Ultimately, this move will be judged by one metric: conversion rate. How many Obidients and Kwankwasiyya become NDC members, not just in spirit but on the ballot? If the answer is “most,” then history will call it strategy. If the answer is “some,” then it was survival. If the answer is “few,” then it was a miscalculation dressed as ambition. The voters are watching, and their silence right now is louder than any endorsement. For Obi and Kwankwaso, the real campaign did not start in Abuja. It starts the day a trader in Aba and a farmer in Gaya can point to the NDC logo and say, “That is us.”

Usman Muhammad Salihu was among the pioneer fellows of PRNigeria and writes from Jos.

muhammadu5363@gmail.com.

By Muhammad Abubakar

The Supreme Court of Nigeria on Thursday set aside an order of the Court of Appeal to maintain the status quo ante bellum in the leadership crisis rocking the African Democratic Congress, ADC.

A five-member panel of the apex court, led by Justice Mohammed Lawal Garba, held that the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal acted without jurisdiction when it issued the order after already dismissing the case filed by a rival faction.

The decision effectively restores the recognition of the party’s executive committee led by former Senate President David Mark.

Prior to the ruling, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, had removed David Mark and his executive team from its portal in compliance with the lower court’s status quo order.

The Supreme Court directed all warring factions to return to the Federal High Court to continue and fully determine the substantive suit regarding the party’s leadership.

The ADC has been embroiled in a leadership crisis following a restructuring that brought David Mark in as National Chairman and former Osun State Governor Rauf Aregbesola as National Secretary, a move fiercely contested by a rival faction led by Nafiu Bala Gombe.

By Malam Aminu Wase 

As 2027 approaches in Nigeria, a troubling sentiment is spreading among many citizens. There is no point in voting. Frustration is understandable. Economic hardship is real. Insecurity is real. Public disappointment is real. But choosing silence at the ballot box is not a solution;  it is surrender.

Democracy does not collapse in a single dramatic moment. It weakens gradually as citizens withdraw, participation declines, and people convince themselves that their voices do not matter. The most dangerous political decision is not voting for the wrong candidate; it is refusing to vote at all.

If we are dissatisfied with leadership, the answer is not apathy. It is participation. If we desire better governance, accountability, and reform, we must use the one instrument that gives power to ordinary citizens, the ballot.

Complaints on social media do not change governments. Private anger does not change governments. Boycotts by the disillusioned do not change governments. Votes change governments.

When citizens stay home on election day, they do not protest the system; they strengthen the influence of those who show up. Every empty polling unit is not a statement of resistance; it is an opportunity handed to someone else to decide the future.

The power to shape 2027 does not lie solely with politicians. It lies with citizens who choose to participate. Leadership is not imposed in a democracy; it is permitted. And permission is granted through votes.

This is not about blind loyalty to any party or personality. It is about responsibility. It is about understanding that disengagement guarantees continuity of whatever we claim to oppose. If we want reform, we must vote for it. If we want accountability, we must demand it through participation.

Nigeria’s future will not be written by observers. It will be written by participants. In 2027, the real question will not only be who wins. The real question will be, did we show up?

Silence is not a strategy. Withdrawal is not resistance. Our vote is our voice, and 2027 is the time to use it.

Malam Aminu Wase writes from Kaduna. He can be reached at aminusaniusman3@gmail.com.

By Mohammed Usman (Noble-pen)

Let’s talk beyond political party affiliation. Let’s tell ourselves the brutal truth.

Believing that all these people under the shade of one political party, ADC, and many more to move into it, are after the interest of the poor, the masses, instead of themselves, is the gravest mistake one will ever make. 

All these people have their own vested and individual interests, which spurred them to cross-carpet into the party, which seems to them promising, full of potential, and offering vistas for achieving those interests. And you know what? The poor, the masses, are the last thing they think of. Let alone the country’s future. 

Let me give you a practical, relatable elaboration on this by picking the few and the major points among them. Maybe, that way, you will understand what I am trying to say here.

1. Atiku Abubakar 

This person has been investing heavily and persistently in his ambition to become the country’s president. He never reneged since he started. He had been spending billions of naira on it. Therefore, do you sensibly think working for the poor, the masses, will be his top priority when he attains the power he has been so adamantly vying for, instead of looking for a return on his financial and material investment for years before? Don’t forget, he is a business-oriented person. And you should know what I mean. 

2. Nasir El-Rufai 

This person was once one of the cocks of the work of the current brutal government under the auspices of the APC. They entrenched it with their sweat and blood. And he never felt sorry for the poor suffering under the coarse, clueless policies of the government until the government, headed by Tinibu, betrayed him and denied him the opportunity he was dying for: a ministerial post and a place at the driving force of the government. That marked the genesis of his enmity towards the government and turned him into one of its most blunt and fierce foes. Hence, his decision to move to SDP, which refused him, then to ADC. His mission is purely to take vengeance on the government which made him an outcast rather than to save the poor masses from the bondage and shackles of poverty and insecurity, which they have been grappling with for donkey’s years.

3. Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso 

Just like El-Rufai, Kwankwaso is being driven by the force of spite and vendetta over the betrayal he suffered at the hands of his once political apprentice accomplice, Abba Gida Gida. His mission is driven solely by the quest to uproot the government of Abba Gida Gida, rather than by the welfare of the people of Kano State. However, he is a politician with very, very good antecedents. No one can deny that. But he is not into ADC for the masses. No. 

4. Nasiru Gawuna 

This was once an accomplice to the current merciless APC government, who fought a political battle—over his inspiration for the Kano state gubernatorial office—with Kwankwaso and his boy, Abba Gida Gida, but lost to them. He was once their worst enemy. But today, he and the Abba’s boss kwankwaso have leagued up as sweet friends in another political party (ADC) each with different and individual vested interest: kwankwaso to dislodge the assumed betraying government of Abba Gida Gida as well as to occupy an influencial office in the presidency; while Gawuna, to use it as an opportunity to become the kano state governor which he failed to in his previous opposition party APC. 

4. Peter Obi 

This person has the worst political andecedent, being the former governor of Anambra State and has—allegedly— a strong affiliation to IPOB, being the terrorist and outlawed political group in Nigeria, which had been perennially insurgent and rebellious to successive Nigerian governments with their impossible mission of dividing the country and taking their own share, which they aimed to call BIAFRA. So Peter Obi might clearly have this scheme hidden in his mind to, when he tapped the supreme power —presidency—become instrumental for the IPOB to finally make it possible to see the last light —they have been dying and killing people for—at the end of the tunnel, and reach their daydreamed-promised land. Polarising the country is the plot of his horizon. 

Likewise, if you pay very close attention to the other people who will be cross-carpeting into the party, ADC. You will notice that they were once fundamental figures in the previous governments who failed the masses and never took concrete, robust action to save their lives and property. Let alone improving their welfare and standard of living. Tell me, when did they change to be trusted with our mandates and entrusted with our lives once again, simply because they moved into another political party? The same applied to the others who are beneficiaries of the current APC government and are now quitting it for the shining party of the day, ADC.

Let me wrap up by telling you the secret of these Nigerian politicians. 

The fact is, they are always the same set of people.  They only switch color and identity by jumping from one political party to another— using the very public funds they looted while occupying the public offices they were once either elected or appointed into — with romanticized manifestations to sway the minds of the poor masses and pave a wider way for themselves to achieving their vested and selfish interest; increasingly impoverish the already poor masses, steal their future and the future of their children and grandchildren; while enriching themselves, their children and grandchildren, making their lives and future always the brighter.

And mind you, they switch political parties based on their analysis of which political party the poor masses lean their attention and hope towards. This means that it’s always the previous, unchanging enemies the masses mistake for their beloved ones and the beacon of hope, revolution, and transformation. 

Therefore, until the poor citizens of Nigeria understand these Nigerian politicians’ Machiavellian formula and devise a way to dismantle it—instead of continuing with their primitive thinking that their problems lie with one political party and that the solutions are in another—they shall continue to live in bondage, suffering, humiliation and destitution.

Mohammed Usman (Noble-pen) is the Author Of “Butterfly’s Wings.”

By Abba Marke

Across the length and breadth of Jigawa State, conversations are heating up. In tea joints, markets, and political circles, people are talking, and what they’re talking about is the sudden and somewhat surprising shift in tone from the administration of Governor Malam Umar Namadi Danmodi.

Barely halfway through its first tenure, the Jigawa State Government has begun sending strong signals that it intends to seek re-election in 2027. The governor’s close allies and political associates have, in recent weeks, made comments and gestures that clearly point toward a second-term ambition.

To many observers, this early campaign-like posture has come as a shock. The people of Jigawa expected that, at this midpoint in his administration, the governor’s main focus would be on governance, performance, and fulfilment of campaign promises made during the 2023 elections. Instead, they now see high-ranking officials raising eight fingers — a symbolic declaration of a “second term” agenda — while many of the promises that inspired the electorate’s trust remain unfulfilled.

This development has left the public asking some serious and legitimate questions:

1. Is it already time to begin campaigning for the 2027 elections?

2. Have all the commitments made to the people of Jigawa in 2023 been accomplished?

These questions are not born out of malice or opposition politics; they stem from a genuine concern among citizens who want to see their state move forward. The people yearn for progress — for improved infrastructure, better schools, reliable healthcare, job opportunities for the youth, and meaningful reforms that impact their daily lives.

However, they now worry that the government’s attention is shifting away from governance toward political preservation. Many fear that this early flirtation with the idea of a second term could become a major distraction, diverting energy and resources from the actual work of leadership.

History has shown that once a sitting government becomes preoccupied with re-election, governance often suffers. Projects slow down. Accountability weakens. Public servants often start aligning themselves with political interests rather than serving the public. The people of Jigawa, who have placed their hopes in this administration, fear that this could be the same path being taken once again.

What the public is calling for is simple: focus on the job at hand. Let the government channel its full strength into delivering on its promises — building roads, improving agriculture, empowering the youth, reforming education, and uplifting rural communities. Once visible progress is made and the people feel the impact of good governance, the question of a second term will naturally answer itself.

For now, the citizens of Jigawa are watching closely. They want results, not rallies. They want action, not ambition. And they want their leaders to remember that time spent seeking a second term could be better spent earning it.

Abba Marke wrote via abbayusufmarke@gmail.com.

By Misbahu El-Hamza

President Bola Tinubu has finally responded to the false accusation of a “Christian genocide” in Nigeria, a narrative that surfaced in late September. Yet as this claim gains traction in U.S. conservative circles, he should be more worried about his political prospects. The narrative—and U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent call to redesignate Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC)—could give Washington both motive and cover to oppose Tinubu’s re-election in 2027, just as former President Goodluck Jonathan alleged of the Obama administration in 2015.

Former President Jonathan publicly claimed that he lost the 2015 election because of U.S. interference. Two issues broadly defined the diplomatic rift between the two governments. The first was Boko Haram’s insurgency and the abduction of the Chibok girls. In a 2018 BBC interview, Jonathan lamented that Nigerians in the U.S. joined public protests there, one of which famously featured Michelle Obama holding a placard with the slogan #BringBackOurGirls.

At the October 2025 launch of ‘SCARS: Nigeria’s Journey and the Boko Haram Conundrum,’ by former Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Lucky Irabor (retd.), Jonathan recalled: “When I was in office, one of the major scars on my government, and one I will retire with, is the issue of the Chibok girls. As Bishop Kukah said, no plastic or cosmetic surgeon will remove it.” The then-opposition under Muhammadu Buhari, which included Tinubu, exploited insecurity for political advantage, a factor that clearly contributed to Jonathan’s loss.

The second, and in my opinion, more damaging rift was Jonathan’s stance against same-sex marriage, reflecting the convictions of most Nigerians. In 2014, he signed the Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act, shortly after the Obama administration’s 2011 pledge to “use all the tools of American diplomacy” to promote gay rights globally. Washington’s reaction was swift. The White House warned of possible cuts to HIV/AIDS and anti-malaria funding, while Jonathan’s government held firm. Nigerians applauded him for that. But during the 2015 campaign, the Obama administration’s outreach, including direct appeals to Nigerian voters and a high-profile visit by Secretary of State John Kerry, was widely viewed as tacit support for Buhari, which many Nigerians, including Jonathan himself, believe shaped the election’s outcome.

Insecurity also played a domestic role in Jonathan’s downfall. Nigerians were increasingly alarmed by unrelenting violence—beyond Boko Haram, currently compounded by communal, ethnic, and religious clashes and by banditry mostly in northern Nigeria—that claimed hundreds of innocent lives. Regardless of how the world described it, the reality was and is still tragic. It eroded public trust and patriotism. Yet successive governments, rather than restoring security, have often appeared more concerned with foreign perceptions than with rebuilding national confidence and truly working to end the bloodshed of innocent Nigerians.

So, while Jonathan’s administration angered the Obama White House over the same-sex marriage law, many believe that Tinubu’s has irritated Washington for another reason.

In early September, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz introduced the Nigeria Religious Freedom Accountability Act of 2025 (S.2747) to the U.S. Senate. The bill seeks to sanction Nigerian officials allegedly complicit in “Islamist jihadist violence against Christians and other minorities” and those “enforcing blasphemy laws”. Blasphemy remains an offence under Nigeria’s criminal code and in the twelve northern states operating shari’a law. Yet, the Cruz bill’s language raises serious questions: how would the former officials be identified, and on what evidence? If Washington possesses proof, it has not presented any. Within Nigeria, such accusations often surface in political rhetoric but rarely withstand scrutiny.

Still, Nigeria’s greater “offence” under Tinubu—at least to American conservatives like Bill Maher, Mike Arnold, Ted Cruz, Riley Moore, and now Donald Trump—is its unwavering support for the Palestinian people. Successive Nigerian governments, whether Christian- or Muslim-led, have consistently condemned Israel’s occupation and called for a two-state solution as the only path to peace. This position, long-standing and bipartisan in Nigeria, clashes directly with Washington’s pro-Israel consensus.

After Nigeria’s firm statement at the 80th UN General Assembly in September, Maher went on his HBO show and declared, “I’m not a Christian, but they are systematically killing the Christians in Nigeria,” comparing it to Gaza and calling it “a more serious genocide.” Such claims, amplified by Trump’s rhetoric about “defending Christians,” serve U.S. political optics more than global justice. Recall Trump’s 2020 CPC designation for Nigeria. It was largely symbolic and carried no enforcement before he left office. His renewed posturing appears equally opportunistic.

Tinubu may believe U.S. pressure arises from concern for Christian victims of Islamist violence and that this aligns with Nigeria’s large Christian population. Yet the U.S. record tells a different story. The same establishment that condemns persecution in Nigeria supports Israel’s war in Gaza, where many casualties are both Muslim and Christian Palestinians.

If Nigeria accuses Washington of selective advocacy, it may find sympathy at home, but not in Washington, where lobbying interests dominate the narrative. Assuming that the “Christian genocide” argument will shield Nigeria from criticism would be a miscalculation.

Tinubu is not yet where Jonathan stood in 2015, but the parallels are unmistakable. The Obama administration’s posture during Jonathan’s re-election bid showed how U.S. influence can shape Nigerian politics. A sustained clash with U.S. policy on religious freedom and Palestine, coupled with insecurity and governance failures, could become a tipping point. Avoiding that outcome will require strategic diplomacy (which we have no doubt our president possesses), credible reform, and a domestic agenda rooted in accountability. Nigerians must see real action towards ending Boko Haram and banditry.

This moment demands political acumen and the disciplined management of both security and foreign relations. Tinubu cannot afford to repeat Jonathan’s missteps. In global politics, misreading Washington’s signals has previously cost Nigerian presidents, and history may not be kind to those who fail to learn from it.

Misbahu writes from Kano and can be reached via email: misbahulhamza@gmail.com

By Zayyad I. Muhammad 

Since February 6th, 2013, when the All Progressives Congress (APC) was formed, the party has been the darling of the North. In the 2015, 2019, and 2023 presidential elections, the North was instrumental in bringing and maintaining the APC in power at the centre. However, in President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s just two years in power, there is widespread aggrievement against the Tinubu government in the North. This is surprising and unsurprising as well:

Out of the 8.7 million votes that brought President Ahmed Bola Tinubu to power, the North collectively contributed 5.6 million votes, accounting for approximately 64% of his total. In contrast, the South contributed 3.2 million votes, or 36%. Given this overwhelming support, it is surprising that the President has allowed the North to slip from his political grip so easily.

To be fair to Tinubu, every President seeks to reward close associates, loyalists, and political allies, including in his own way of governing. However, Tinubu appears to have gone too far in prioritising his inner circle, often at the expense of the region that gave him his strongest mandate.

The good news is that Tinubu still has ample time to regain the North’s confidence. But to succeed, he must act based on facts, not emotions, nor the filtered narratives he hears from those around him.

Broadly, Tinubu must focus on four urgent actions, grouped under two components: one political and three socioeconomic.

The President has made good progress in building elite consensus but must expand to persuade more politicians and elites. Some seek recognition, relevance, appointments, or contracts. Tinubu can quickly address this: by calling, offering appointments, or granting contracts. There’s room for more Advisers, Special Assistants, and ambassadorial positions.

Furthermore, he should establish a Presidential Advisory Council in each state, a small team of respected voices who can meet quarterly to brief him directly on the needs and aspirations of their people. This will give Northern leaders a sense of inclusion and shared ownership in governance.

The second component, socioeconomic, comprises three elements: Agriculture, Livestock, and security and infrastructure.

This is where Tinubu must be most deliberate. Socioeconomic issues directly affect the masses, the real voters. The August 16, 2025, by-election has already shown that money politics will have limited influence by 2027.

Tinubu has tried to stabilise food prices, but the cost of farm inputs has skyrocketed. The North urgently needs a dedicated agricultural recovery program. Past initiatives, such as the Anchor Borrowers’ Programme, the Presidential Fertiliser Initiative (PFI), Youth Farm Lab, Paddy Aggregation Scheme, Agricultural Trust Fund, PEDI, and the Food Security Council, were well-conceived. Yet implementation failures meant that benefits rarely reached genuine farmers.

For instance, under the PFI, fertiliser blenders made fortunes, but farmers, who should have been the real beneficiaries, still buy fertilisers at ₦45,000–₦52,000 per bag, far above the ₦5,000 target price.

Tinubu must ensure that agriculture is reconnected to ordinary farmers, not just middlemen. The Ministry of Agriculture should recalibrate its projects and programs to target real farmers directly.

The creation of the Federal Ministry of Livestock Development was a brilliant and forward-thinking step. Yet, it has made little impact so far.

With proper funding and direction, this ministry can: transform nomadic herders into more settled, educated, and productive citizens; address the farmer-herder conflict that has claimed thousands of lives; reduce cattle rustling, banditry, and kidnapping, which are often linked to herder communities.

If effectively managed, the ministry can become one of Tinubu’s most enduring legacies in the North.

Security remains the North’s most pressing concern. The kinetic and non-kinetic strategies being coordinated by the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) are yielding some positive results, but much more is needed.

Tinubu should expand the non-kinetic approach through security communications, utilising massive public relations and grassroots outreach, particularly in the Hausa and Fulfulde languages. Talking directly to communities and even to at-risk groups will deepen trust, reduce misinformation, and weaken extremist recruitment.

Another way to rewin the North is through concerted efforts to make sure the ongoing and stalled infrastructure projects are fast-tracked, especially the ongoing rehabilitation of the Abuja-Kaduna expressway, some deplorable roads in the Northeast, especially along the Gombe-Adamawa axis, the Mambila hydroelectric project, Sokoto-Badagry Freeway/Highway, Kaduna-Kano Standard Gauge Rail Project, and Kano-Maradi Rail Link.

The North gave Tinubu his strongest mandate in the 2023 election. Losing its trust would be politically costly in 2027. To recover lost ground, the President must move beyond token gestures and adopt a deliberate, structured engagement strategy that balances elite consensus with grassroots socioeconomic transformation.

If Tinubu can act decisively on these four fronts, more political inclusion, agricultural recovery, livestock reform, enhanced security, and fast-track ongoing infrastructure projects, he will not only rewin the  Northern confidence but also secure massive votes in 2027

Zayyad I. Muhammad writes from Abuja via zaymohd@yahoo.com.