Pitfalls in the Obi–Kwankwaso project
Sir: The idea of an alliance between Peter Obi and Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso has been sold to Nigerians as a masterstroke of political arithmetic — a merger of votes, a
Sir: The idea of an alliance between Peter Obi and Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso has been sold to Nigerians as a masterstroke of political arithmetic — a merger of votes, a consolidation of opposition strength, a shortcut to victory in 2027. But what is unfolding suggests something far more troubling: a coalition already strained by ego before it even faces the test of governance.
Let us be clear — alliances are not built on excitement; they are sustained by discipline, mutual respect, and clarity of roles. Without these, what appears strong on paper collapses under the weight of human ambition.
Kwankwaso’s political history offers context that cannot be ignored. He is not a man known for playing supporting roles. His rise in Kano politics was not achieved through quiet negotiation but through assertive, often confrontational dominance. Established figures were not accommodated; they were displaced. Structures were not shared; they were controlled. Loyalty was not negotiated; it was commanded.
Such a political personality does not suddenly transform into a cooperative deputy because of electoral convenience.
On the other hand, Peter Obi represents a different political energy — one rooted in reformist language, institutional rebuilding, and a more technocratic appeal. His support base, particularly among young Nigerians, is not just loyal — it is intensely protective. They do not merely support him; they identify with him. They are watchful, vocal, and quick to react to any perceived slight.
Now imagine placing these two forces within the same power structure.
What we are already seeing — subtle overshadowing, assertive signalling, unilateral communication — could, if left unchecked, evolve into something far more destabilizing. If such tendencies are visible before the pressures of office, what happens when the stakes become higher? When appointments, policy directions, and control of state machinery come into play?
The danger is not hypothetical. A presidency born out of unresolved rivalry does not mature into
Nigeria’s current reality does not permit experimentation with fragile coalitions. The country is grappling with economic challenges, rising insecurity, youth unemployment, and weakening institutions. What it needs is a leadership structure that is internally coherent — one that can make decisions swiftly and implement them without internal sabotage.
A divided presidency is not just inefficient; it is dangerous.
Kwankwaso’s assertiveness in public communication, his symbolic gestures of control, and his history of political dominance all point in one direction: he does not see himself as a secondary figure in any arrangement. Obi’s measured approach, on the other hand, may be interpreted — rightly or wrongly — as political softness, creating a vacuum that a more assertive partner could exploit.
This is where the imbalance becomes dangerous.
An alliance must be anchored on clearly defined leadership, mutual concessions, and a shared governing philosophy. Without these, it becomes a contest disguised as cooperation. And contests, when brought into the presidency, do not produce development — they produce paralysis.
Read Also: Stakeholders express concern over Nigeria’s ITU representation, domestic telecom priorities
It is also important to address a hard truth: not every alliance that is possible is advisable. Political compatibility is not a luxury; it is a necessity. Leaders must not only agree on winning power; they must agree on how to use it.
At present, the Obi–Kwankwaso conversation appears to be driven more by urgency than by strategy, more by enthusiasm than by structure. That is a risky foundation for something as serious as governing a nation.
Nigeria cannot afford a presidency that spends its time managing internal tensions while the country waits for solutions. It cannot afford a government where personal ambition overshadows national interest. And it certainly cannot afford an arrangement that shows signs of strain before it has even begun.
The lesson here is simple but often ignored: unity is not declared; it is demonstrated.
If the early interactions between these political figures are anything to go by, then the proposed alliance is not yet a partnership — it is a negotiation of power still in progress. And until that negotiation is resolved with clarity and sincerity, any attempt to present it as a ready-made solution to Nigeria’s problems is premature at best and deceptive at worst.
•Aliyu Abubakar Bello, Dorayi, Kano.
