The Kaduna De-Initiatives And The Eternal Comedy Of Political Fidelity

No Result View All Result Home News Politics Business Sport Football Health Entertainment Education Opinion Editorial Columns Others LeVogue Magazine Conferences National Economy Contact Us Hausa Edition Home News Politics Business Sport Football Health Entertainment Education Opinion Editorial Columns Others LeVogue Magazine Conferences National Economy Contact Us No Result View All Result No Result View All Result The Kaduna De-Initiatives And The Eternal Comedy Of Political Fidelity by Abdulrauf Aliyu 1 week ago in Backpage, Columns Share on WhatsAppShare on FacebookShare on XTelegram In The History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides famously observed that the strong do what they can, while the weak suffer what they must. He omitted a third category peculiar to political life: the domestic lieutenant who happily executes the cruelties of the strong, only to stage a tearful, moralizing press conference the moment the tyrant stops sharing the table scraps.

Stumbling online across an op-ed published in the Daily Trust on October 1, 2026, titled Why we left El-Rufai to support Gov. Uba Sani, co-authored by Hon. Mukthar Isa Hazo and Hon. Nasiru Abdullahi Maikano, one could not help but chuckle. It purports to be a manifesto of principled liberation. In truth, it reads like a tear-stained receipt from disappointed political mercenaries whose long-term investment in a falling stock finally went bust.

The Technocrat Reading Machiavelli Backwards

The political tragedy of Malam Nasir El-Rufai is rooted in a comical misunderstanding of classic statecraft. He always projected himself as an invincible strategist, an administrative prodigy who studied Florentine power dynamics with clinical precision. Yet, he read Machiavelli backwards.

He fixated on the rise of Cesare Borgia, the ruthless Duke of Valentinois who used brutal enforcers to pacify conquered territory, only to dispose of those same enforcers when public resentment peaked. Borgia fell because he assumed his personal genius could override the institutional authority of the Papacy. El-Rufai similarly operated under the illusion that his intellectual posture exempted him from the foundational laws of political gravity.

His central failure was his bizarre interpretation of the famous maxim that “the end justifies the means.” Like many Nigerian politicians, El-Rufai treated this phrase as an open license for unbridled hubris, family dynasty building, and tactical backstabbing.

In real political philosophy, Machiavelli never advocated mindless cruelty or endless betrayal. The “end” was specifically defined as the preservation, stability, and ultimate survival of the state, which alone could excuse extraordinary and painful “means.” El-Rufai inverted this logic entirely. He treated his personal ambition and familial influence as the sovereign end, using state power merely as an instrument to reward a narrowing inner circle.

Having played pivotal roles in propelling Bola Ahmed Tinubu to the presidency and engineering the rise of Governor Uba Sani in Kaduna, El-Rufai assumed he had secured a lifetime appointment as ultimate kingmaker. He forgot that Pope Julius II, the formidable “Warrior Pope,” did not secure Rome by honouring debt tokens from fallen conquerors. Julius II offered superior protection, patronage, and political cover to Borgia’s abandoned generals. In modern Kaduna, Uba Sani stepped into the boots of Julius II, offering political sanctuary to El-Rufai’s stranded infantry.

Mercenaries Weeping Over Broken Contracts

The manifesto penned by Hazo and Maikano, speaking for the “Kaduna De-Initiative,” presents a parade of displaced figures. They invoke names like Hon. Ja’afaru Sani, Dr. Shehu Usman Makarfi, Hon. Bashir Saidu, and Senator Abdu Kwari, framing them as principled statesmen driven away by administrative neglect.

The authors boast that they took political bullets, built grassroots structures, and defended El-Rufai when his political horizon looked dark. Their righteous indignation is laughable.

These signatories were not naive observers; they were the eager, highly compensated machinery of El-Rufai’s governance. For eight years, as legislative officers and cabinet members, they enthusiastically cheered every aggressive executive manoeuvre. They raised zero philosophical objections to autocratic governance so long as the patronage pipelines flowed into their respective local domains. Crying foul now because the family circle narrowed is hypocritical. They did not experience a sudden moral awakening; they simply ran out of seats at the feast.

The essay reaches peak absurdity when quoting Bashir Saidu’s defiant question: “Are we not adults who can take our own political decisions?” Declaring adulthood only after the political pantry has been locked is a fascinating display of delayed maturity. Where was this adult independence when they were executing harsh policy turns and insulating El-Rufai from public accountability?

Their dramatic exit was not sparked by a noble defense of democratic values, but by a failed nomination battle. When El-Rufai backed his former rival, Isa Ashiru, in the African Democratic Congress (ADC) primary over Ja’afaru Sani, the group expressed shock. They allege that backdoor deals were made to reserve cabinet posts for El-Rufai’s family.

Their shock is astonishingly gullible. Did they honestly expect a politician who spent his entire career burning political alliances to display sentimental devotion toward them when a cold calculation dictated otherwise? They complain of being treated as political property, yet they spent nearly a decade selling their political labour to the highest bidder.

To validate their retreat, the authors list a lengthy directory of former associates who fell out with El-Rufai over the years: Balarabe Lawal Abbas, Hadiza Bala Usman, Muhammad Sani Dattijo, Hadiza Sabuwa Balarabe, Prof. Adamu Danfulani, Dr. Daniel Manzo Maigari, Arc. Ibrahim Hamza, Thomas Gyang, Mukhtar Monrovia, Senator Sule Hunkuyi, Senator Sani Saleh, Hon. Abbas Tajuddeen, Hon. Garba Datti Babawo, Hon. Ahmed Munnir, Yusuf Ibrahim Zailani, Aminu Shagali, Yusuf Liman, Ben Kure, Dr. Abdulmalik Durunguwa, and Hadiza Muazu.

Far from proving El-Rufai’s unique malice, this long roll call merely illustrates the transactional nature of Nigerian politics. Every person on that list rode the El-Rufai vehicle until the engine overheated or a better ride pulled alongside them.

Framing this standard migration as a noble walk toward freedom requires breathtaking mental gymnastics. The signatories claim they are joining Governor Uba Sani in the spirit of state reconciliation. Let us speak plainly: they are joining Uba Sani because he holds the state pen, controls the treasury, and provides immediate cover from political winter.

The comedy of the Kaduna De-Initiative’s manifesto lies in its self-congratulatory claims of liberation. They proclaim that “Kaduna’s future is bigger than any individual politician” and boast of reclaiming their political destiny. Yet their primary act of self-determination is to hand their political structures directly to the sitting governor.

This is not a story of political emancipation; it is a transfer of lease terms. They traded an influential godfather whose national footing slipped for an active governor with immediate state resources. They praise Uba Sani for extending a hand of reconciliation, ignoring the basic reality that any sitting governor will gladly shelter defecting troops to dismantle a predecessor’s influence. The authors have not broken their chains; they have simply chosen a more comfortable leash.

Neither party in this feud holds the moral high ground. Malam Nasir El-Rufai sits in a political isolation of his own making, discovering that authority rooted in fear dissolves the moment power shifts. He played the prince without realizing that a leader who discards his foot soldiers will find himself entirely defenceless when the next Pope takes the stage.

Similarly, Hazo, Maikano, and their cadre of new moralists cannot rewrite their past through newspaper declarations. They were willing accomplices in an elite enterprise until that same enterprise discarded them. Their manifesto in the Daily Trust is not a historical declaration of freedom; it is a public admission that in Nigerian politics, loyalty is merely a temporary lease, renewed only as long as the checks continue to clear.

We’ve got the edge. Get real-time reports, breaking scoops, and exclusive angles delivered straight to your phone. Don’t settle for stale news. Join LEADERSHIP NEWS on WhatsApp for 24/7 updates →