In an editorial on Monday, the New York Times slammed the postponement of the Nigerian elections. It pointed out that the action might have been more credible if President Goodluck Jonathan’s government had not spent much of the past year playing down the threat posed by Boko Haram and if there were a reasonable expectation that Nigeria’s weak army has the ability to improve security over the next few weeks.
“It appears more likely Mr. Jonathan grew alarmed by the surging appeal of Muhammadu Buhari, a former military ruler who has vowed to crack down on Boko Haram,” the article said. “By dragging out the race, Mr. Jonathan stands to deplete his rival’s campaign coffers, while he continues to use state funds and institutions to bankroll his own.”
Recalling that Buhari led a coup against a democratically elected government in 1983, it argued that his emergence as potential winner of the forthcoming election is more of an indictment of Jonathan’s dismal rule than a recognition of the former military chief’s appeal.
It criticized Jonathan’s performance over the abduction of the Chibok girls and the attacks by Boko Haram, saying they have exposed the weaknesses of Nigeria’s armed forces and the dysfunction of the government.
“Beyond security matters, entrenched corruption and the government’s inability to diversify its economy as the price of oil, the country’s financial bedrock, has fallen have also caused Nigerians to look for new leadership. Nigeria, the most populous nation in Africa, and a relatively young democracy, cannot afford an electoral crisis.”
It would be recalled that following an endorsement of Buhari by The Economist in its edition dated February 7, a sulking Jonathan said he did not need the support of the magazine.
Source: SHR
0 comments:
Post a Comment