Even if you are not a movie buff—which I am not—you probably know the classic line from Clint Eastwood’s action movie “Dirty Harry.” With Eastwood’s character pointing a gun to the temple of a bloodied bad guy, he asked him, “Do you feel lucky, punk?” It is a line whose irony might resonate with newly sworn-in President Muhammadu Buhari.
With Buhari taking office when the economy is in tatters, we could well ask him, “Do you feel lucky, Mr. President?” This question, though, is far less ironic than Dirty Harry’s. In fact, the forthright answer could well be, “Yes, I do.”
It is not just because Buhari has done what is rare in the annals of democracy: becoming a head of state twice, first by the gun and then by the ballot. And, for that matter, more than 30 years apart.
And it is not just that he attained the rare feat despite considerable political baggage. In the African context, the only parallel I can think of is South Africa’s Jacob Zuma.
The irony of ironies is that Buhari should be feeling lucky because the economic skid takes the pressure off him. Oil prices have taken a precipitous fall. The naira has tumbled and, for the most part, continues to tumble. Electricity supply, which is anaemic at the best of times, has shrunk even further. Then came strikes by petroleum workers, which grounded everyone and stalled even mobile phone services. Even before these setbacks, millions of workers have gone without pay for months.
Ordinarily, one would think that providence has dealt the Buhari administration a bad hand, but not necessarily. Buhari and the All Progressives Congress could well feel a sense of relief from lowered expectations.
In most contracts, there is a “force majeure” clause. It relieves one or both parties to the contract from their obligations when circumstances beyond their control make fulfillment impossible. There is no such clause in the implicit contract between the elected and the electorate. However, there is a parallel.
During the campaigns, Buhari and the APC promised much more than they can deliver. Now, with regard to the most critical promises, they can evoke the political equivalent of “force majeure” and say, “No, can’t do.”
Buhari’s central campaign promise was with regard to the economy. He would transform the infrastructure, sharply reduce unemployment, provide monthly allowances to the most impoverished Nigerians, rev up the economy, and even get the naira to parity with the dollar. Well, this last incredulous promise was retracted no sooner than it was made. But the others technically remain on the contract. That is, unless Buhari invokes “force majeure.”
Actually, he and the APC chieftains are already doing that. No sooner was he elected than he began to plead with Nigerians for patience. The usually unflappable retired general even admitted to nervousness about the assumption of office. “The expectation is too high and I have started nervously to explain to people that Rome was not built in a day,” he was quoted as saying in a speech.
He and APC spokesmen are also accusing the administration of President Goodluck Jonathan of hoisting the economic problems to subvert the incoming administration.
“Never in the history of our country has any government handed over to another a more distressed country,” the APC’s Lai Mohammed said in an emailed statement to Agence France Pressebut then, Mr. Mohammed, never before has our country had a party-to-party transition. So, there is really nothing to compare with, is there? But I digress.
Back to the point, the APC is even more strident in an official statement.”The outgoing administration has shown neither the capacity nor the willingness to resolve any of the crises it has contrived and foisted on the nation,” the party wrote.
But why would an administration wreck the economy during its tenure, even at the end? It would make more sense to hand over an economy in good order against which the new administration would be judged. A logical means of subversion would be to plant the seeds— the equivalent of the Trojan horse — and sit back post-tenure to observe the treachery at work.
In any case, Jonathan’s spokesmen are turning the tables. To them, Buhari and the APC are actually responsible for subverting the economy. Some point to the fact that the fuel shortage started as the election approached, and they see that as the APC’s ploy to discredit the Jonathan administration.
Jonathan’s spokesman, Reuben Abati, makes the lower-the-expectation charge. “We find it curious and more than a coincidence that the nation is experiencing an acute shortage of fuel and electricity supply at this point in time, when such has not been the case under the current PDP-led administration,” he was quoted as saying. “We ask, are there some forces sabotaging the system to create an impression that the APC is inheriting poor infrastructure and complete system breakdown.”
If I were to accept either side of the blame game, I would opt forAbati’s as more plausible. But I dismiss both claims of sabotage, naïve though that might be. The primary reason for the economic difficulties is a force beyond either party’s control. It is the collapse of crude oil prices and the consequent fall in the value of the naira. Are there complicating factors, such as corruption and political malevolence? Maybe. But these have to be complicating factors, not precipitating ones.
Now, back to the invocation of “force majeure,” Buhari and the APC have to be wary of its short shelf life and limitations. As President Barack Obama’s administration learned soon enough in the United States, it doesn’t take long before people begin to say, “Whatever happened before, it is your economy now.”
Also, the economic difficulties do not at all affect other expectations: the taming of corruption and institution of a cost-effective administrative apparatus, for examples. In fact, expectations would be even higher in these regards.
Buhari and the APC also have to be wary of the consequences of crying wolf too often. When the elections were postponed, they said it was a coup. When the Jonathan administration suggested an earlier transition, they said it was sabotage. And now they see the economic difficulties as another sabotage. It doesn’t take long before such shrillness begins to lose all credibility.
Source: Punch
Comments
Post a Comment