Alhaji Waziri Ibrahim’s “Politics Without Bitterness” and the Remaking of the Nigerian Elite (2), by Usman Sarki

 “The best way to find yourself is to lose yourself in the service of others”, Mahatma Gandhi

If the first task of Nigeria’s post-colonial elite was to secure independence, the unfinished task of our time is to complete nation-building. That task has remained elusive largely because the ruling class has failed to evolve into a genuinely national elite. Instead, it has remained trapped within the ethnic and regional cages of its own making, unable to transcend the very divisions it was expected to overcome.

In many respects, the predicament of contemporary Nigerian politics stands in sharp contrast to the ethos embodied by late Alhaji Waziri Ibrahim during the Second Republic. His advocacy of “politics without bitterness” was not merely a personal disposition but a conscious attempt to shape the tone and conduct of political engagement in a fragile and diverse polity. It reflected a deeper understanding that the sustainability of the Nigerian project depended not only on institutional arrangements, but on the behaviour, restraint, and sense of responsibility of its political elite.

 That insight appears even more relevant today. One of the most visible expressions of elite failure has been the entrenchment of zoning and rotational politics. Leadership selection has increasingly been reduced to ethnic and religious arithmetic, where offices are allocated primarily to appease regions and religions rather than to reward competence or vision. Although such arrangements were conceived as mechanisms for managing diversity and preventing domination, they have in practice institutionalised mediocrity and weakened accountability. The consequence is that elections are rarely contests of ideas. Nigerians seldom ask what policies a candidate intends to pursue or what vision they offer for national transformation.

The first and often decisive question they ask is: where does the candidate come from? What is his or her religion? Identity therefore came to eclipse capacity while performance became secondary to provenance. In this set up, merit became frequently subordinated to the imperatives of “balance” and appeasement. In such an environment, politics inevitably becomes bitter. It is bitter because it is existential. When access to power determines not only authority but also economic advantage, influence, and group prestige, elections become high-stakes struggles in which defeat is perceived as collective loss.

 It is this structural condition, as much as individual failings, that has made Nigerian politics combustible and divisive. Yet, if bitterness has structural roots, its removal must also be structural. The revival of Waziri Ibrahim’s vision of politics without bitterness therefore requires more than appeals to civility; it demands a fundamental reordering of political behaviour, institutional arrangements, party politics and elite consciousness. At the moral level, politics must be redefined. The pursuit of power for its own sake must give way to an understanding of leadership as stewardship. Those who seek office must see themselves not as representatives of sectional entitlement, but as custodians of a national trust.

 The language of politics must equally change. Public discourse must move away from insult, demonisation, blackmailing and incitement toward reasoned disagreement and respectful contestation. Opponents must be treated as political rivals and not as mortal enemies. But alas, moral exhortation alone is insufficient. The structure of politics must also shift away from identity mobilisation toward issue-based engagement. Political competition must increasingly be framed around policies, programmes, and measurable outcomes rather than ancestry or affiliation. Nigerians must begin to ask not simply where a candidate comes from, but what he or she intends to do. Political parties, in turn, must evolve beyond loose coalitions of interests into institutions anchored in ideas, programmes, and discipline.

This transformation cannot occur without strengthening institutions. One of the reasons politics in Nigeria is so bitter is that power is excessively centralised and highly rewarding. Winning office often means controlling resources, appointments, and influence in ways that make political competition existential. To reduce this intensity, institutions must be strengthened so that governance does not depend solely on the disposition of those in power. The rule of law must be applied consistently. Electoral processes must be credible and transparent. Public institutions must function independently of partisan pressures.

 Equally important is the cultivation of a truly national elite. Nigeria cannot progress if its leaders continue to think and act primarily as representatives of sectional interests. A new elite must emerge that is capable of speaking to, and for, all Nigerians, of building bridges across divides, and of advancing a shared national vision. This requires a deliberate shift in orientation away from regional loyalty to national responsibility; from patronage to performance and from entitlement to service. Political parties must play a central role in this transformation. As the vehicles through which political power is organised and contested, they must become more than election platforms. Internal democracy must be strengthened. Candidate selection must be transparent and merit-based. Party structures must encourage discipline, accountability, and ideological clarity. Without strong parties, the culture of politics will remain transactional and unstable.

 The role of citizens is equally critical. Politics without bitterness cannot be sustained by elites alone; it must be reinforced by public expectation. Citizens must reject divisive rhetoric and hold leaders accountable for their conduct. The Nigerian masses must cease to be mere combustible materials to used as incendiary instruments to cause mayhem in political campaigns. Civic education must promote tolerance, democratic norms, and a sense of shared destiny. The media, too, must exercise restraint and responsibility, avoiding sensationalism that inflames tensions and instead fostering informed and balanced discourse.

 Ultimately, leadership by example will be decisive. Political culture is shaped from the top. When leaders demonstrate restraint, fairness, and magnanimity, they set standards that others are compelled to follow. Nigeria needs leaders who can rise above the temptations of division, who can speak not to their constituencies alone but to the nation as a whole, and who can place long-term stability above short-term advantage. The remaking of the Nigerian elite is therefore both a political necessity and a moral imperative. A ruling class that continues to operate within the narrow confines of ethnicity and region will perpetuate cycles of bitterness, instability, and underdevelopment. But an elite willing to undergo transformation in moral, institutional, and intellectual aspects, can unlock the immense potential of this country.

 Nigeria stands at a crossroads. We can continue along the path of division, where politics remains a contest of identities and a struggle for dominance. Or we can choose a different path in which governance is understood as a shared responsibility and leadership as a sacred trust. Perhaps the time has come for a new generation of Nigerian leaders to rediscover Waziri Ibrahim’s vision not as a slogan, but as a governing ethic rooted in restraint, responsibility, and service. Only then will politics without bitterness become more than a memory. Only then will the remaking of the Nigerian elite truly begin.

The post Alhaji Waziri Ibrahim’s “Politics Without Bitterness” and the Remaking of the Nigerian Elite (2), by Usman Sarki appeared first on Vanguard News.