By Mohammed Bello Doka
There comes a moment in every nation’s journey when politics must yield to judgment, and power must answer to conscience. Nigeria is at that moment. The question before the country is no longer who can win an election by arithmetic or alliance, but who can take decisions that heal fractures, build institutions, and carry consequences without burning the house down.
This is where the case for Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi becomes unavoidable.
If the African Democratic Congress (ADC) fields Amaechi as its presidential candidate, it would not merely be presenting a name on a ballot; it would be offering Nigeria a governance philosophy—one anchored on limits, competence, and national balance. Coming from the South-South, Amaechi’s emergence immediately lowers the familiar North–South temperature that has overheated the polity since independence. Rotation, whether written or unwritten, is not superstition; it is Nigeria’s political shock absorber. Disregard it, and the system groans. Respect it, and the system breathes.
But rotation alone is not Amaechi’s argument. Record is.
Here is a leader from the Niger Delta whose most consequential projects were not confined to his region. As Minister of Transportation, Amaechi rebuilt rail lines and transport arteries deep into the North—Abuja–Kaduna, Ibadan–Ilorin–Minna–Kano corridors, Warri–Itakpe to serve northern industrial logistics, inland dry ports in Kano and Kaduna, rail extensions linking farms to markets, and the Transport University in Daura, Katsina State. These were not symbolic gestures. They were strategic investments in national integration.
So one must ask: Can a regional bigot build arteries that bind the nation?
Can an ethnic jingo consistently channel capital projects into zones that are politically inconvenient?
Amaechi’s answer lies in steel, gravel, sleepers, and stations across northern Nigeria.
Contrast styles, not personalities. Amaechi’s career reveals a technocratic temperament—defined by planning, execution, and accountability. Tinubu’s politics, by comparison, bears the signature of a godfather era—centralised control, transactional loyalty, and decision-making by survival instinct rather than systems design. One builds institutions to outlive him; the other builds networks to sustain power.
There is a moral dimension here that deserves sober reflection. Amaechi has red lines. He has walked away from comfort, lost power, defied godfathers, endured exile, and still chosen restraint when escalation beckoned. His political life suggests there are things he will not do—no matter the prize. Power, to him, is a tool. To others, it appears as an end in itself.
Nigeria must ask the uncomfortable question: Is the nation safer in the hands of a leader who knows when to stop, or one who views any cost as acceptable so long as power is secured?
History warns that rulers who are willing to rule over ashes usually begin by striking matches in silence.
Amaechi’s courage has never been theoretical. As Rivers State governor, he confronted militancy when appeasement was fashionable. At the Governors’ Forum, he stood his ground in the face of federal pressure. As a minister, he signed off on long-term infrastructure loans knowing repayment would outlast media cycles. He decided—and stayed to defend those decisions.
Courage is not taxing the poor because they cannot fight back. Courage is standing up to the strong, the entrenched, the dangerous. Courage is saying no when yes would be easier. Can the same be said of a president whose tenure appears consumed by electoral calculations from day one, while insecurity metastasises, kidnappings spread, and communities bury their dead? How does a nation reconcile governance paralysis with perpetual campaign mode?
Philosophers tell us that “the true test of leadership is not popularity, but responsibility.” Another warns that “when the prudent see danger, they take refuge; the simple keep going and pay the penalty.” Nigeria has paid too many penalties.
Amaechi’s acceptability in the North is not an accident. His traditional title, his relationships across the region, and the respect earned through concrete investments reflect a man perceived not as an outsider, but as a partner. Generosity, in politics, is not almsgiving; it is fairness in allocation, dignity in engagement, and sincerity in intent. These are currencies Amaechi has spent wisely across regional divides.
And yet, no presidential ambition stands alone. Reality demands coalition. Amaechi’s path to victory is clearest with a strong, credible northern vice-presidential partner—a figure of stature and reform pedigree such as Nasir El-Rufai or Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso. Such a ticket would balance geography with gravitas, temperament with mobilisation, and competence with reach. Crucially, it would pose the most serious electoral challenge to an incumbent whose vulnerabilities grow with every unresolved crisis.
Nigeria must therefore ask its hardest questions now, before the ballot answers them permanently:
Do we want a president who governs by instinct or by systems?
A leader who confuses control with leadership, or one who respects limits?
A nation managed by political arithmetic—or by decision-making discipline?
In classical allegory, Rome fell not because it lacked emperors, but because it mistook power for wisdom. Nigeria cannot afford such a mistake again.
The Amaechi argument is not that he is perfect. It is that he decides, he delivers, he draws lines—and he thinks nationally. In an age of noise, that may be the rarest qualification of all.
Decision-making, not politics. History will recognise the difference.
Tags
Opinion