Opinion
Rivers: Why Fubara May Fight Again!
By Ismail Omipidan
The return of Governor Siminalayi Fubara after the expiration of the six-month emergency rule has been widely applauded by many Nigerians. To avoid any unguarded utterances, the governor, on his return to the state, appeared to tactfully distance himself from his army of supporters who had thronged the Rivers State Government House on Thursday. Instead, he showed up yesterday, and promptly delivered a statewide broadcast to the people of the state.
Before his return, there were concerns over the details of the peace deal that paved the way for his reinstatement. While some argued that he would serve only one term, others insist that the arrangement heavily favours his estranged godfather and current FCT Minister, Nyesom Wike.
Wike was on Politics Today with Seun Okinbaloye on Thursday. He declined to reveal details of the peace deal. But any peace deal whose terms remain shrouded in secrecy cannot, in my view, be regarded as fair or just. I stand to be corrected.
For now, it appears that only Wike, Fubara, and perhaps President Bola Ahmed Tinubu know the exact contents of the peace deal or understanding.
However, as a trained political communication specialist, I find that Fubara’s statewide broadcast offers a glimpse into parts of the agreement. This is particularly evident in paragraph 10 of his speech, where he stated: “To those who have expressed genuine fears, frustrations, and uncertainty over the nature of the peace process, I assure you that your concerns are valid and understood.” In essence, the governor acknowledged that the public’s fears and doubts about the peace deal are not unfounded. By validating these concerns and admitting that he understands them, Fubara tacitly concedes that there are indeed contentious aspects of the arrangement.
The governor was, however, quick to add that “nothing has been irretrievably lost; there remains ample opportunity for necessary adjustments, continued reconciliation, and inclusiveness.” My understanding of these lines are these: One, even if there is a clause for now in that peace deal that would prevent him from seeking a second term, his good behaviour and willingness to play ball, going forward may make change their minds, thereby adjusting the peace deal to allow him seek a second term. Two, certain things that he was not too pleased with could equally be adjusted as time goes by, once he showed genuine reconciliation efforts. And by shunning the crowd on Thursday, the governor appears to be ready for a genuine reconciliation.
For me, the only reason Fubara may be willing to fight again is if, after abiding religiously by the terms of the peace deal without reservations, he is still denied a second-term bid.
Already, he has been stripped of critical levers of power: he has no control over the local governments in the state, he is not in charge of the House of Assembly, and, if the feelers I’m getting are anything to go by, he is unlikely to be in full control of his cabinet either. Having been politically weakened on all fronts, it would be unwise and indeed provocative to further deny him a re-election ticket. In our recent political history, the only governor who was denied a second-term ticket on the basis of non-performance was Chinwoke Mbadinuju of Anambra State under the PDP in 2003. So far, no one can say Fubara hasn’t performed, as such, non performance cannot be adduced as a reason should they decide to strike. My point is, if they do, as being planned, it will be on the basis of politics, a development that may trigger another round of political unrest in the state.
With the benefit of hindsight, Fubara would have already seen the end of Wike’s dominance in Rivers politics, if not for Wike’s current status as a minister, backed firmly by the very man who appointed him.
Opinion
“Let President Muhammadu Buhari Rest in Peace” – By Nasir El-Rufai
The recent launch of a book on the life and legacy of our late leader, President Muhammadu Buhari, has stirred deep emotions and renewed divisions among those who once formed his inner circle. Having followed the headlines and images from the event, I felt compelled to make a simple but urgent appeal: let us allow President Buhari to rest in peace.
A careful look at those who dominated the book launch revealed the same factional lines that existed during Buhari’s lifetime. One camp was prominently represented, while others—equally close to the late president—were excluded. This selective engagement compounded by the choice of location of the event were red flags, and raises concerns about whether Buhari’s legacy is now being shaped to serve narrow interests rather than historical truth.
More troubling was the presence of long-time critics of Buhari, some of whom now hold high office, delivering glowing, but clearly faked tributes. These are individuals who once blamed his administration for nearly every challenge facing Nigeria, but who now appear eager to revise history—perhaps to deflect responsibility for present failures.
It was also unsettling to see individuals celebrating Buhari in death who had neither his trust nor his respect in life. President Buhari was a principled man who did not easily forget personal or political disrespect, and he made his preferences clear to those around him.
I have not yet read the book, Soldier to Statesman: The Legacy of Muhammadu Buhari, and it is possible that some media reports lack context. However, many of the so-called revelations attributed to the late president appear one-sided and unfair, especially as he is no longer alive to respond. Explaining the thoughts and motivations of a complex leader through selective anecdotes risks distorting, rather than preserving, his legacy.
President Buhari was far from perfect. Many of us who supported him expected much more from his civilian presidency. However, as someone who worked closely with him in opposition political, and governance roles for over a decade, I believe much of his administration’s shortcomings stemmed from the actions and failures of a powerful inner circle—relatives, advisers, and officials who did not always share his commitment to integrity and public service.
Buhari himself remained, to the end, a man of deep faith, personal discipline, and unquestioned patriotism. Those now invoking his name for self-justification should reflect on whether they can claim the same standards.
My appeal here is simple: to all Nigerians: admirers and critics alike—let President Muhammadu Buhari rest in peace. Let history judge him fairly, without opportunism or revisionism. The truest way to honour him is not through selective storytelling, or attempting to exhibit new-found love, but by upholding the values he embodied: simplicity, integrity, humility, and service to Nigeria with all he had.
May Allah grant him eternal rest.
Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai
Cairo, Egypt
17th December, 2025
Opinion
Ogun 2027: Kings Have Spoken, Yayi Belongs, Let the Campaign Begin
Opinion
Has the South-East Traded Kanu and Obi for Political Access? By Mohammed Bello Doka
When Nnamdi Kanu was handed a life sentence, expectations were clear and historic. Across Nigeria, many anticipated a decisive political reaction from the South-East: emergency meetings, coordinated resistance, forceful statements from governors, and a re-assertion of the region’s long-held grievance narrative.
What followed instead was something far more revealing — a loud, deliberate silence.
No collective pushback by South-East governors.
No political reprisal.
No price imposed on the centre.
And in that silence lies a deeper story — one that goes beyond Nnamdi Kanu alone.
For the first time in Nigeria’s political history, all five South-East governors are aligned — directly or indirectly — with President Bola Tinubu and his re-election project. This is not speculation. Public statements and political signaling from the zone confirm that the governors have closed ranks around Abuja. Some openly endorse Tinubu; others maintain strategic silence while cooperating fully with the centre. Either way, the outcome is the same: regional power has moved away from confrontation to accommodation.
This alignment explains much more than the silence after Kanu’s sentence. It also explains the quiet abandonment of Peter Obi’s presidential ambition by the same elite class that once benefited from his momentum.
For years, the South-East sustained a dual political narrative:
Nnamdi Kanu represented resistance — a symbolic struggle against marginalisation.
Peter Obi represented reform — a constitutional path back to relevance at the centre.
Today, both pillars have been set aside.
Unlike previous moments in history when South-East elites distanced themselves from regional causes out of weakness or isolation, this time is different. This retreat did not happen in defeat. It happened from a position of leverage:
The region had unprecedented national sympathy after 2023.
It commanded a powerful youth-driven political movement.
It had emotional capital across Nigeria and the diaspora.
Yet, despite this strength, the elite chose survival.
South-East governors — the true controllers of the political system — have clearly decided that confrontation carries higher costs than alignment. Federal access, security cooperation, budgetary relevance, and political protection now outweigh symbolic struggles. In plain terms, Kanu became a political risk, Obi an electoral uncertainty.
This raises unavoidable rhetorical questions.
If the South-East remains as marginalised as long argued, why was Kanu’s life sentence not treated as a regional emergency?
If injustice still defines the regional condition, why has no political consequence followed?
Or has political access softened the meaning of marginalisation itself?
Even more unsettling is what this silence suggests about the future.
Will there be consequences from the people?
Governors may control the machinery, but history shows that South-East grassroots sentiment does not always move in sync with elite calculations. Suppressed anger, when ignored, rarely disappears — it mutates.
Has the South-East finally been subdued?
Or is this only a strategic pause — a recalibration before another political rupture?
And perhaps the most dangerous question of all:
What becomes of the Biafra agitation in a post-elite world?
If the political class no longer carries the banner — and the state believes resistance has been neutralised — the struggle may not end. It may simply lose its intermediaries and become harder to predict, harder to control, and more radical in form.
For now, the facts are clear.
South-East elites have chosen power over protest.
Access over agitation.
Survival over symbolism.
Whether the people follow — or resist — that choice will define the region’s political future far more than any endorsement ever could.
And until then, the silence after Kanu’s sentence remains the loudest statement the South-East political class has ever made.
-
Business9 hours agoBREAKING: Petrol Depot Owners Crash Prices To Cheapest; Details Emerge
-
News2 days agoIs It True That Court Is Set To Revisit Kanu’s Case After Pressure From Israel, US? Facts Emerge
-
News2 days agoBuhari’s Ex-Minister Pantami Breaks Silence Over Alleged Wedding Plan With Aisha Buhari
-
News19 hours ago“Do Not Test Trump’s Resolve”: US Issues Fresh Threat To Nigeria
-
Entertainment14 hours agoSO SAD: Actress and Content Creator Sunshine D!es After Surgery; Details of Last Moment Trends
-
Sports1 day agoAFCON: Nigerian Billionaire Splashes Dollars On Super Eagles
-
Lifestyle1 day agoChimamanda: Heartbreaking Details About What Killed Author’s Late Son Emerge
-
News8 hours agoBREAKING: KWAM 1 Writes Ogun Govt, Accuses Fusengbuwa Ruling House of Plot to Exclude Him From Awujale Selection
