Vice President Kashim Shettima’s candid admission of poor leadership, corruption, and pervasive poverty as the root causes of the recent vandalism and looting in parts of Northern Nigeria stands in stark contrast to the narrative spun by Dele Alake, who labeled the nationwide protests as a calculated attempt at regime change. This divergence in perspectives within the highest echelons of power reflects a deeper tension between addressing the real issues afflicting the Nigerian State and deflecting criticism with convenient political narratives….READ FULL ARTICLE...READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE ▶▶
Vice President Shettima’s remarks offer a rare moment of introspection from the second-highest ranking official of the current APC administration. By acknowledging the failure of leadership, the pervasive corruption, and the crippling poverty that have plagued the North for decades, Vice President Shettima addresses the systemic issues that have led to widespread disillusionment and unrest. His recognition that these vices have bred a generation of youth who feel abandoned by the state and alienated from society speaks to the heart of the problem. Shettima’s assertion that the social vices tolerated for too long have culminated in the current unrest underscores the urgent need for reform. His call for a complete overhaul of the system is a recognition that the status quo is unsustainable and that genuine change is necessary to prevent further deterioration. This is a far cry from the dismissive tone often adopted by some of his colleagues in the same APC’s boat of governance, who seem to prefer to paint such protests as the work of agitators rather than as a reflection of legitimate grievances. For instance, Mr. Dele Alake’s portrayal of the protests as an attempt to forcibly change the government not only misrepresents the reality on ground but also undermines the genuine concerns of the protesters. By framing the protests as a threat to the country’s democracy rather than as a call for accountability and reform, Alake’s narrative seeks to delegitimize the voices of those who are suffering under the weight of economic hardship and systemic injustice. This regime change narrative serves as a convenient tool to deflect criticism and rally support for the government by painting protesters as enemies of the state. However, this approach fails to address the underlying issues that sparked the protests in the first place. It also risks further alienating a population that is already deeply distrustful of the government and its intentions.
To return to VP Shettima’s candid reflections, the recent #EndBadGovernance protests have laid bare the raw anger simmering within Nigeria’s youth, particularly in the northern region. Vice President Kashim Shettima’s remarks, conveyed through his Special Adviser on Political Matters, Dr. Hakeem Baba-Ahmad, underscore a grim reality: the North is treading a dangerous ground. The restiveness and defiance displayed by the youth, who no longer fear the army, police, or any authority, is a stark manifestation of the deep-seated frustration born out of hunger and hopelessness. When hunger becomes a constant companion, it has a numbing effect. It desensitizes individuals to pain, suffering, and even the threat of death. The Northern youth, emboldened by their desperation, have reached a point where they no longer fear the consequences of their actions. Hunger is not only a physical condition but a powerful force that strips individuals of their humanity, dulls their senses, and erodes their fear of consequences. When a population is pushed to the brink by chronic hunger, the instinct for survival takes over, and all other considerations – respect for authority, fear of the law, and even the sanctity of life -become secondary. This is the dangerous reality facing the North today, where millions of young people, left to fend for themselves in a country that seems to have forgotten them, are lashing out in anger. The protests, driven by a desperate need for change, were a direct response to the destitution of leadership in the region. The Northern youth, many of whom are uneducated, unemployed, and disillusioned, see no future in the current system. For them, the protests were not just about bad governance – they were a cry for help, a plea for recognition in a country where they feel invisible. The social contract, which binds citizens to respect and obey authority in exchange for protection and provision, has been shattered. In its place is a dangerous mindset where survival takes precedence over everything else, and where the youth are willing to challenge the very institutions that are supposed to safeguard their future. This desensitization is evident in the way the youth confronted security forces during the protests. Unafraid and unyielding, they stood their ground, not because they were reckless, but because they had nothing else left to lose. The hunger that gnaws at their bellies has also eaten and gnawed away their fears, leaving behind a generation of young people who are angry, disillusioned, and ready to take matters into their own hands. This explains why the daring youths driven by mob mentality confronted a crack team of anti-riot police, dispossessing them of an Amoured Personnel Carrier (APC), and cruising around with it!
Fidelity Leaderboard
Vice President Shettima’s observations point to a leadership crisis that has left the North vulnerable to unrest. The failure of Northern leaders to address the root causes of poverty, illiteracy, and unemployment has created a vacuum that has been filled by anger and resentment. The youth’s lack of respect for authority is not just a rebellion against the police or the army. Indeed; it is a rejection of a system that has failed to provide them with the basic necessities of life. The Northern youths see their leaders as distant, out of touch with their daily struggles, and more concerned with their own interests than with the welfare of the people. This disconnect has fueled a sense of alienation and abandonment, driving the youth to take drastic actions in a bid to be heard. The #EndBadGovernance protests transcended the boundary of accountability quest. They were a declaration of independence from a system that has consistently failed them. The situation in the North is a ticking time bomb that cannot be ignored. The government must urgently address the root causes of youth restiveness, starting with tackling hunger and poverty head-on. Food security, education, and job creation must be at the forefront of any meaningful intervention. Moreover, the government must work to rebuild trust between the youth and the institutions that are meant to protect and serve them. This will require a new kind of leadership, one that is empathetic, responsive, and willing to engage with the youth on their terms. It will also require transparency and accountability at all levels of government, to show the youth that their concerns are being taken seriously and that their voices matter.
On the flip side, the statement by Dr. Dele Alake, the Minister of Solid Mineral Development, following the Council of State meeting on August 13, 2024, represents a classical misstep in addressing roiling national discontent. By framing the #EndBadGovernance protest as an “attempted regime change,” Alake has not only mischaracterized the nature of the protests but also dangerously conflated legitimate public dissent with insurrection. This approach is problematic on several levels, and it raises important questions about the role of government officials in managing public discourse and the separation of responsibilities within the administration. The #EndBadGovernance protest was basically a manifestation of widespread frustration and anger at the state of governance in Nigeria. The protestors, many of whom were young Nigerians, were driven by a desire for accountability, transparency, and better governance. To dismiss this movement as an attempted “regime change by force” is to ignore the legitimate grievances of millions of citizens who are dissatisfied with the current state of affairs. By labeling the protest as an insurrection, Alake is not only undermining the democratic right of citizens to express their discontent but is wilfully ignoring the root causes and by so doing, stoking fear and division. Such rhetoric can lead to a further erosion of trust between the government and the governed, deepening the already palpable sense of alienation and frustration among the populace.
Quite instructively, Vice President Shettima and Governor Sule of Nasarawa State have been candid about the root causes of the unrest that culminated in the #EndBadGovernance protests. Equally on the same page of well-meaning Nigerians at different fora, constantly sounding a cautionary alarm about the proverbial ‘gun-powder keg’ are former President Obasanjo, Gov Caleb Muftang of Plateau State, and Minister of State for Education, Yusuf Sununu. They have pointed to issues such as rampant hunger, unemployment, lack of education, and the resultant widespread disillusionment among the youth, particularly in the northern region, all of which conspire to press the time-bomb button. These are the real drivers behind the protests – systemic failures that have left millions of Nigerians feeling abandoned by their government. Shettima, in his remarks, highlighted the dangerous disconnection between the state and the youth, who no longer see any value in respecting institutions that have consistently failed them. Governor Sule echoed similar sentiments, pointing out the explosive combination of poverty, illiteracy, and the absence of meaningful opportunities, which have driven many young people to the streets in search of change. Instead of acknowledging these deeply rooted issues, Alake’s statement appears to deflect from them by focusing on a supposed threat to the current administration, which seemed every inch a fleeting ghost raised from his vegetative imagination. This narrative not only undermines the credibility of the government’s response to the protests but also risks inflaming tensions further. By framing the protests as a “movement to effect a change of regime by force,” Alake dismisses the legitimate grievances of millions of Nigerians and trivializes their struggles. Such an approach is not only misleading but also counterproductive. It diverts attention from the urgent need for reforms and reinforces the perception that the government is more concerned with preserving its power than addressing the needs of its people. This mischaracterization could lead to a dangerous erosion of trust between the government and the citizens, further deepening the crisis of governance in Nigeria.
Dr. Dele Alake, as the Minister of Solid Mineral Development, who has a specific portfolio that is crucial to the economic development of the country, has by assuming an amorphous role of a presidential spokesperson, chosen to blur the lines of duty and cross the boundaries. His role involves overseeing the exploration, development, and regulation of Nigeria’s vast mineral resources. It is not within his purview to act as the presidential spokesperson or to make declarations about national security and the interpretation of political protests. By stepping into this role, Alake not only overstepped his boundaries but also created a confusing and potentially- damaging precedent. The responsibility of addressing national security concerns and political movements typically falls within the domain of the National Security Adviser, the Minister of Information, or the Presidential spokesperson. By taking on this role, Alake blurred the lines of authority and responsibility within the administration, which could lead to mixed messages and a lack of coherence in government communications. In times of national crisis or widespread protest, it is essential that government officials communicate clearly, responsibly, and within the bounds of their designated roles. Alake’s comments, while perhaps intended to support the President, risk inflaming tensions and further alienating the very citizens the government is meant to serve.
It is crucial for government communications to reflect an understanding of the issues at hand and to show a commitment to addressing the root causes of public discontent, rather than dismissing or mischaracterizing them. The government must be careful not to fall into the trap of viewing all forms of dissent as threats to its power. Nigeria’s democracy was hard-earned, as Alake rightly pointed out, but it can only be sustained through open dialogue, accountability, and a willingness to listen to the concerns of the people. Suppressing or misrepresenting these concerns as attempts to forcibly change the government only serves to weaken the very democracy that the government claims to protect. At a time when Nigeria faces significant challenges, what is needed is responsible leadership that listens to the concerns of its people and responds with empathy and action. The statements made by Shettima and Sule should have been the focal point of the government’s response to the protests, highlighting the urgent need to address the socio-economic conditions that have driven millions of Nigerians to the brink of despair. The government must move beyond the defensive posture that Alake’s statement represents and instead focus on implementing the reforms that are so desperately needed. This includes tackling corruption, improving education and healthcare, creating jobs, and ensuring that every Nigerian has a fair shot at a decent life.
Another aspect of the divergent perspectives borders on Mr. Alake’s celebration of misplaced confidence amidst Nigeria’s distressing realities. Alake’s celebration of the vote of confidence passed on President Bola Tinubu’s administration by the Council of State is both perplexing and tone-deaf, given the distressing realities that millions of Nigerians are currently facing. While such a vote might serve as a symbolic endorsement within the political elite, it does little to address the deep-seated issues plaguing the nation – issues that have driven the recent #EndBadGovernance protests and continue to erode public trust in the government. Nigeria is grappling with a myriad of challenges: rampant unemployment, rising poverty, inflation, insecurity, and a growing sense of hopelessness among the populace. These are not abstract concerns; they are the lived experiences of millions of Nigerians who struggle daily to make ends meet. In this context, Alake’s exuberant celebration of a vote of confidence by the Council of State appears out of touch with the pressing needs of ordinary citizens. The Council of State’s endorsement, while perhaps a morale boost for the administration, does not translate into meaningful change for the average Nigerian. It does not fill the empty stomachs of those suffering from hunger, create jobs for the unemployed, or provide security to those living in fear of violence. The realities on ground starkly contrast with the rosy picture that Alake’s celebration attempted to paint. Alake’s remarks also highlight the dangers of political echo chambers, where leaders become insulated from the true state of the nation. In such environments, the affirmation of a select group of elites can be mistaken for widespread public approval. However, this vote of confidence from the Council of State does not reflect the sentiments of the broader Nigerian population, many of whom are disillusioned with the state of governance. Celebrating a vote of confidence in isolation, without acknowledging the broader context of national distress, risks further alienating the government from the people it is meant to serve. It sends a message that the administration is more concerned with its internal validation than with addressing the urgent needs of its citizens. This disconnect could have serious consequences, as it deepens the divide between the government and the governed.
What Nigerians need from their leaders is not symbolic gestures or political grandstanding but real, tangible action that addresses their most pressing concerns. The recent #EndBadGovernance protests were a clear indication that the public is demanding more than just rhetoric – they want accountability, transparency, and a government that prioritizes their well-being. Instead of celebrating a vote of confidence, the administration should be focusing on implementing policies that will alleviate the suffering of the people. This means tackling the root causes of poverty, creating jobs, ensuring security, and addressing the systemic issues that have led to widespread disillusionment. The government’s success should be measured not by the confidence of the political elite but by the improvements in the lives of ordinary Nigerians. Alake’s celebration of the Council of State’s vote risks fostering a sense of complacency within the administration. It creates the illusion that all is well, when in reality, the country is facing one of its most challenging periods in recent history. This complacency can lead to a failure to take the bold and necessary steps needed to address the underlying issues that are driving discontent. The government must resist the temptation to rest on its laurels and instead, redouble its efforts to meet the needs of the people. The vote of confidence should serve not as an endpoint but as a call to action – a reminder that the true measure of success lies in the positive impact on the lives of Nigerians.
Perhaps, it is even pertinent to ponder: a vote of confidence or a vote of disconnect? If the Council of State, with the physical presence of former Presidents Goodluck Jonathan and Muhammadu Buhari, indeed passed a vote of confidence on President Bola Tinubu’s administration, it reveals a troubling disconnect between these former leaders and the ordinary Nigerians who grapple daily with existential challenges. This endorsement, while significant within political circles, highlights how far removed these former presidents and the current administration are from the harsh realities that the average Nigerian faces. This brings to mind the illusion of political endorsement. In the lofty corridors of power, a vote of confidence may seem like a triumph, a stamp of approval that signifies stability and continuity. But for millions of Nigerians, this endorsement is nothing more than a mirage, a gesture that does little to alleviate the day-to-day struggles that define their existence. Rising unemployment, insecurity, inflation, and a failing healthcare system are just a few of the many issues that plague the nation. Yet, this vote of confidence appears to be a comic exercise in political theatre, rather than a reflection of the administration’s performance in addressing these critical issues. Former Presidents Jonathan and Buhari, by aligning themselves with this endorsement, send a message that is disheartening to many. It suggests that these leaders, who once held the reins of power, are more concerned with political solidarity than with the real suffering that ordinary Nigerians endure. This move deepens the chasm between the ruling elite and the populace, reinforcing the perception that those in power are insulated from the very problems they are meant to solve.
For the average Nigerian, the endorsement by the Council of State is likely to be met with indifference or even disdain. What does a vote of confidence mean to the market woman who struggles to feed her family amidst skyrocketing food prices? What comfort does it bring to the unemployed youth who sees no hope for a better future? How does it address the fears of families living in regions plagued by insecurity? These are the questions that the political class seems to overlook in their pursuit of mutual admiration and validation. This disconnect not only represents a lack of understanding but also a failure to empathize with the common man’s plight. The vote of confidence may secure the political status quo, but it does nothing to address the urgent need for tangible solutions to the myriad problems facing Nigeria. It underscores a leadership that is more focused on preserving its image than on delivering real change. If the Council of State’s vote of confidence is to mean anything beyond a symbolic gesture, it must be accompanied by a genuine commitment to engage with the realities on ground. This requires more than just words; it demands action that directly impacts the lives of ordinary Nigerians. The government must move beyond the self-congratulatory atmosphere of political endorsements and address the systemic issues that have led to widespread disillusionment. Former Presidents Jonathan and Buhari, along with President Tinubu, have a responsibility to bridge the gap between the leadership and the led. They must recognize that the true measure of confidence lies not in the approval of fellow politicians but in the trust and well-being of the citizens they once swore to serve. This requires humility, empathy, and a willingness to listen to the voices of those who are often ignored. For this vote to have any real significance, it must be followed by a concerted effort to tackle the issues that matter most to the Nigerian people. It is only by closing the gap between the political elite and the common man that true confidence can be restored -confidence that is earned through action, not just words, and that speaks to the heart of Nigeria’s struggles and aspirations.
On a final note, the contrasting narratives from Shettima and Alake highlight a critical issue within the administration: the lack of a unified and coherent response to the crisis. While Shettima’s acknowledgment of the need for systemic change offers a path forward, Alake’s narrative threatens to derail any meaningful dialogue by framing the issue in adversarial terms. For the government to effectively address the challenges facing the country, it must reconcile these differing perspectives and adopt a response that is rooted in reality rather than political expediency. This means listening to the grievances of the people, addressing the root causes of their anger, and implementing reforms that can restore trust in the system. In choosing the right path forward, Vice President Shettima’s candid reflection on the causes of the recent unrest offers a glimmer of hope that the government might finally be willing to confront the issues that have long plagued the Nigerian State. However, for this to translate into real change, the government must move beyond the simplistic regime change narrative and engage with the real issues at hand. The choice before the government is clear: it can either continue to deflect criticism and dismiss the protests as the work of agitators, or it can take the path of reform, acknowledging its failures and working to build a system that serves all Nigerians. The future of the Nigerian State depends on which path it chooses. And there is no better time to make this critical choice than now!…READ FULL ARTICLE
