Still on Buhari’s visit to the US

By and large, we can safely conclude that President Muhamadu Buhari had a good time in the United States. Whether the visit was worth the energy a lot of Nigerians dissipated on discussing it is another matter entirely. It was, however, good that our president had his moment in the sun and Nigeria became the cynosure of all eyes once more for good. Buhari carried himself well but regrettably, that cannot be said for some of his comments during the visit. The jury is still out on how successful the visit was and would be, even as the president’s spokespersons labour to list the gains of the visit during the weekend.  

Let’s start with the president’s opinion piece published in the Washington Post – ‘Nigeria committed to good governance and fighting terror’ – on Monday, July 20. It is painful that Buhari decided to toe the path of condescension past leaders trod in announcing that we would not have ministers until September. For goodness sake, it is the president’s prerogative to constitute his cabinet whenever he wants even though one gets the feeling that were it not for the constitutional requirement, he would have done away with ministers. But why announcing such a serious decision, at least going by the reasons adduced in the piece, on the pages of a foreign newspaper? If the president thinks laying the foundation for cabinet appointments is serious enough that it cannot be rushed, is there no credible medium in Nigeria worthy of such announcement? Would a presidential broadcast or a statement not be justified? Sadly, citizens were disregarded and held in utter contempt by this message from a foreign lectern. As this government marches forward, hopefully we would be treated better and spoken to directly on issues that concern us.

Another issue with the piece is the illustration our president used in making the point of no minister till September. It was factually incorrect and it baffles one why the president would fudge the issue.  It is worth noting that Obama himself did not have his full Cabinet in place for several months after first taking office; the United States did not cease to function in the interim – the piece magisterially pronounced, but this is not true. President Barack Obama’s first inauguration was on Tuesday, January 20, 2009, and Hilary Rodham Clinton assumed office on January 21, 2009 as Secretary of State. Obama, then President-elect, formally announced Clinton as Secretary of State on December 1, 2009 the same day he announced that Robert Gates would continue in office as Secretary of Defense. Similarly, Eric Holder was announced as Secretary of Justice the same day.

In fact due to the financial crisis bedeviling America then, Obama, as early as the end of November 2008, had indicated that he would nominate Timothy Geithner as Secretary of Treasury even though he was not confirmed until January 26, 2009 because of a self-employment tax controversy, a fact Geithner admitted in his memoir, Stress Test. Obama nominated others like Ken Salazar, who later served as Secretary of the Interior on December 19, 2008 and Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture two days earlier. It was Gary Locke, third nominee for Secretary of Commerce, after Bill Richardson, nominated on December 3, 2008 and Judd Greg, February 3, 2009 withdrew their nominations. Why this Obama presidential history? This is just to show that whosoever wrote this piece for the president should be fired especially since Buhari’s unique selling point remains integrity. Dear President, you don’t have to twist facts to justify your actions especially when you have the right to decide on such issues. It is quite possible that members of the Buhari-can-do-no-wrong group do not see anything wrong with this blunder, but leaders should not lie to their citizens.

This makes one to wonder the kind of expertise available to the president on this trip. We saw pictures of governors who seemed more interested in shaking Obama’s hands and who went to meetings without a writing pad for notes while others on the US side were with thick folders. Was the president well served with quality advisers who understood what the visit was about? Was he aware of the Leahy Law that prevents America from selling arms to us? Further, no matter how the media handlers spin it, Buhari’s faux pas on 97% and 5% was totally unnecessary and they should not blame his traducers for seeking to profit from it. I’m sure he must have briefing notes, does he make use of them or he is always too much in a hurry to impress?

If the president was able to secure US help “in locating and returning $150 billion in funds stolen in the past decade and held in foreign bank accounts” then this trip was worthwhile, otherwise it was an exercise in public relations which is actually not a bad thing entirely. Let’s just hope the figure is correct.