BY REV FR GERALD NWAFOR
Political alliances in Nigeria have always been fluid, strategic, and sometimes unpredictable. Onye ndi iro gbara gburugburur na eche ndu ya nche mgbe dum (A man surrounded by enemies should be protective of his life always). The allegations of El-Rufai on importation of poison by some group of people should not be taken for granted, since El-Rufai was once an associate of the accused importers. Therefore, he knows them too well. I believe Dora Akunyili died a natural death but let God be the judge.
Anyways, back to the main topic. In such an environment, caution is not a sign of weakness but a mark of wisdom. The present political climate calls for measured relationships, especially for leaders who carry the hopes of millions. The issue is not merely about personalities but about patterns, history, and the lessons that past events quietly teach to those willing to observe. When political figures with strong histories of shifting loyalties come into new partnerships, prudence becomes a necessary companion.
One cannot discuss contemporary Nigerian political dynamics without acknowledging how frequently alliances rise and fall. I should not like to talk about Sim and Wike, Tinubu and Rufai, and of last is Kwankwaso and Yusuf, the third betrayal in human history save Judas and Jesus, Cesar and Brutus.
A politician may be loyal to an administration today and become its strongest critic tomorrow. This pattern is neither entirely wrong nor entirely right; politics is often shaped by interests according to Zik, ideologies according to Awo, and survival according to Fubara. However, when a particular individual repeatedly appears at the center of political fractures, observers naturally begin to question whether the pattern is circumstantial or characteristic. This is where caution becomes not an accusation, but a rational response to history.
Peter Obi should consider the trajectory of relationships that have shaped Nigeria’s leadership circles over the past two decades. There have been instances where strong partnerships dissolved into bitter disagreements, sometimes publicly and dramatically.
Obi is from Anambra State where Emeka Offor and C.C Mbadinuju opened the play book, followed by Ngige and Uba brothers, Obiano and his best friend from school. These shifts do not automatically disqualify a politician from future cooperation, but they do signal the importance of vigilance. Leaders who aspire to transform Nigeria must understand that charisma and intelligence alone are not sufficient safeguards; strategic distance and clear boundaries are equally vital.
History offers multiple illustrations. Political alliances once considered unbreakable have fractured under the weight of ambition, ideological conflict, or personal rivalry.
A notable example is the political journey involving figures such as Olusegun Obasanjo, whose administrations saw loyal allies later become critics. Examples are his Vice president (Atiku), his FCT minister (El-Rufai) his anointed successor (Goodluck) and many more. Similarly, modern political movements have witnessed figures moving across party lines or parting ways with former associates.
These developments are not inherently immoral; political evolution is natural. Yet repetition of abrupt separations creates a narrative that cannot be ignored. The first may be termed a mistake, the second may be coincidence, but the third is intentional and calculated (Agba mbu otua n’ogwe, agba abuo otua n’ogwe obuzi so ogwe ka apiri aku?).
Another dimension is the nature of friendships within politics.
Alliances built on shared objectives can quickly transform into rivalries when interests diverge. The well-known tensions between political actors such as Nuhu Ribadu and former close associates (El-Rufai and Atiku) demonstrate how swiftly camaraderie can shift into confrontation. Such occurrences are reminders that political friendships are often conditional, tied more to goals than to enduring personal loyalty. For anyone entering cooperation with a figure who has experienced multiple high-profile fallouts, alertness becomes a form of self-preservation rather than suspicion.
Political parties themselves are not immune to these fluctuations.
Nigeria’s major parties—All Progressives Congress (APC), Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Labor Party (LP), New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), and African Democratic Congress (ADC)—each carry their own histories of internal disputes, defections, and ideological shifts. No party is entirely stable, and no party is entirely doomed. Some appear vibrant, others struggle, and a few oscillate between revival and decline. Yet all remain relevant because Nigeria’s political terrain is too vast and complex for any single party to dominate permanently.
In this context, political caution should not be mistaken for rejection.
Welcoming experienced politicians into new coalitions can bring strategic advantages, institutional knowledge, and nationwide networks. However, acceptance must be balanced with awareness. Trust, in politics, should be layered—earned gradually, reinforced through consistent behavior, and never granted blindly.
Collaboration should be guided by clear agreements, transparent expectations, and well-defined limits. Political actors must learn to “dine with a long spoon,” maintaining civility without surrendering independence. Peter joined ADC because the government forestalled the LP leadership crisis. Peter said the government of Nigeria did not want him to be a presidential candidate of any political party and I believe him and urge him to be more careful (Anya saa biko, anya saa).
Nigeria itself, as a nation, stands at a delicate crossroads. Nigeria faces economic pressures, social divisions, and ideological uncertainty. Citizens are increasingly politically conscious, less tolerant of recycled promises, and more demanding of accountability. This new era requires leaders who can navigate alliances wisely without becoming entangled in the very patterns that have hindered progress in the past. The stakes are no longer limited to party victories; they extend to national stability and the collective future.
Another factor to consider is public perception. Voters observe not only policies but also associations. A partnership with a controversial or unpredictable figure can energize supporters or alienate them, depending on how it is managed. Optics matter in modern politics. Transparency about intentions, consistent messaging, and visible independence of thought help reassure the electorate that cooperation does not equal submission. We do not need to see the likes of Reno, Buwala, Cubana, and co join ADC. Those names are known for stomach-infrastructure. Political maturity lies in the ability to collaborate without losing one’s identity or principles.
Furthermore, caution should be mutual rather than one-sided. Every political actor brings strengths and vulnerabilities into an alliance. The goal should not be to label individuals as angels or devils but to recognize human complexity. A person may be brilliant in administration yet difficult in long-term partnerships. Another may be charismatic in campaigns but inconsistent in governance. Understanding these nuances allows for smarter political engineering rather than emotional decision-making. We would not like to have the poor man’s two knives, the sharp one has no handle and the one with a handle is blunt.
For emerging or reform-minded movements in connection to OBIDIENT-MOVEMENT, the temptation to embrace influential allies quickly can be strong. Experience and visibility can accelerate momentum, but haste often carries hidden costs. Building a coalition is similar to constructing a bridge: the materials may be strong individually, but the structure fails if connections are poorly planned. Measured engagement, phased collaboration, and periodic reassessment of alliances can prevent future fractures that might otherwise derail progress. One cocoa yam leaf is enough to serve as an umbrella, but a thousand oil bean leaves cannot shade you when it’s raining. Obidients please get your PVC.
Ultimately, the watchword is vigilance. Not paranoia, not hostility, but steady awareness. Political terrain changes rapidly, and yesterday’s certainty can become tomorrow’s miscalculation. Wise leaders understand that cooperation and caution are not opposites; they are partners. One opens doors, the other ensures those doors do not become traps. In Nigeria’s evolving democracy, the ability to balance openness with discernment may determine not only personal political survival but also the direction of national transformation. ADC is not the silver bullet yet, Peter Obi please beware.
