Another way to look at the logic of the above contention is to raise the question why has 2011 presidential discourse and politics being reduced to the South-North debate? Is this not indicative of how the zoning question and the 2015 presidency constitute the political pressure which determines who gets what in 2011? Why has Jonathan refused to make a promise on the 2015 Igbo presidency? Is this not suggestive of what he has traded off in order to achieve his 2011 presidential dreams? Given this reality, is it expected that the Ndigbo would accept this without exploring option that can brighten their chances of realizing the 2015 Igbo presidency dream? However unfortunate it may be that such indexes are determining and shaping the outlook of our politics, disregarding these indexes might be tantamount to divorcing issues from the existing political context, historical reality and situational psychology.
With respect to the Northern delegate votes, it is worth recounting the recent statement credited to the Director General of the Jonathan/Sambo campaign organisation Dr Dalhatu Sarki Tafida. During a recent campaign tour in the South-South, Tafida said, ““Mr. President you are lucky. You are lucky because these people you see here love you. However, there are challenges, challenges in the sense that other zones are competing with you. The north-west is competing with you. The North-East where we think we have an aspirant there is competing with you. Believe you me, the North- East (Atiku) may even beat you in the polling zone, therefore you should be careful! Be careful! (turning towards Jonathan). They are working very hard! They are working very hard…”
Tafida was speaking the obvious when he listed the North-East and North-West as zones that are competing with Jonathan. These are zones where the zoning question bears a significant influence, hence, the prospect that Atiku will amass a stunning majority of the delegate vote from this zone. Although the North central is opened to these two PDP top contenders, giving Atiku’s political spread and aged-long relationship with stakeholders in this zone, he stands a good chance of having upper hand over Jonathan in this zone. There are even other political actors from the North-West and North-East who can assist Atiku in penetrating the North-central. To the exception of the power of incumbency, Jonathan’s camp may be said to be lacking such political reservoirs. Besides this factor, regional, ethnical and regional sentiments will strongly influence the voting dimension in these zones, therefore, another reason why the overwhelming majority of the delegate votes would be lost by Jonathan.
At this juncture, the indexes of political calculus would be put to use in analyzing how the chances of Jonathan’s emergence as PDP flag bearer will be effected. The first of these indexes is political risk which as defined a source is “an unquantifiable risk that future events will cause a current political commitment to look bad, with the benefit of hindsight, and thus incur a future political cost from a past action.”
Going by my previous analysis of what the PDP went through or the grounds it lost owing to the crisis instigated by Obasanjo during his hey days as the number one man in PDP, the party’s stakeholders and its delegates will be affected by the psychology of this past and the consequential crises that might trail the abandonment of zoning which is enshrined in the party’s constitution.
Zoning, power sharing and rotation philosophy between the South and the North as pragmatic analyst would concede, was the focal point that underlined the formation of the PDP and upon which its continued existence is hinged. This is expressly stated in Article 7, subsection 2c, of the PDP constitution, which states that “in pursuance of the principle of equity, justice and fairness, the party shall adhere to the policy of rotation and zoning of party and public elective offices, and it shall be enforced by the appropriate executive committee at all levels.”
The validity of the above claim on zoning vis-a-vis the relevance of zoning to the formation and sustenance of PDP as a political party will become clearer when Article 7, subsection 2c quoted above is read against a preamble in the party’s constitution which reads, “ “to create socio-political conditions conducive to national peace and unity by ensuring fair and equitable distribution of resources and opportunities, to conform with the principles of power shift and power sharing by rotating key political offices among the diverse peoples of our country and evolving powers equitably between the federal, state and local governments in the spirit of federalism.”
Readers are implored to bear in mind that the PDP was formed based on the collective interest of some elites with varying religious, political, and ethnical background whose common goal is to ensure that the leadership of the country is produced and retained within their circle. It was with this spirit that the concept of zoning, power sharing and rotation was conceived by the PDP stakeholders and founding fathers. In fact, this is a permanent interest that is common and topmost on the agenda setting of any political parties. To achieve this on the long term basis, and also sustain the life of the PDP, then, the principle of zoning was devised so that both a sort of balancing would be maintained between the South and the North.
Therefore, if one man’s ambition will create an implosion that will eventually affect the interest of the elites within the PDP, cause the PDP to lose its national dominance and peradventure accelerate the collapse of the PDP, then, it is definite that at the decisive moment, such ambition would be sacrificed.
Card carrying and non-card carrying members of the PDP are aware of how Jonathan’s ambition has created serious cracks within the rank and file in the PDP, therefore, based on the factor of political risk, it may be argued that the probability is on the high side that most party delegates and stakeholders would work against the emergence of Jonathan as the PDP presidential flag bearer.
Another way to reconsider the above argument is to use the yard stick of political cost which is defined by a source as “a measurable and unavoidable expenditure of political capital for taking an action (political commitment).” The PDP’s ultimate political commitment is to retain the forces in the North and the South that are central to its continued national dominance. This is defining point of PDP’s political capital without which its objectives on the power question and national dominance cannot be achieved. Therefore, as it is normal that individuals’ conflicting interests will always exist in a political setup, it is also natural that in so much the permanent party’s interest remains, certain individual political ambitions/interests will be traded as a forgone cost in favour of that which makes it possible for the permanent interest to be sustained.
Based on this logic, it is my take that Jonathan’s ambition would at the end of the day, be made the political alternative forgone which simultaneously, is needed to preserve the soul and body of the PDP. In other words, by working out the defeat of Jonathan at the PDP primaries, it would be considered by the party’s elites and stakeholders that the PDP will be deriving the value of the best other use to which Jonathan’s emergence would have caused them. Therefore, Jonathan’s ambition would, based on the relationship between PDP’s permanent interest and the concept of political cost, in preference to the concept of zoning-the opportunity cost- which is needed to get the spirit and body of PDP together, be made as the alternative forgone.
One of the several recent developments which establishes the veracity of this argument was
how the PDP responded to the threat of IBB that he will dump the party if the concept of zoning is not respected. The party was well aware of the bandwagon effect that this will create and its imminent effect on the life of the party, and its permanent interest as identified in this piece, therefore, the reason why a day after the threat was issued by IBB, an emergency meeting of PDP National working committee was conveyed to discuss this matter on the 10 December, 2010.
Emissaries were in the wake of some political realities sent to IBB not to leave this party. The reason why such decision was taken, one will contend, was not as a result of the overbearing influence of IBB within the PDP. Rather, it is more politically wise to reason that this was based on the sensitivity of the basis on which he, IBB, predicated his quest to leave the party. This reason as stated by IBB’s is because jettisoning zoning, “simply means that they reject (zoning) and are therefore not prepared to conform to the principles of power shift and power sharing by rotating key political offices amongst the diverse peoples of our country and devolving powers equitably between the Federal, State and Local Governments in the spirit of federation. …If the Party has become so helpless in the face of these gross violations of its own constitution by its officers and its highest elected representative, then, many of us shall have no alternative but to reconsider our continued membership of the Party.” Based on this statement extract, one may therefore not require uncommon wisdom to decipher what may become of Jonathan’s ambition when the PDP presidential primaries are held.
Another argument which dovetails the above conclusion is to recount that the crises which started with Obasanjo, cascaded during the election that produced Yar’Adua and this was somehow well managed during the latter’s reign. However, after the latter’s death, the crises imploded with Jonathan’s bid to overrule the party’s constitution so that he can emerge as the party presidential flag bearer. This factor has generated series of reaction and wave of spiraling sentiment which has portrayed Jonathan’s candidacy as one that is against the party’s concept of zoning, and such which is aimed at undermining the Northern interest. It is on this premise that those who are opposing Jonathan’s candidacy on the platform of PDP are premising their argument and this was the foundation upon IBB predicated his threat that they made the PDP to send a delegation which tried to pacify him to remain within the party’s fold. This factor, it is obvious, is potent and critical to continued sustenance of the psychology of PDP as a political party, the party’s soul and spirit and the machinery it relies on, to sustain its hold on the politics of Nigeria.
Since Jonathan has power of incumbency to his advantage, one would expect him to fight this issue using all arsenals at his disposal. Therefore, it is essential that this factor be examined, hence, the focus on the next index of political calculus, political desire.
One other factor that might work against Jonathan is his low political desire scorecard’s rating. Here, political desire is, as defined by a source, “an elected official’s interest in seeing a particular issue successfully addressed.” At the party level, it is a known fact that Jonathan has demonstrated leadership inability to manage the crises within the party. Even evidences would be provided to argue how the internal party crises that are rocking the PDP has increased in manifold since Jonathan’s reign as the party’s number one person. Similar argument might be raised on how Jonathan has not been able to manage the nation’s economy and insecurity. All these will reduce the potency of the incumbency factor and hence, compromise the chances of Jonathan when the die is to be cast.
Another way to argue how the incumbency factor will not work in favour of Jonathan is to take a critical look on some happenings between Jonathan and PDP governors. One would wonder that the governors who bought Jonathan’s application form, and graced his declaration as a “mark of support for his candidacy” were the ones that Jonathan later forced to “endorse” his candidacy. Jonathan who was fully conscious of the fact that he hardly enjoys the real political support pledged him by the PDP governors, was so helpless that at a crying point, he issued the following statement:
You have given assurances of support but some of you are secretly campaigning for Atiku. I can’t stand here and be humiliated by you. Everything I have asked for, you have refused to give me. No president anywhere has been treated by his party the way you are treating me.” … “I am the captain of this boat. I am not going down alone. I am going to sink this boat and go down with all that are in it.
From the first part of the above statement of Jonathan, it is obvious that Jonathan knew that he does not enjoy the real support of most the PDP governors. It also shows that he is fully aware of the fact that he would be defeated at the primaries and that he does not enjoy the party’s real support. It was on the strength of this reality that he issued the threat, “I am the captain of this boat. I am not going down alone. I am going to sink this boat and go down with all that are in it” which was aimed at caging governor and force them to make a retreat from their decisions not to back him. The governors who were of course smarter and who have learnt from experience of the past decided to issue another false declaration which was so much sensationalized by the media without much analysis of the authenticity of such endorsement. It may even be asked that but Obasanjo succeeded in using incumbency to achieve his succession agenda.
First, it seems more apt that why attempting to find the most logical explanation why Jonathan might not succeed with the same factor, to bear in mind that Obasanjo unlike Jonathan was over a long period of time able to manipulate and work out the exit of the gladiators/political caterpillars that were opposed to his agenda. In this case of Jonathan, those gladiators are not only back in the fold of the PDP, but are tirelessly working and freely operating as effective power blocs who are plotting how to pay back Obasanjo in his coin and in effect, this will affect Jonathan’s agenda.
Also, another reason why the incumbency factor might not really work in favour of Jonathan is that the time factor needed to put this to effective use is not on the latter’s side and most importantly, Jonathan, unlike Obasanjo, is not a veteran of the game. But of all these factors, it is my take that the most significant one that might really undermine Jonathan’s incumbency factor is that Jonathan, unlike Obasanjo, lacks what it takes to force his political opponents on exile from the party or render them effectively silenced. He has tried this and failed on many occasions. The same tactics being highlighted was deplored by Tinubu when he wanted to hijack and dismantle the then Alliance for Democracy (AD) structure and similar trend, may, if further researched, be found in the politics of the first, second and third republics.
Consequently, if the endorsements and what has been sensationalized about Jonathan’s chances are real, I leave readers to wonder why was it that the PDP governors frustrated Jonathan’s attempt to change the order of conduct of the PDP primaries? Readers are also tasked to wonder, why was it that Jonathan desperately attempted to get the constitution of the country changed by effecting major changes in the electoral act? Were these maneuvers not indicative of the fact that Jonathan and the PDP governors are playing hide and seek game?
All of these questions and other factors argued above are instructive and poin
ters to the fact that Jonathan has enjoyed more support in the imaginary world than in the real world of politics where decision will be taken on the probable emergence as PDP presidential flag bearer.
