I have never responded to a rejoinder in my career as a writer. Not out of arrogance, not out of disdain, and certainly not because criticism unsettles me. I have avoided rejoinders because Nigerian political rebuttals are almost always predictable exercises in ad hominem attacks, strawman arguments, and whataboutism, carefully designed to evade substance while appearing combative.
This response would ordinarily not deserve an exception.
But it does — because Nasir El-Rufai was dragged into it, my article was grossly misrepresented, and a presidential spokesperson chose to speak not with facts, but with contempt, generalisation and dangerous logic that goes beyond disagreement into national harm.
The article in question — “Is Tinubu Waging a Quiet War on the Muslim North – or Is It All Coincidence?” — was written by me. El-Rufai did not write it. He did not annotate it. He did not endorse it. He simply shared it.
Yet the Presidency, through a rejoinder written by Sa’adiyyah Adebisi Hassan and amplified by Bayo Onanuga, assumed that El-Rufai’s share amounted to ownership and endorsement — and proceeded to attack him personally while falsely converting questions into accusations.
By the Presidency’s own logic, therefore, Onanuga’s decision to share that rejoinder makes its contents the position of the Federal Government. That logic compels a response — not to El-Rufai, but to the claims, assumptions, and implications now stamped with presidential authority.
Questions Were Turned Into “Allegations” — Deliberately
My article made no accusation. It explicitly stated that no motive was imputed and no allegation made. It laid out patterns, silences, and outcomes, and asked whether Nigerians were witnessing coincidence or political calculation ahead of 2027.
The rejoinder lied about that — outright — by claiming I alleged that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was “waging a quiet war” against the Muslim North.
That distortion was necessary, because it is easier to attack a false allegation than to answer an honest question.
From Rebuttal to Blame: Demonising the Muslim North
Unable to answer the substance, the rejoinder adopted a far more reckless approach: collective blame.
It argued that because Northern Muslims held major security and political offices under President Muhammadu Buhari — and Nigeria performed poorly — then Muslim Northern leadership itself is the problem.
This is not just dishonest; it is incendiary.
By that logic, governance failure becomes a religious and regional crime, not a policy failure. And when that argument comes not from a street agitator but from a government-aligned voice, it becomes extremely dangerous.
Let us carry that same logic forward — honestly.
The Logic Boomerang the FG Did Not Think Through
If Buhari’s failure is assigned to Muslim Northerners because of their presence in power, then what does Tinubu’s performance say today?
As of now:
- President: Bola Ahmed Tinubu — South
- Senate President: Godswill Akpabio — South
- Chief Justice of Nigeria: From the South
If logic is consistent, then the current outcomes reflect Southern leadership performance.
But that logic is wrong — and that is the point.
Nigeria’s failures are not the failure of any religion or region. They are the failure of policy, elite insulation, poor sequencing of reforms, and indifference to human cost. To suggest otherwise is to reopen the darkest chapters of Nigerian history — this time with official condescension.
The Data the FG Carefully Avoided
The rejoinder made loud claims that Tinubu is “doing the right thing”, that competence has replaced religion, and that Nigeria is moving forward.
The numbers say otherwise.
- Poverty has risen from about 40–46% before May 2023 to 54–60% in 2024–2025, pushing 30–40 million Nigerians into poverty.
- Multidimensional poverty remains above 60%, with population growth worsening absolute deprivation.
- Violent deaths surged, with 6,549 Nigerians killed between May 2024 and mid-2025, including 570 in April 2025 alone.
- Kidnappings more than doubled compared to pre-2023 levels, with thousands abducted across the country.
- Adult illiteracy climbed from about 38% to over 40%, adding millions to the ranks of the uneducated.
- Out-of-school children rose from 18.3 million to nearly 20 million.
- Inflation, though easing statistically, only did so after peaking at 34.19%, permanently eroding purchasing power.
These are World Bank, NBS, NHRC, UNICEF, and UNESCO figures — not opinions.
If this represents success, then words have lost meaning.
Balance Is Not the Problem — Contempt Is
At no point did my article oppose inclusion of the Middle Belt or Christian Northerners. At no point did it demand religious monopoly. Those claims were invented to distract from the real issue: why entire regions feel disposable and unheard.
Governments correct imbalance by communication and reassurance — not by humiliation. Reforms succeed through empathy, not derision.
Calling genuine concern “manufactured victimhood,” mocking “religious extortion,” and portraying fear as manipulation does not unite a country. It fractures it.
And So the Questions Remain — Louder Than Before
Instead of insults, Nigerians deserve answers to the same questions that provoked this fury:
- Why have key Muslim Northern political figures been eased out of strategic positions ahead of 2027?
- Why does insecurity continue to devastate large parts of Northern Nigeria with no visible urgency?
- Why are budgetary priorities sharply misaligned with regions producing most of the nation’s insecurity?
- Does the Presidency disown the growing claim that President Tinubu “does not need Northern votes” in 2027?
- What is the future of Vice President Kashim Shettima and the Muslim–Muslim coalition that delivered 2023?
- Is the current trajectory correction, coincidence, or cold political recalibration?
These questions were not answered.
They were mocked.
And when a government replaces explanation with contempt, suspicion does not die — it multiplies.
Nigeria does not need insults.
Nigeria does not need regional shaming.
Nigeria needs answers.
Until the Federal Government provides them, the questions will remain — and history will remember who chose evasion over leadership.